|
Dreyvas posted:Ooh, I might be interested in this. Details? It's a popular hangout for the DevOps community. https://twitter.com/hangops https://signup.hangops.com/ I need to get on there more. But if I left Slack open at work, I'd literally never get anything done. I'm bad enough with spam refreshing SA.
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
Hey everyone, I have a question and I'm not sure where to ask so I'd like to ask the IT professionals here. It's about workstation security. What do you guys recommend in regards securing data on a workstation that was stolen? The person in question has a small business setting up workstations for other businesses. My client was asking me what would be the best way to remote wipe a workstation if it were to get stolen. I suggested full disk encryption as a first defense but while researching this specific request, I came across several services that offered remote wipe such as: Microsoft Intuit Absolute DDS Prey Project EXO5 Lojack Maas360 If I'm barking up the wrong tree, I'd gladly take some redirection. Thanks  Edit: Forgot to say these stations are running Win 7 Pro and Win 10 Pro, I believe. Instruction Manuel fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
Full disk encryption and strong user passwords are the way to go. Remote wipe is a safetly blanket at best.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
I asked for a 5% increase over what the start up company was offering and they blew up the offer entirely 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Bullet dodged?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
 Guess who went from being unemployed to making 30% more than ever. I had even been told that I didn't get the job on Friday, then they changed their mind Monday. It turns out someone from my first job works there and put in a good word for me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Trainwreck dodged
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Remote wipe is nice and all... except if the person is actually smart and attempting to steal data, they would not expose it to the internet, so your remote wipe command will never go through. Remote wipe is slightly more useful for cell phones or something with an "always on" type of connection, always on being in quotes because you obviously can turn it off, so with this case the same principle from before applies, if the person is smart and actually attempting to steal data, one of their first steps (should be) to no longer expose it to the internet. As others mentioned, full disk encrypt + strong passwords. Perhaps more security minded people have other avenues as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Apparently, holy moly. Guess I'll just focus on preparing to interview with Microsoft in a couple weeks but yikes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
Philip Rivers posted:Apparently, holy moly. Guess I'll just focus on preparing to interview with Microsoft in a couple weeks but yikes. Yeah, there's at least one monstrous ego at that company that you do not want to work with (or more likely, work for).
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
That they didn't even counter with, "nope, sorry, we can only stick firm at this number" and instead just told me to gently caress off probably does say a lot, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Were they anywhere near 80k?
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
Nope. I'll admit the 80k thing was seriously naive on my part (maybe if I get the MS job lol) but I felt like they were lowballing me from the start.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Philip Rivers posted:That they didn't even counter with, "nope, sorry, we can only stick firm at this number" and instead just told me to gently caress off probably does say a lot, yeah. It tells you two things: 1. They only hire spineless cowards. 2. They're incapable of negotiating with people who have spines. I don't think they have great prospects for the future unless they're selling cold fusion reactors that actually work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
Absolutely a dodged bullet. Try not to let it rattle you too much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
5% is absolutely nothing. If they weren't shitlords they would've at least offered to split the difference. You should ask for 10% next time and shoot for 5.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Full disk encryption and strong user passwords are the way to go. Remote wipe is a safetly blanket at best. MF_James posted:Remote wipe is nice and all... except if the person is actually smart and attempting to steal data, they would not expose it to the internet, so your remote wipe command will never go through. Remote wipe is slightly more useful for cell phones or something with an "always on" type of connection, always on being in quotes because you obviously can turn it off, so with this case the same principle from before applies, if the person is smart and actually attempting to steal data, one of their first steps (should be) to no longer expose it to the internet. This is pretty much what I've concluded. Thanks for the responses and anyone else feel free to chime in. Cheers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
Alternatively use only network/online storage and keep nothing on local disks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Got a quote from a vendor to redo our entire phone system for ~$35,000. Got to go demo it today. First experience with Cisco UCM, but color me impressed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
The Fool posted:Got a quote from a vendor to redo our entire phone system for ~$35,000. Got to go demo it today. First experience with Cisco UCM, but color me impressed. How many endpoints? Because that's not a bad price, if it's including services.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
psydude posted:How many endpoints? Because that's not a bad price, if it's including services. Little less than 100. I had no real idea of what to expect, the IT director was all, "yeah, that's normal"
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
I have Cisco UCM for about they many users, purchased a few years ago and I'd love to get rid of it. Probably moving to hosted VOIP. It's just not worth the maintenance or having to call consultants in for anything major. At 100 users it's more trouble than its worth. My predecessor put it in, paid twice your quote, and it was a dumb decision at the time, let alone now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
We have UCM, poo poo just works. Yes I call consultants but it's not often. I like it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Docjowles posted:It's a popular hangout for the DevOps community. Hangops can wait, servers and storage cannot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I have Cisco UCM for about they many users, purchased a few years ago and I'd love to get rid of it. Probably moving to hosted VOIP. It's just not worth the maintenance or having to call consultants in for anything major. At 100 users it's more trouble than its worth. My predecessor put it in, paid twice your quote, and it was a dumb decision at the time, let alone now. Hosted voip solutions are a total non-starter in this region. Also, ad integration for address book and user provisioning? Yes please.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Hosted VoIP is terrible for businesses that do mostly in-house communications. There's just no reason to traverse hundreds of miles of internet to talk to Bob in accounting every so often. If half of the 100 person environment talks externally, like a sales office, it makes a whole lot of sense. Or if users are spread over multiple locations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
The Fool posted:Little less than 100. I had no real idea of what to expect, the IT director was all, "yeah, that's normal"
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 03:28
|
|
|
Are you guys putting the call manager, unity, etc virtual machines on currently running esx hosts?
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
adorai posted:That's pretty phenomenal. I am not sure I could do 100 endpoints for that much, and it would be done by internal staff. Bonus points: you don't have to employ weird phone people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
adorai posted:That's pretty phenomenal. I am not sure I could do 100 endpoints for that much, and it would be done by internal staff. Sorry, that number doesn't include deployment. Labor costs are nearly another $20k
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
What's your guys opinion on this. We're kind of in a pissing match with a monitoring company. They emailed us about an interface being down. We told them it's down until further notice, however they interpreted that as meaning it's down due to a maintenance and keep sending us emails asking when it will be back on. We've asked them about 10 times now to stop asking us about it until further notice but they keep telling us since we took it down for maintenance we need to let them know when it will be back. We never took it down for maintenance though we just said to stop monitoring it until further notice. So do you guys consider "stop monitoring until further notice" to be the same as "taken down due to maintenance"
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
yet another reason i hate using third parties.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Sepist posted:What's your guys opinion on this. We're kind of in a pissing match with a monitoring company. They emailed us about an interface being down. We told them it's down until further notice, however they interpreted that as meaning it's down due to a maintenance and keep sending us emails asking when it will be back on. We've asked them about 10 times now to stop asking us about it until further notice but they keep telling us since we took it down for maintenance we need to let them know when it will be back. We never took it down for maintenance though we just said to stop monitoring it until further notice. Setup auto responder. Be done with it. Add in weird poo poo to the responses to screw with them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
Sepist posted:What's your guys opinion on this. We're kind of in a pissing match with a monitoring company. They emailed us about an interface being down. We told them it's down until further notice, however they interpreted that as meaning it's down due to a maintenance and keep sending us emails asking when it will be back on. We've asked them about 10 times now to stop asking us about it until further notice but they keep telling us since we took it down for maintenance we need to let them know when it will be back. We never took it down for maintenance though we just said to stop monitoring it until further notice. If you hadn't followed up with them by emphatically saying it's down until further notice, then I could find some way to understand their position. But this seems like they're trying to dogmatically adhere to some sort of internal policy. "All maintenance windows must have a defined start and end." Well you know, again, you work for us, the end of this 'maintenance' is when I tell you. e: It probably seems like I went from 0 to 60, just immediately treat them like crap. And maybe I did. But I swear, I've dealt with two similar issues in my own organization (not even external!) in the last month and I am just exhausted by this kind of refusal to bend and collaborate. MC Fruit Stripe fucked around with this message at 09:26 on Oct 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 09:15
|
|
|
Just tell them that it is down and you haven't decided when it will be back up. There really is no need for discussion with a service provider whether you are allowed to take your stuff down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 10:42
|
|
|
The maintenance window is set to expire on February of 2019, but we'll let you know if it's back up earlier
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 12:26
|
|
|
adorai posted:yet another reason i hate using third parties. Unfortunately we had no choice. Customer wanted a gartner magic quadrant monitoring solution instead of what we're offering. Now they hate it and want to reneg the deal with magic quadrant company and bring it in house to us. I don't blame them, these guys are a real piece of poo poo monitoring company. jaegerx posted:Setup auto responder. Be done with it. Add in weird poo poo to the responses to screw with them. They also call on every outage so there's a paper and verbal trail, not to easy Sepist fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Oct 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
Is Gartner more than an organisation for receiving sacks of cash? There's a lot of stuff in their magic quadrants that is pure poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
Probably, the only one I've ever heard of that doesn't have outside influence is JD Power but even that is just from what I hear.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
Judge Schnoopy posted:Hosted VoIP is terrible for businesses that do mostly in-house communications. There's just no reason to traverse hundreds of miles of internet to talk to Bob in accounting every so often. There's a feature called reinviting that lets you tell phones that have direct LAN access to each other to just send their audio direct to the destination rather than bouncing it off the server. It's disabled by default because it can result in one-way or no audio issues when dealing with certain NAT issues, but if you have enough control over your network to diagnose and repair said NAT issues it can be wonderful. All your on-network calls stay on your network other than a bit of control traffic being sent to the server. With a smart SIP proxy like an Edgemarc on site you can even have internal calling remain working when the connection to the hosted server goes down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2016 14:45
|
|
