Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:I don't think it'll be that useful (Score 1) 87

Touchdown...

I've never been interested in having Exchange in my phone's email client because the email clients built in with most Androids suck.. I bought Touchdown years ago because it was built to talk to Exchange and it worked very well.

Gmail is pretty good, but I'm still not interested in merging my Exchange account with it because then my phone becomes completely subject to my workplace's rules and regulations on mobiles. Touchdown keeps that separate and I like it that way. Hell, I have a company phone and I STILL use Touchdown. If some idiot Exchange admin F's up a powershell command to wipe some dude's phone and ends up wiping everyone named Steve's phone**, I don't have to worry because only my Touchdown partition is affected. And any personal stuff I have on the device (for better or worse) is unaffected. Yay.

**This HAS happened at a company where I warned the head of IT that the guy they just made a domain admin was not ready for that responsibility. Not a week goes by before he force wiped all phones belonging to anyone named Christine. Out of 1200 users. Fun day!

Comment Re:Why does that bother you? (Score 1) 309

Little enrages me as much as these guys getting the handouts they get. The main purpose of the building is for roughly 14 days out of the year and then maybe another 30-60 days a year for other events. The public funds them and gets little to nothing in return. If public money is going to stadiums then they should be owned by the public. MN's new stadium should never have been built and popular opinion was never polled. It would never have passed popular vote. Sure, about 20-30% of the public would have been irate at the other 70-80%, but that's how it would have gone. But then Dayton just handed a multi billionaire half a billion anyways. Over half that stadium belongs rightfully to the city of Minneapolis and its proceeds shouldn't be making it into Wilf's pockets, but into the schools and policy stations that they SHOULD have been paying for in the first place.

Comment Re:cracked in about two years. (Score 1) 133

if not before, the better plan if one wanted to switch from PS4 to something else would be to hang on to your potentially exploitable console and keep it offline until someone releases an exploit. If Sony is able to fix the hole with a patch any unpatched boxes immediately jump up in value, like we saw with the Xbox 360 and PS3. That of course means giving up online features and possibly new game releases for a while, but if you're one of those users who doesn't game online and/or uses it mostly as a Bluray player that might not be a big deal. You can then use the money to build a budget gaming PC that'll beat the pants off of any of the consoles.

Where does the PS4 hold its OS? If it's on the HDD you could just back it up to one or two others and let them sit around.

Comment Re:Easily? (Score 1) 40

Who the heck actually still runs an FTP server as part of their website, in this day and age?

More than I care to admit or remember... I've seen a lot of advertising firms using FTP for transferring material to/from clients all over the place. They figure user/pass and origin IP are secure enough. Well, maybe their data isn't important enough to transfer with any level of encryption.

So when the headline says these protections are "easily" bypassed, all it's really saying is that if someone using a defensive system makes mistakes

Very true, but many smaller websites may not have the luxury of moving their IPs about.

Comment Holy shit (Score 1) 487

Microsoft also adds that Wi-Fi Sense will only provide internet access, and block connections to other things on the wireless LAN

So I'm reasonably certain all this will do is block access to your subnet and only allow traffic to your gateway. Which in any corporate environment is a massive security risk because if they're doing it right, employees are sitting on different subnets (RFC1918 or otherwise). So, yes, random guy who happens to be a contact in Outlook.com (which literally BEGS to let you make every you ever emailed a contact) now has access to every normally permissible network node as long as he's not interested in the wifi subnet.

Yes, most corporations should be using per-employ authentication, and hopefully Sense engineers are dumb enough to share out AD/LDAP credentials (well, maybe they're not smart or interested enough to go into *nix authentication). But that's not always the case.

Can't wait until this is called "Wifigate"

Comment Re:NADA is very powerful. (Score 1) 190

My knowledge of this comes mostly from Wikipedia and a movie I saw called Beer Wars. I took an interest some years ago when Surly Brewing had a long battle with the three tier system in MN. Mostly I just wanted to be able to buy a pint locally.

I've been trying to pay attention to the Tesla vs Dealership battle for a while. Mostly with the hopes that some day I could afford to comfortably pay $90k for a vehicle some day. Though I'd be more than happy to get the Model 3 when it becomes available. :)

Comment Re:NADA is very powerful. (Score 2) 190

Nice summary! Off topic, but this really reminds me of the way that alcohol industry is set up. Originally people felt like it was a good idea because the manufacturers had way too much power. But in the end the manufacturers are sorta getting screwed, and the public is really getting screwed.

I try to buy my beer from independent brewers (mmm... growlers...) because the distributors can make or break them, and I'd I'd leave dealerships in the dust if I could, too.

Comment Re:No... (Score 1) 331

That would be interesting, indeed.

I've never seen a corporation spring for anything greater than the smallest HDD available, though, so the returns wouldn't be too substantial for anyone on a long-term refresh, though I have seen .5 and 1TB drives shipping recently (and you'd probably want to keep your hands off the SSDs for now). Assuming 100 nodes at an average of 100GB of free space allocation each is perhaps 2TB of questionably reliable storage (10TB of very volatile data). You couldn't allow heavy access to the distributed storage during the day (tanking r/w performance for users). If the licensing and maintenance are very low cost, you could slap 1TB drives everywhere and dedicate half that space for distributed storage. Per 100 users there would be roughly 10TB of relatively redundant space that could be used for, say, deep archives of encrypted backups, logs, or whatever.

Or hell, save space by dedicating a 2nd HDD in every box to distributed storage. A descent SAN will kick its ass any day, but it could potentially cost 1/10th of the price.

Comment No... (Score 1) 331

It's a pretty cool idea. And the algorithm would be fun to explore, but the individual overhead alone on this systems isn't worth the time or money for the minimal payout. How much could you possibly, reasonably expect to pull in? A few bucks a year? Certainly not enough to offset your new bandwidth and power requirements.

You'd be better off building a small SAN in your basement and selling cloudiness to people you know for the maintenance costs. A while ago I helped some friends set up a small mesh of Drobos and other cheap SANs where they could deposit their photos, etc, at each other's houses. Four people had four copies of their data in four physical locations. Everything was encrypted and everyone got the same space. So long as they keep everything on and plugged in...

Comment Re:Conclusion goes too far? (Score 1) 159

I didn't see a reason to go into the details of this particular situation more than that which I found humorous and nerdy. I still don't. The situation was handled very professionally, as I handle all situations. But the professional part isn't as interesting in this context to me as perhaps it is to you.

If you find yourself in a situation like this and you circumvent the rules and get away with it, bully for you. If I'm your net admin and I find out about it, I'll make sure to type up a full report as to why some ass hat in accounting or something like that felt it was okay to skirt compliance and company policy so he could do whatever it is the company decided he's not supposed to do. And a week after that I'd be more than happy to submit your termination to my admins for processing. I'm more concerned about saving your company from the idiots and self righteous. Certainly DGAF about your comfort or position. You want something you ask the people that pay for it and I'd be happy to make that happen if your company decides it's something they want and can afford.

And you're right. Cisco is overpriced and over valued for the most part. But I wasn't the architect (or the owner, who had a major Cisco hard on), so it wasn't my call. Even if I was, I wouldn't be selling $60 consumer grade routers to companies with a 4 hour SLA on hardware knowing full-well that I'd have to send an agent out there 2-3 times a year to replace fried equipment and making my company look like morons. Some of them did that enough on their own...

Comment Re:Conclusion goes too far? (Score 1) 159

Upside-down internet is a lot of fun. And you're right. I'm not a control freak. We set up security rules and guidelines for a reason. Some of these places have stringent compliance needs for HIPPA, PCI, and other regulations that strictly forbid the behavior I mentioned. So, yeah, I'm fucking with him but I'm also not getting him fired, either. It's my ass on the line and as long as I can keep the situation under control it's not a big deal.

Comment Re:Conclusion goes too far? (Score 1) 159

As I mentioned in another post, the author went out of his way to state that it was non-routable and unreachable from the outside. It sounded like he was implying there was no subnetting (as you will always need a route to get from one subnet to another). I'm a network engineer so I know perfectly well how this should be set up. There are ways to use layer 3 switches to prevent broadcasts from going where they don't likely belong.

And, in another article discussion, I mentioned that I've redone a corporate network that was using a single class B subnet for their entire corporation. No subnetting, there was around 8,000 nodes all with /16 subnets (with an internal IP scheme using a public IP they didn't own). So people do boneheaded things all the time.

I've seen people who had resources to do things right (the company I mentioned spent $100k on network equipment due to poor performance, rather than redesigning their network properly, which is what I did). I've seen people somehow manage to set up striped RAID arrays on partitions of the same disk and complain about poor performance (still baffled how that got set up). So you can perhaps see why I can believe that PDRK can do such a crazy thing as use a flat class A.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Confound these ancestors.... They've stolen our best ideas!" - Ben Jonson

Working...