The patches won't be out on WSUS/SCCM/etc for a bit.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
From: HELP_PC [mailto:g...@enter.it]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 12:36 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: R: MS10-070 .NET 3.0
Shouldn't be pushed by WSUS or Windows
To add to that, a graphical family tree -
http://www.hanselman.com/blog/HowToSetAnIISApplicationOrAppPoolToUseASPNET35RatherThan20.aspx
The bottom line here though is that FX35 and FX30 both run on the same version
of the CLR which is 2.0. In order to use either of those, you must by
Further, don't wait on these to be on WSUS - this one is important.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
From: Brian Desmond [mailto:br...@briandesmond.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 1:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: MS10-070 .NET 3.0
The
Can anyone recommend a good SAN vendor? :-) Only kidding...
Does anyone know if you can auto-deploy the SCOM 2007 R2 agent package,
maybe based around membership of an OU or something? It could probably be
done via a GPO setting but I was wondering if there was anything internal to
SCOM that
SCOM console can be used to push out the agents. You can query AD to get a list
of machines to push to. I can't recall if you can set the search base to be a
particular OU, and then just do a search for *
You can certainly use a GPO to deploy the SCOM package if you want. SCOM also
has a
Anyone using Velociraptors with a Perc 6/i controller? Any problems? The
Google search results I'm finding indicate mixed results. If it matters,
the server is an R710 and will have whatever firmware / drivers are current
when it goes into production. (It hasn't been delivered yet.)
Thanks,
I wouldn't dare. I've heard of them killing sysadmins who'd just traipsed
down to the comms room to restart the power after a cold reboot was forced
by the actions of a rogue developer.
On 30 September 2010 10:57, Richard Stovall rich...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone using Velociraptors with a Perc
I've just started a new job and we're building an all-new infrastructure.
One of the key things I'm looking at it is restricting access to the most
sensitive functions of some of the infrastructure, mainly in VMWare and
XenApp. I'm currently looking at doing this by using AD groups - creating
This is Windows 2008 R2 single domain, for the record
On 30 September 2010 12:49, James Rankin kz2...@googlemail.com wrote:
I've just started a new job and we're building an all-new infrastructure.
One of the key things I'm looking at it is restricting access to the most
sensitive functions
If the vCenter server is domain joined, the simple answer is...
You're screwed. From both ways.
-Anders
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:49 PM, James Rankin kz2...@googlemail.com wrote:
I've just started a new job and we're building an all-new infrastructure.
One of the key things I'm looking at it
The short answer is yes, if they are domain admins they can do anything they
like provided they have the knowledge. Including add themselves to the
Enterprise Admins group since you said you were in a single domain, which I
interpret as no empty root.
You could change the ACL's, but again
In scenarios like this, your fallback is auditing, reporting and
reprecussions. It's why they count how many missiles you fire when
you're flying around in a fighter jet ;o) If you don't have that,
they'll do what they want.
a
From: William J. Robbins
I am seriously going to try to get them to accept Server Operators level as
a compromise. They can still kill servers all they want, but they should be
able to be locked out of the finer points of VMWare, XenApp and AppSense.
Time for my first head-butting session with management in this job. If
Documentation is an absolute must. :)
Adding to what another person offered ensure you have auditing enabled, and add
that to your documentation.
I'll hope your management is able to understand.
WJR
- from my Crackberry.
If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.
I've worked in bucket trucks that went up 30-45 feet, but 1786 feet and
no safety harness? Nope.
From: Malcolm Reitz [mailto:malcolm.re...@live.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 6:31 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Tower Climbing
No, no, no - 1786 times no - I could not
Agreed. High availability is more a function of industry and function than
of size.
*ASB *
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Ken Schaefer k...@adopenstatic.com wrote:
I have a similar requirement where core infrastructure (e.g.
authentication, security stuff) needs to be up 4 or 5 9s, and
Their using a safety hook.
Look at the video and you will see that each time he moves up he moves the
hook for his safety line. The Tool Pouch is attached to him from behind. And
each time he takes a break, you can see the safety hook and the safety line.
I cringed when I saw this video, but I
This is a known issue. I just finished dealing with it.
Change the drive letter in disk management, then download the firmware
update for the drive.
TSST, I'm guessing...
it's on Dell's site.
Once you give the drive a new drive letter it will show up when you run the
intel management util.
It
***However, the business are adamant that every member of the support
teams (from helpdesk upwards) will be given a Domain Admin account. Am I
right in assuming this means that they could simply add themselves into the
groups I am setting up, because even if I restrict these groups via an ACL,
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Candee can...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a known issue. I just finished dealing with it.
Change the drive letter in disk management, then download the firmware
update for the drive.
Candee for the win!
-- Ben
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a
She shoots, she scores!!
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Candee can...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a known issue. I just finished dealing with it.
Change the drive letter in disk management, then download the firmware
I am raising this up with IS management, as it is unsupportable - there's no
point in me putting a structure together that can just be pulled apart at
will.
There's no way around it, so I'm just going to have to trust in my own
stubbornness to get the buy-in I need :-) Audit was going to be one
True,
But look at how they hold on to the Tower when they don't have that hook
attached. :)
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:16 AM, James Kerr cluster...@gmail.com wrote:
Except for the parts they were not using one.
Their using a safety hook.
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a
I just finished a two-year project at one of my clients (not full-time for me;
but they had someone working on it full-time). We went from 64 accounts in
Domain Admins down to 4. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth - but
now, whenEVER something changes in AD - we have a way to find out
Ask why they need to be domain admins and not just have the necessary
permissions delegated. My Service Desk guys were domain admins from the day
they started (in some cases years) and they insisted they needed to be domain
admins to do x,y and z.
Oddly, I was able to delegate the necessary
Oh, I'm a fully paid-up member of the choir on this one, and I have seen all
the benefits first hand. I just get the feeling these guys are going to be
more of a PITA than any I've worked with before.
On 30 September 2010 14:22, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.com wrote:
I just finished a
I'm fearful that IS management will be of no help to you, since they haven't
been able to prevent the situation from occuring to this point.
Really, this is 2010. Do we even need to *have* this discussion about admin
levels and appropriate level of rights?
My guess is that you better start
The video says that he’s “free climbing”. He’s only using the safety harness
to rest, not each time he moves.
From: Daniel Rodriguez [mailto:drod...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 8:06 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Tower Climbing
Their using a safety hook.
Yeah, death grip, of course. That job wouldn't bother me, at least you have a
nice view while you work. When I worked as an electrician in my past I wanted
to be one of those linemen that check high tension lines by getting out of a
helicopter and crawling along the lines. It pays quite well.
What are they trying to accomplish? Do they believe that everyone needs
domain admin rights just to change passwords or unlock accounts? I'd
try to find out what they need to do and then restrict them accordingly.
Help desk doesn't need rights to be able to change administrator
passwords, free
but I did see the tech take all necessary precautions
No. They do not Sir.
Starting from 1600 feet they are without safety lines, they also say it in
the audio.
From there on a safety hook is used only to rest.
I would not send my men up there in this way, and we do send people up high
to
If he didn’t have gloves, I’m sure I’d see white knuckles.
From: Daniel Rodriguez [mailto:drod...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 8:20 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Tower Climbing
True,
But look at how they hold on to the Tower when they don't have that hook
I wasn't having a discussion about appropriate levels of rights - I'm well
aware of those. I was just wondering if there was any way to lock a group
out from the depradations of Domain Admins by using some cunning permissions
voodoo. Clearly there's not, so it's off to thrash the details out.
I'm
You're right. Went back and looked at the video.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Maglinger, Paul pmaglin...@scvl.comwrote:
The video says that he’s “free climbing”. He’s only using the safety
harness to rest, not each time he moves.
*From:* Daniel Rodriguez [mailto:drod...@gmail.com]
As usual, the boss of the helpdesk (and his golf buddies) think that change
= interruptions to support. I'm going to convince them that change =
accountability + the same level of support.
On 30 September 2010 14:38, Maglinger, Paul pmaglin...@scvl.com wrote:
What are they trying to
Change = accountability + better levels of support due to less stuff
mysteriously breaking.
*ASB *(My XeeSM Profile) http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker
*Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage...*
* *
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:40 AM, James Rankin kz2...@googlemail.com wrote:
As usual, the
Except for DCs ... but hopefully that can be managed with a secondary
account for a couple of staff only! ;o)
+1000 for having under 5 DAs in any domain! Ridiculous power trip on
every occasion with even non-operations managers wanting to be in there
as a sign of seniority!
a
+1
-Jeff Steward
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Andrew S. Baker asbz...@gmail.com wrote:
Change = accountability + better levels of support due to less stuff
mysteriously breaking.
*ASB *(My XeeSM Profile) http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker
*Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage...*
*
Amen. I have a DA account myself just so even I'm not a DA per se. I wish I
could get it across to the SE team that they should follow suit, but nobody
pushing them and I don't have enough clout.
As usual, the boss of the helpdesk (and his golf buddies) think that change =
interruptions to
I'll see your +1 and raise +11
- WJR
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:04, Jeff Steward jstew...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
-Jeff Steward
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Andrew S. Baker asbz...@gmail.comwrote:
Change = accountability + better levels of support due to less stuff
mysteriously
I wouldn't want to be the guy following him...because I'm sure that at the
slightest gust of wind...you're *GOING* to get covered!! LOL!!
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Daniel Rodriguez drod...@gmail.com wrote:
You're right. Went back and looked at the video.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:34
When I first arrived here, everyone and their Grandmother in IT were
Domain Admins. After months of kicking and screaming, we were able to
convince management that we need to narrow that list down. It did take
quite a bit of work, but needed to be done.
Don Guyer
Systems Engineer -
Is rejecting my messages, even though they've long since been processed by
Lyris.
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/ ~
---
To manage subscriptions click here:
When I worked for a small school district, all of our school sites were
connected through point-to-point wireless. So all the schools had
towers on the roofs. I think the highest off the ground we ever got was
about 100 feet, and that was on a tower that was on top of the
multi-purpose room.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com wrote:
Is rejecting my messages, even though they've long since been processed by
Lyris.
It does that sometimes.
I'm actually surprised it let your message now through. I thought
anything with the word Lyris in the
I started getting those yesterday. Same deal. Usually get the rejection
hours after posting.
- WJR
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:44, Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.comwrote:
Is rejecting my messages, even though they've long since been processed
by Lyris.
~ Finally, powerful endpoint
Yeah. I'm aware of those two terms, and depending on the system, the RTO and
RPO are different. That being said, I think the majority of our Microsoft
stuff could probably survive being a couple days or so behind. Our iSeries
(AS/400) we need to be able to recover as much as possible as quickly as
I was getting them as well... I wonder if we're being singled out... :P
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 7:48 AM, William Robbins dangerw...@gmail.comwrote:
I started getting those yesterday. Same deal. Usually get the rejection
hours after posting.
- WJR
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:44,
I was going to say the same thing. I'm sure that tower moves quite a bit.
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Heaton jhea...@dfg.ca.gov
To: NT System Admin Issues ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: Tower Climbing
When I
@Don: It appears the usual suspects are replying...
@Ben: I was feeling lucky, punk.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Don Ely don@gmail.com wrote:
I was getting them as well... I wonder if we're being singled out... :P
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 7:48 AM, William Robbins
Had the same thought. Maybe my sig line is too short?
- WJR
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:51, Don Ely don@gmail.com wrote:
I was getting them as well... I wonder if we're being singled out... :P
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 7:48 AM, William Robbins dangerw...@gmail.comwrote:
I started
Go buy a SAN already!! The pink one!!
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 7:59 AM, William Robbins dangerw...@gmail.comwrote:
Had the same thought. Maybe my sig line is too short?
- WJR
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:51, Don Ely don@gmail.com wrote:
I was getting them as well... I wonder if
*facepalm*
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:48 AM, John Aldrich jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com
wrote:
Yeah. I'm aware of those two terms, and depending on the system, the RTO
and
RPO are different. That being said, I think the majority of our Microsoft
stuff could probably survive being a couple
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:10 AM, William Robbins dangerw...@gmail.com wrote:
Go buy a SAN already!! The pink one!!
But, but...the vendor told me a consultant once said the blue one was wider!
I think mauve has the most RAM. -- Dilbert's boss
-- Ben
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security
He only thinks that because he's an idiot.
Everyone knows it's periwinkle..
DAMIEN SOLODOW
Systems Engineer
317.447.6033 (office)
317.217.6851 (fax)
HARRISON COLLEGE
-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:13 AM
To: NT
*headdesk*
- WJR
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:12, Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.comwrote:
*facepalm*
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:48 AM, John Aldrich
jaldr...@blueridgecarpet.com wrote:
Yeah. I'm aware of those two terms, and depending on the system, the RTO
and
RPO are different.
I've heard good things about fuchsia.
- WJR
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:14, Damien Solodow
damien.solo...@harrison.eduwrote:
He only thinks that because he's an idiot.
Everyone knows it's periwinkle..
DAMIEN SOLODOW
Systems Engineer
317.447.6033 (office)
317.217.6851 (fax)
HARRISON
That's not a SAN. That's a PogoPlug NAS.
-Original Message-
From: Don Ely don@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 08:05:14
To: NT System Admin Issuesntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Reply-To: NT System Admin Issues
ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.comSubject: Re: Lyris...
Go
I'm stealing that too for the newsletter this week
ROTFLMAO
Warm regards,
Stu
From: Gary Slinger [mailto:gary.slin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 2:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: OT: Early Friday Funny...
I'm stealing that
From: Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com
To: NT System Admin Issues ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
Sent: Thu, September 30, 2010 11:12:42 AM
Subject: Re: Consultants
*facepalm*
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:48 AM, John Aldrich
OK. To get low RTO means have a fast restoration procedure. Getting low RPO
means having frequent backups/snapshots/whatever. You will need to mix/match
your technologies to accomplish whatever combination of RTO/RPO you need.
It's not just a matter of how quickly do you want it back up and
Lemme ask this... since there's a need to get management buy in. Is
everyone in the organization running as local admin? If not, then an
analogy can be drawn. Afterall, if helpdesk had to support staff who ran as
admin, well, that would be more difficult, right? It's a good argument to
Perfect!
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Pete Howard pchow...@yahoo.com wrote:
--
*From:* Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com
*To:* NT System Admin Issues ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
*Sent:* Thu, September 30, 2010 11:12:42 AM
*Subject:* Re:
Same here
Jonathan L. Raper, MCSE
Thumb-typed from my HTC Incredible (and yes, it really is) Droid. Please excuse
brevity any misspellings.
- Reply message -
From: Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, Sep 30, 2010 10:45 am
Subject: Lyris...
To: NT System Admin Issues
Will ask IT to check guys.
Stu
-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:48 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Lyris...
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com wrote:
Is rejecting my
ROTFLMAO?
Are you *really* rolling on the floor, Stu? If I've told you once, I've told
you 100,000,000,000,000 times not to exaggerate. Sheesh
Shook
From: Stu Sjouwerman [mailto:s...@sunbelt-software.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:28 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: OT:
My tech pointed out to me the other day that I do facepalms frequently,
sometimes double facepalms. He is going to try to point it out when I do it, I
never notice it. I guess because at that moment I'm probably flabbergasted at
something a user has done or said.
James
- Original Message
In my case, no, GPOs manage the worksations' local admin groups (Domain
admins and our Field Tech group). Our (outsourced) Help Desk does not
have rights to do anything on workstations that require elevated perms.
Don Guyer
Systems Engineer - Information Services
Prudential, Fox
And what other job lets you wear a chainmail suit of armor??
-sc
From: James Kerr [mailto:cluster...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 9:35 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Tower Climbing
Yeah, death grip, of course. That job wouldn't bother me, at least you have
Ditto.
All together now: FRIGGIN' LYRIS!
-sc
From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:45 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Lyris...
Is rejecting my messages, even though they've long since been
processed by Lyris.
~
http://www.medievaltimes.com/
^^^
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Steven M. Caesare scaes...@caesare.comwrote:
And what other job lets you wear a chainmail suit of armor??
-sc
*From:* James Kerr [mailto:cluster...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, September 30, 2010 9:35 AM
*To:* NT
Meat cutter?
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Steven M. Caesare scaes...@caesare.comwrote:
And what other job lets you wear a chainmail suit of armor??
-sc
*From:* James Kerr [mailto:cluster...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, September 30, 2010 9:35 AM
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
Contains no embedded gfx.
-sc
From: William Robbins [mailto:dangerw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:59 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Lyris...
Had the same thought. Maybe my sig line is too short?
- WJR
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:51, Don Ely
A diver that works with sharks?
- Original Message -
From: Steven M. Caesare
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:51 AM
Subject: RE: Tower Climbing
And what other job lets you wear a chainmail suit of armor??
-sc
From: James Kerr
I don’t think that’s chainmail, it’s more likely something non-conductive. J
Shark wranglers get to wear chainmail, and a lot of butchers/meat-slicers at
least get the gloves.
DAMIEN SOLODOW
Systems Engineer
317.447.6033 (office)
317.217.6851 (fax)
HARRISON COLLEGE
From: Steven M.
That's just a glove or .gauntlet if you will.
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan Link
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: Tower Climbing
Meat cutter?
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Steven M. Caesare
Knight of the Round Table?
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Tower Climbing
Meat cutter?
On Thu, Sep 30,
Check your email footer.
Shook
From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:scaes...@caesare.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Lyris...
Contains no embedded gfx.
-sc
From: William Robbins [mailto:dangerw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30,
Exactly, which is something I need to sit down with Management to find out.
-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:30 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Consultants
OK. To get low RTO means have a fast
“Shark Head Laser Attacher Technician”.
-sc
From: James Kerr [mailto:cluster...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Tower Climbing
A diver that works with sharks?
- Original Message -
From: Steven M.
The program I saw on it absolutely had a fine mesh metal suit that was attached
to the lead the clamped on to the conductor in order to keep the worker’s
entire body at the same electrical potential.
-sc
From: Damien Solodow [mailto:damien.solo...@harrison.edu]
Sent: Thursday, September
It is conductive. Its made from nomex (so it doesn't catch fire) and stainless
steel threads.
- Original Message -
From: Damien Solodow
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:54 AM
Subject: RE: Tower Climbing
I don’t think that’s chainmail, it’s
They fight whenever they're able..
DAMIEN SOLODOW
Systems Engineer
317.447.6033 (office)
317.217.6851 (fax)
HARRISON COLLEGE
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: [OT] RE: Tower Climbing
Are you sure it's not a gantlet?
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:56 AM, James Kerr cluster...@gmail.com wrote:
That's just a glove or .gauntlet if you will.
- Original Message -
*From:* Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com
*To:* NT System Admin Issues
No, but we sing from the diaphragm a lot!
Steven M. Caesare scaes...@caesare.com wrote on 09/30/2010 11:01:54
AM:
Do they have openings?
-sc
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:57 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: [OT] RE:
Ask John Cleese.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfGpVcdqeS0
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
Consultant and Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:scaes...@caesare.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 12:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: [OT] RE:
Don't the women complain?
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM, richardmccl...@aspca.org wrote:
No, but we sing from the diaphragm a lot!
Steven M. Caesare scaes...@caesare.com wrote on 09/30/2010 11:01:54
AM:
Do they have openings?
-sc
From: Michael B. Smith
You're *incredibly* optimistic. Do you actually think there's a chance that a
company that wants all of IT to be Domain Admins has seen the light and doesn't
let users run as local admins?
From: Jonathan Link [mailto:jonathan.l...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 10:34 AM
To: NT
Only Zoot...
Cameron cameron.orl...@gmail.com wrote on 09/30/2010 11:14:31 AM:
Don't the women complain?
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM, richardmccl...@aspca.org wrote:
No, but we sing from the diaphragm a lot!
Steven M. Caesare scaes...@caesare.com wrote on 09/30/2010 11:01:54
AM:
Even if they were a domain admin in a child they could add themselves to the
EAs group in a root domain if they really wanted to.
Thanks,
Brian Desmond
br...@briandesmond.com
c - 312.731.3132
From: William J. Robbins [mailto:dangerw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 7:05 AM
Please don't try and use the Server Operators group. It doesn't actually grant
hardly anything on your member servers but it will hand out all sorts of
strange permissions you never expected to your DCs. It's there for legacy (NT4)
compatibility. You shouldn't be populating any of the *
I can easily use a Server Admins group - just involves a little extra work
granting some user rights, that's all
On the other query, users don't run as admins. They're Citrix-based so that
hurdle hasn't arisen - or already been navigated.
On 30 September 2010 18:25, Brian Desmond
Anyone here use SNORT for monitoring traffic? We use it here and my network guy
sent me a screenshot saying it detected BackOrofice traffic from a machine that
I have since scanned and it comes up clean. I did both a McAfee and a GFI
Languard scan and it came up clean.
Is there any updating
we use snort,
it could be a false positive. the signatures should be updated on a regular
basis. back orifice has been around a long time, i doubt the signature that
detects bo has changed.
shane
From: David Lum [david@nwea.org]
Sent: Thursday, September
If it's already been navigated, then it should be a short corollary to if
they don't need domain admin rights, they don't get them.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:49 PM, James Rankin kz2...@googlemail.com wrote:
I can easily use a Server Admins group - just involves a little extra
work granting
I'm sure it'll be a bit trickier convincing the special people in IT. :-)
My initial sounding-out of the powers-that-be didn't go too badly, so
fingers crossed tomorrow might see some positive developments.
On 30 September 2010 18:57, Jonathan Link jonathan.l...@gmail.com wrote:
If it's
Not really. I can see that the IT staff in general would want to retain
admin rights generally and limit rights to users based on what they need.
IT staff at that organization need to adjust to a least permissions
framework, too. If they've already pushed that framework down to the users
or if
Ok, so the special people in IT get accounts, you crank-up auditing and
wait to yank them back.
And, you are planning to create separate accounts, right?
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:01 PM, James Rankin kz2...@googlemail.com wrote:
I'm sure it'll be a bit trickier convincing the special people in
Yeah, I stand corrected. I'm just really surprised that they're running as
non-admins on the desktop. I certainly agree with your approach though and it
should be a fairly easy step to non-DA.
I'd put together some scenarios to demonstrate the danger if I were in the
situation.
From: Jonathan
The problem comes because we are consolidating thirteen separate entities
with their own IT staff into a single structure. I'm encountering a lot of
the resistance you used to get when performing outsourcing operations. Lots
of political intrigue. I'm sure we've all experienced it from time to
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
