Microsoft Communicator 2007 R2
-
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
So I'm seeing that Rocket.Chat is web based, but I can't seem to find info for an on-premise installation.
Rocket.Chat themselves said that this one was great and wanted me to help get their official docs updated:
http://mangolassi.it/topic/8086/installing-rocket-chat-on-centos-7
Yeah I ran across that one in the past. I was going to circle back around and check it out. Recent information that I can't post about on here is that we have to go with Skype, sucks to say.
-
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
So I'm seeing that Rocket.Chat is web based, but I can't seem to find info for an on-premise installation.
Rocket.Chat themselves said that this one was great and wanted me to help get their official docs updated:
http://mangolassi.it/topic/8086/installing-rocket-chat-on-centos-7
Yeah I ran across that one in the past. I was going to circle back around and check it out. Recent information that I can't post about on here is that we have to go with Skype, sucks to say.
That sucks. Are you sure that you "have to go with Skype" even when they won't approve it? they can "say" all that they want that they have to go with it, but if they are not approving the budget, what does that mean? Just install Rocket in the mean time and see what happens. it is just a stop gap until they "get around to releasing the budget".
-
@BBigford said:
we have to go with Skype, sucks to say.
It's not too bad. It has been kind of unreliable lately though which sucks.
-
@MattSpeller said:
@BBigford said:
we have to go with Skype, sucks to say.
It's not too bad. It has been kind of unreliable lately though which sucks.
He means Skype for business which REALLY sucks.
-
But currently... they are not going with it? I thought that they were stalling on the decision at this point.
-
@scottalanmiller Do you find Rocket Chat any more or less secure (on premise) than Skype for Business?
-
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller Do you find Rocket Chat any more or less secure (on premise) than Skype for Business?
Well it is on premises so up to "me" to secure it. So I lack the security team that MS has to secure things. As a communications channel it is pretty similar. If my goal is to secure the communications from random people, SfB is probably more secure. If it is to keep the communications away from the government, Rocket.Chat would be the more secure.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller Do you find Rocket Chat any more or less secure (on premise) than Skype for Business?
Well it is on premises so up to "me" to secure it. So I lack the security team that MS has to secure things. As a communications channel it is pretty similar. If my goal is to secure the communications from random people, SfB is probably more secure. If it is to keep the communications away from the government, Rocket.Chat would be the more secure.
I'm guessing you use Rocket Chat, and that your post about setting up Rocket Chat wasn't just a trial, but to put it to use... Any tips on securing it for internal use? Using the mobile app is way up in the air... not really a concern at this point as that would be a separate issue since we'd have to worry about firewall rules and if it is pointing to our internal connection instead of being exposed to the public cloud.
-
@scottalanmiller For internal, I know the question gets posed "it's internal, how do you figure it'll get compromised?" My thought was a compromised internal machine can feed that data to an external source (as unlikely as that might be, they are questions that might be raised).
-
@BBigford said:
I'm guessing you use Rocket Chat, and that your post about setting up Rocket Chat wasn't just a trial, but to put it to use...
No, we DO have it running, but we don't use it. We use Skype (real Skype, the one that works, not that SfB garbage, we tried that and it is pretty much useless) because our system is mostly for talking to customers, not internally. So since we are stuck with Skype to talk to customers it makes both SfB and Rocket pretty much useless to us.
-
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller For internal, I know the question gets posed "it's internal, how do you figure it'll get compromised?" My thought was a compromised internal machine can feed that data to an external source (as unlikely as that might be, they are questions that might be raised).
Internal is always the most dangerous. SMBs just don't have the resources to secure and monitor things like big enterprise cloud providers can.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
I'm guessing you use Rocket Chat, and that your post about setting up Rocket Chat wasn't just a trial, but to put it to use...
No, we DO have it running, but we don't use it. We use Skype (real Skype, the one that works, not that SfB garbage, we tried that and it is pretty much useless)
Hah, now that is funny. I had read from so many Lync admins that Lync was great, until SfB came into play. So if Skype didn't exist, what would you do...? That's kind of where we're at, "We want something like Skype for Business. Something that has mobile app support, secure, and we can talk to external clients with. But we don't want it to be Skype because it's a pain to manage, and it's expensive." Pretty much 90% is IM, other 10% is screen sharing. Company uses WebEx so rolling that in would be nice, but I guess it's not crucial since the cost of not using Skype for Business forever would justify having something like X-solution and WebEx.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
@scottalanmiller For internal, I know the question gets posed "it's internal, how do you figure it'll get compromised?" My thought was a compromised internal machine can feed that data to an external source (as unlikely as that might be, they are questions that might be raised).
Internal is always the most dangerous. SMBs just don't have the resources to secure and monitor things like big enterprise cloud providers can.
Yeah and see that's what I'm afraid of. Purchasing a closed source solution, you expect certain levels of security so I can redirect my efforts somewhere else, instead of hardening our IM services. Going with something like OpenFire, I don't expect the security to be on the same level because the development is nowhere near as robust because it is free, so expectations are much lower for that kind of thing.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@BBigford said:
I'm guessing you use Rocket Chat, and that your post about setting up Rocket Chat wasn't just a trial, but to put it to use...
No, we DO have it running, but we don't use it. We use Skype (real Skype, the one that works, not that SfB garbage, we tried that and it is pretty much useless) because our system is mostly for talking to customers, not internally. So since we are stuck with Skype to talk to customers it makes both SfB and Rocket pretty much useless to us.
What did you find so terrible about SfB? I've read complaints about video/audio quality, connectivity, etc. Are there any specifics you can mention? It is all helpful when I'm writing up this stuff in a proposal of what to do for now and the coming years.
-
@BBigford said:
Hah, now that is funny. I had read from so many Lync admins that Lync was great, until SfB came into play.
No, SfB changed nothing. Lync was always garbage. SfB is just a rebranding of Lync, nothing really changed. And Lync was just a rebranding of Communicator. None of it was ever any good.
-
@BBigford said:
Yeah and see that's what I'm afraid of. Purchasing a closed source solution, you expect certain levels of security ....
Oh no, very much the opposite. Closed source means "bad security". Security and open go hand in hand. How do you get security when the source code is secret? Obscurity is the enemy of security.
-
@BBigford said:
Going with something like OpenFire, I don't expect the security to be on the same level because the development is nowhere near as robust because it is free, so expectations are much lower for that kind of thing.
Development is much more robust AND the code can be audited AND isn't kept secret. From a product standpoint, Skype and SfB would be the least secure options. It's the hosting of it that is more secure.
-
@BBigford said:
What did you find so terrible about SfB?
Unreliable, never worked properly, lacked really fundamental features like persistent groups.
-
@scottalanmiller Awesome. As always, thanks for the insight Scott. I'm headed home for the day. Have a good one.
