I would think we all understand that somebody had glazed over eyes and just wasn't paying attention. Sounds like they have a good process in place. It's just that those damned Human Interface Devices were approved to Interface with the system. Had those been on the unapproved to make changes list we wouldn't even be talking about their oooops (or Oh Shit) even today. :-)
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven M. Caesare Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 10:18 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] A Windows 7 image was deployed to EVERYTHING. Indeed, but that's a result, not a root cause. -sc -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] on behalf of Melvin Backus Sent: Mon 5/19/2014 10:05 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] A Windows 7 image was deployed to EVERYTHING. I think it can safely be assumed (yes I know) that a deployment server should never overwrite itself as part of a deployment. -- There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven M. Caesare Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 9:15 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] A Windows 7 image was deployed to EVERYTHING. How does one know if process refinement is necessary when you don't know the root cause of the issue (yet)? -sc -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] on behalf of Ken Schaefer Sent: Sun 5/18/2014 10:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] A Windows 7 image was deployed to EVERYTHING. Personally, I don't think any of these things will help. When creating a change record, the exact steps to be followed are documented. If someone either: a) Creates the wrong documentation, and it's approved by CAB b) Creates the right documentation, but someone either fat fingers or doesn't read the doco Then creating these extra steps is just process inflation. I don't think adding more steps or manual checks to process is the right answer. Especially in a world where business is clamouring for more agility and speed, rather than more bureaucracy in the name of risk management. If you look at the stuff coming out of CEB or Gartner, we need things like leaner processes, cross-skilled teams better able to understand implications across multiple towers, orchestration/automation tied to process and bunch of other things I don't remember off the top-of-my-head. Cheers Ken From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of CESAR.ABREG0 Sent: Monday, 19 May 2014 12:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] A Windows 7 image was deployed to EVERYTHING. Verify the number of clients in collection before using to deploy a TS to it? Verify that the dynamic collection being use contains the intended clients? Verify that the 'all system' collection is not a target? There could be more but a couple of that I can think of. Most this situations happen by human errors and inexperienced as well. I think HP consulting did it at a bank a couple of years ago and some that colleagues have shared with me that happened in a USA government branch. I've been doing imaging over 10 years and I never do mandatory deployments to populated collections, only to empty ones and I add clients manually or have a process to do so. This got me thinking of steps that can be taken or be part of a TS to prevent this type of situation up to an extend, can't never be prevented completely. 1. Put a step that verify DCs and other critical infrastructure systems and have human click yes before moving forward or fail if no response. 2. Creat web service/orchestrator to send email or a type of notification to a group before continuing. Automated. 3. What I've used in the past. Create an empty collection, deploy TS to it as mandatory, add required systems manually or by script from a list. Limit who can add systems and the type of client, like no DCs or SCCM systems. Cesar A. Meaning is NOT in words, but inside people! Dr. Myles Munroe My iPad takes half the blame for misspells. On May 18, 2014, at 5:31 PM, Ken Schaefer <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I'm assuming someone clicked the wrong button (i.e. "Finished", when they should've clicked "Cancel"). How does "process verification" (how do you define this?) help? Cheers Ken From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rankin, James R Sent: Monday, 19 May 2014 2:59 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] A Windows 7 image was deployed to EVERYTHING. I think I may use this as an example in an article about the importance of process verification. Sent from my (new!) BlackBerry, which may make me an antiques dealer, but it's reliable as hell for email delivery :-) ________________________________ From: "Andrew S. Baker" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sender: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 12:55:37 -0400 To: ntsysadm<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> ReplyTo: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] A Windows 7 image was deployed to EVERYTHING. Automation leads to relaxation... ...unless something goes horribly wrong. ASB http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker<http://xeeme.com/AndrewBaker> Providing Virtual CIO Services (IT Operations & Information Security) for the SMB market. On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Richard Stovall <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Wowzers. That's just incredible. On May 16, 2014 8:14 PM, "Kennedy, Jim" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: So SCCM sent win 7 to everything, including servers. http://it.emory.edu/windows7-incident/ This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
