Alas, I don't have that much power.  And we have previously been down the road 
where this department ran their own network--not a good thing.  I have taken 
some measures to minimize the risk, but beyond that and documenting/reporting 
the possible issues and concerns, not much else I can do. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 5:12 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Reality check

Perhaps you can take the tack that your department owns the network, and that 
you won't have such an insecure setup on your network - they can run the 
software on the server they manage themselves, as long as it doesn't connect to 
the production network.

I doubt it, but...

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 14:02, Mayo, Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> Afraid not.  The department that uses the software makes the decision 
> about what they use.  We can only advise.  We previously had a 
> different vendor, and this vendor is actually superior from what I can tell.
>
> I don't really deal directly with the vendor for this system, so the 
> only thing I can do is point out the problems to the person that 
> administers the system and to our CIO.  The former has been hearing 
> about it all day, and the latter will (he is already aware of some 
> issues we have had when the workstation has had problems).
>
> The last time this came up (when I had some involvement with the 
> workstation getting setup), I complained to the on-site tech about it.
> At that time (about 3 years ago), he said that he agreed and that they 
> were working on converting the processes to services.  Guess that 
> didn't happen.
>
> Thanks to all for the confirmation that I am not just difficult (at 
> least in this case!).
>
> Bill Mayo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Bodnar [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 4:23 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Reality check
>
> As long as you are tied to the vendor, they will do whatever they 
> want, which means not fixing the problem.
>
> Any possibility of shopping around for another vendor?
>
> Chris Bodnar, MCSE
> Sr. Systems Engineer
> Infrastructure Service Delivery
> Distributed Systems Service Delivery - Intel Services Guardian Life 
> Insurance Company of America
> Email: [email protected]
> Phone: 610-807-6459
> Fax: 610-807-6003
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mayo, Bill [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 4:05 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Reality check
>
> I am terribly frustrated with an application vendor who is on-site to 
> add a new module to on of our critical software packages, and I want 
> to confirm it is not just me being difficult.  This system already has 
> the requirement that a workstation be logged on with 3 different 
> programs running in the foreground to shuffle data around between 
> modules.  To be clear, an account has to be logged into this machine 
> at all times for this system to work properly.  They are here now, 
> installing a new server for a new module, and they now have to have it 
> doing the same thing on the server (logged on account, foreground 
> applications running).
>
> This is not a minor system (either in size or cost) and the parent 
> company is not tiny (rhymes with "bun hard").  When I say "services"
> they look at me like I am from Mars.  The problems with needing an 
> account logged onto a server at all times seem obvious to me.  (The 
> workstation was bad enough.)  Am I alone?
>
> Bill Mayo
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ 
> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------
> This message, and any attachments to it, may contain information that 
> is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under 
> applicable law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended 
> recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, 
> copying, or communication of this message is strictly prohibited.  If 
> you have received this message in error, please notify the sender 
> immediately by return e-mail and delete the message and any attachments.  
> Thank you.
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ 
> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ 
> <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ 
<http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to