Duh.

Caution: This paragraph will say Windows Restore has ... issues, but the Windows Backup may be OK.

The major problem with system restore is that you can't mark any specific restore point "good". What you are left with are a few system restore points that usually are somewhat corrupted by the time you need them: EG: The Good restore points are wiped by infected ones by the time Mom tells you her computer was acting funny. You know she really didn't want to bother you about it... If you could mark a restore point as known, it would be better. (I would probably keep the initial set + just after each SP.).

To be fair, Windows Backup appears not to suck any more .. at least on 2008. (I have not seen Windows Vista or 7 yet.)Server wants a separate disk for the backup, You can pop in an install disk & use that backup image to restore the entire system. (although I don't think it's recommended for exchange...) If the backup on 7 is as good; can let me target a network share... that's a huge improvement for ms.

(has anyone tried this on 7? I'm too lazy to look this feature up. Kinda like OP who didn't notice that he made so little space for system restore that it overwrote each and every one.)

It's kinda like a backup that's available on Disk, you know
- It takes a backup of system files on every successful boot.
- it provides fast access to those backups if you need them.
- best of all (for most users), it's infected with a virus by the time you want to use it;)

with the requirement that you have ten times the processing power.

Let Lesson
always preview use
or smash text

I just spent the weekend at work, due to an apparently "new" rootkit that hit our network. Friday 9AM, Ticket was submitted to MaBigVendee (with sample of affected file). At 3 PM: Admins had ticket escalated due to lack of response. (120 workstations affected) At 6 PM: MaBigVendee responded that we did have "unwanted software" and asked for us to make some logs (Using Process Monitor; the vendor application internal scan log). -> but hey: Try our latest beta virus definitions file.... it should work.... By 9 PM: The initial link for ftp sent by the vendor did not work; while the ftp client on our side said the second link worked & accepted & completed the upload ... Ticket is escalated to the highest level it can go to. I am attached to the incident. At 11 PM: We have shut down much or our core network. The contact and phone number I got with ticket escalation to the highest level of handling do not work. I have to sit in the main queue to contact anyone: who states something like: we have no files and can do no work on the issue. I do not have a copy of the files; all engineers who were on the case Saturday: ~9:30 AM: 20MB log file is broken into a multi-part zip file & emailed. (Don't forget to change the extension to .txt so it can stay as an attachment.) 11:30 AM: MaBigVendee states they are missing part of the zip. I get the copy I was cc'd on & forward it again.:: Someone is getting security to let them into offices to collect instances of affected laptops. 12:30 PM: MaBigVendee states that the logs sent were useless: Asks if we got the alert during them: (I did not know then, but it turns out MaBigVendee asked for us to create the alert popup condition while the log was being created. This was done per request.) At this point, we are asked to test another virus definitions file: Why: no reason I can tell. I hear various refrains on response was delayed due to a lack of information being sent to the vendor. Apparently all information was sent to the vendor & vendor is so large that one hand is unaware of the other. (EG: Concierge service is unaware of anything touched by phone monkeys; researchers can neither access corporate nor concierge resources.) 12:45 MaBigVendee remote assistance site is blocked at the web-proxy due to environmental restrictions applied by admins: 2:15 PM Another admin & I go way out of policy to get MaBigVendee access to an instance of an infected workstation. MaBigVendee researchers play on this workstation for the next several hours. At some point vendor asks for a VM of the infected machine: but seem to want the machine there researchers are attached to .. don't start until the researchers finish. 9PM: We get bored and VM another instance of an infected machine: 11:45 PM: Call MaBigVendee concierge service number: No response... leave message no response: go home. Sunday: 9AM: Vendor will get to office to pick up VM image at noonish. 12:00: Cannot replicate symptoms in Virtual environment. Point this out to vendor. ("Hey, you know how some programs check to see if they are in a virtual environment & shutdown? I think this may be one.") MaBigVendee response: "We don't think you virtualized an infected machine." Can you understand how insulting this is? I mean seriously? Go show vendor's guy Virtualization Log Summary on infected machine & that that machine has the issue we are trying to get resolved. More Boring frustrating stuff here. By 7:PM Vendor finally tests a method of removing "unwanted software", but neither of the vendor tools (2) that we own & could be used to push out a Virus definations file & force a full scan will work. We will have to wait for an approved definition, or sneaker-net the beta to 250+ workstations. So: Having a company that will actually respond and put researchers on the problem is a good part of having a competent company, but big is no panacea & may work against you. Personally, I think Microsoft has much better rootkit detection tools than that vendor did. I'm particularly irked that the logs the vendor used to delay responding to us were a) Prepped as requested; b) useless. (Hey: If you are reading this here's a hint. "Rootkits are designed to hide from the OS. If you really want to find them, you have to somehow check the memory signature for every process 'running' to that of every process that starts." Like Microsoft does, or Symantec does...)

I saw it on a website yesterday. Therefore the correct answer is a difficult to use, obtuse unix variant: Therefor, try a BSD variant. Tell em it runs VMWare (an OpenBSD if I'm interpreting some of the config files correctly.) How about PC BSD.

Seriously: go to Distrowatch.com Scroll down the right-hand side & look at the current page-hit ranking. Try the top ten & see how they work for you & offer to install one for your users. You will be the ONLY tech support for converted users & will have to train people who no nothing about computers how to google for themselves. Be aware of what you are getting into.

The Government does not pay all that well (and previously less well). You are talking about large networks, that are very complicated. As a result, you do not have a whole lot of government staff with experience to run a network that is that complicated.

I work in a very small (5K users) government (federal) office. I have to deal with 12 windows domains, 11 Political groups, and offer support to all Regional Admins, and departmental admins - as well as dealing with a help desk which has been told "we don't investigate error logs."

Unfortunately, some of the government staff can't find their ***es with both hands. This is because 12 years ago, the government paid much less than the contractors. Good technical people could earn twice a much contracting a working for the government. Those people are still contracting (mostly), and are the ones that you would want in the government running the show. The people who have "more senior" positions in gvt now? They are largely the ones who couldn't get the better paid contracting jobs, and state: Helpdesk personnel should not be investigating application event logs.

Furthermore, this is also the case for many large businesses: They outsourced the tech support years ago (cheaper); most users get someone in india to change passwords, while sr. staff get concierge service. Those large businesses have similar issues as well: but they have an explicit 2-tier service system.

It's been going on for years, but I don't see any way to rectify it: especially as the job listings still seem to be opaque, and difficult to decode.

Yes, Two stroke engines have been around for a long time. However, this engine purports to be a clean two stroke - something that has not been around a long time. Anyone with an mid-70's two stroke motorcycle could probably go around the block before biking in their own smoke - so yes, this is new.

The advantage of this "system" is obviously 1) it's light, 2) it's clean; 3) it can use multiple fuel types.
1) A light engine can be combined with a generator; a battery. Think Electric-Car.
          If the battery in an electric car is large enough to run ~30 miles; the car has a sufficiently strong auxillary motor (not enough to drive the car fast uphill, but enough to repower the battery between the downhill & uphill) - this makes an electric type car better. A "more complex" two stroke should be lighter than a four stroke; make the Electric car significantly better. (Personally, I drive under six miles most days. Occasionally I want to visit friends who live outside the range for a purely electric vehicle - requiring me to have a conventional vehicle, or an expensive one with multiple power systems.)

2) If the engine is as clean as a four stroke, then the engine is as clean as a four stroke. EG: you will be able to use it in a production vehicle without as much pollution as a conventional two stroke.

3) It can use multiple fuel types: EG: You can fill it with Gas, Diesel, Algie-Diesel - or if you're in a 3rd world country: you can use Strained Fryer Grease (Diesel Fuel) from Bob's Yak stand. (May only work in warm climates, not recommended for stoned hippies, etc...)

So yes, if this works as implied this is a good solution that represents a significant improvement over a four stroke engine. (Not to say that the moving-puch cylinder head would not work in a four-banger.) For a company that makes very light vehicles, and is working on an "electric-type" vehicle - this solution makes emminent sense. Please insert this in your tin-foil hat so the Govenment does not leak it to the Big Oil companies.

Re: Windows Admins...

Guys, Us stewpid windows guys don't haff to know this stuuf.
Micro$oft locks out any account that has 3 failed logons withing 15 minutes by default. (Not that it would not be trivial to get around, it just means that you have to try each password for a specific account once per five mintues. And increases the amount of time it takes to break a password. Hopefully to longer than the period to change the password....)

duhhhhhh!

Dude, you misunderstand:
You wanted the "Department of Inadvisably Applied Shiny Shit."
This is the "Department of Keeping Crap Moving."
If you wanted Shiny Shit, you are in the wrong department - cause this is a crappy job.

If my office allowed anything but connections from office issued VPN laptops, I could do all my work from.. wherever. In my last job, it would have let me take more days off. The initial lack of a RDP client for iPhone was one of the major motivators for my not getting one...

As I recall Apple (DRM) was stating that jailbreaking cellphones was something to be done by terrorists who want to destroy cellphone infrastructure.

Interesting that a SMS message can destroy apples;)