@DustinB3403 said in OneNote - Share Across Devices - User rant:

OneNote locally to their hard drive, and then moan about their hard drive failing with OneNote saved locally.

huh, that's weird.. by default OneNote wants to make you put it on OneDrive (at least it used to) so making it be local would require extra work.

I'm with Jared, either DDNS or a central system that is static and sites that are dynamic. Are there cases for static IP at the office, of course. But I think that they are pretty rare these days and getting rarer.

@travisdh1 said in SSL between a proxy and its target:

@Dashrender said in SSL between a proxy and its target:

@dafyre said in SSL between a proxy and its target:

@scottalanmiller said in SSL between a proxy and its target:

Never had to do that. Seems like a script to pull it from time to time might be enough, though?

Set up a passwordless scp of the /etc/letsencrypt (or /etc/certbot?) folder from the proxy to the internal machine?

Any security risk to this? I don't know anything about it - I just see passwordless and have to ask.

It's industry standard public/private key encryption, so shouldn't be an issue.

You should go read up on SQRL. In my not so humble opinion, passwords have long outlived the point where they are a useful security mechanism.

I'm fully aware of SQRL - I asked Scott on Day one of ML if he would support it when it became available, sadly it's still not released to the wild 😞

Question: have you tried setting up the DHCP server as the time master, and having the Centos system sync time to the DHCP server (with said DHCP server syncing to NIST or whatever time source you prefer) instead of the NTP Pool? That way theoretically DHCP server and Centos should be at the same time. Just a thought.

This is the NextCloud information that @scottalanmiller was talking about.

This is still a consistent problem. Does not seem to occur if I'm not using cached exchange mode but that is required on my network.

@Ambarishrh said in virus cleanup-advise needed:

Can webroot help me here, thinking of using webroot and see if it can clean

Maybe. Anything "might" work. But you'll never know.

@aaronstuder said in Contabo VPS:

@scottalanmiller Do you know how well nested KVM works?

Have not tested it.

@scottalanmiller said in Linode and Vultr Current Pricing Q1 2017:

Vultr has a much superior (IMHO) web interface. Linode's is not at all on par.

Completely Agree 100%

Circling back to this, it is like I was blind or something. This happened because owncloud made it into the EPEL. It says it right there in my screenshot.

I just installed a new CentSO system and wanted to see what it tried now.

[root@bna-nc ~]# yum install owncloud Loaded plugins: fastestmirror epel/x86_64/metalink | 12 kB 00:00:00 epel | 4.3 kB 00:00:00 (1/3): epel/x86_64/group_gz | 170 kB 00:00:00 (2/3): epel/x86_64/updateinfo | 751 kB 00:00:00 (3/3): epel/x86_64/primary_db | 4.6 MB 00:00:00 Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile * base: centos.mirrors.tds.net * epel: mirror.oss.ou.edu * extras: ftpmirror.your.org * updates: bay.uchicago.edu Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package owncloud.noarch 0:9.1.4-1.el7 will be installed

*stands close to @scottalanmiller , ready to pounce on him with an epipen, just in case*

We use HAProxy as our load balancer for Horizon View. Works amazingly well and is very light weight.

And there goes a successful mail test.

Mar 7 11:25:24 relay01 postfix/smtpd[2206]: connect from owncloud.domain.local[10.201.1.17] Mar 7 11:25:24 relay01 postfix/smtpd[2206]: CB2E6C0C82CB: client=owncloud.domain.local[10.201.1.17] Mar 7 11:25:24 relay01 postfix/cleanup[2208]: CB2E6C0C82CB: message-id=<[email protected]> Mar 7 11:25:24 relay01 postfix/qmgr[1665]: CB2E6C0C82CB: from=<[email protected]>, size=591, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Mar 7 11:25:24 relay01 postfix/smtpd[2206]: disconnect from owncloud.domain.local[10.201.1.17] Mar 7 11:25:26 relay01 postfix/smtp[2209]: CB2E6C0C82CB: to=<[email protected]>, relay=domain-com.mail.protection.outlook.com[216.32.181.170]:25, delay=2.1, delays=0.05/0/0.62/1.4, dsn=2.6.0, status=sent (250 2.6.0 <[email protected]> [InternalId=42704859829911, Hostname=SN1PR0201MB1854.namprd02.prod.outlook.com] 7564 bytes in 0.244, 30.254 KB/sec Queued mail for delivery) Mar 7 11:25:26 relay01 postfix/qmgr[1665]: CB2E6C0C82CB: removed

@wirestyle22 updates were applied only in the VM's not the host.. everything is ok, just for a vm an error about integration services

@Dashrender said in DNSMessenger malware:

That's all fine and dandy my point was that this hack is currently worthless on its own it requires a previous hack in order to make this one work

The point is not how the infection was started. The point is that the infection itself is completely fileless. Never writing data to the disk.

There are multitudes of ways into a Windows system that an attacker could use to execute the initial code.

Old thread but I just found this out after wasting a few hours last evening trying to get Hyper-V 2016 on my Dell 2950 lab server. Processors need to support SLAT
http://www.nodefinity.net/post/hyper-v-on-poweredge-2900-2950-the-end-of-the-road-is-windows-server-2012-r2

Same here. We do not normally put OpenVPN on endpoints.

LucidCharts?