Brother Scanning: MFC2700 / MFC 8480
-
eesh, I despise that kinda stuff. Make em' scan to email. Safer, traceable, no permissions garbage, etc.
-
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Yeah, that's technically true. But for this software, you setup the directory to scan to and they hit a button and it scans. Besides, if you knew these users...
THIS ^^ This right here is what I hear every day - my users will never do anything they aren't supposed to, so I don't need to worry about security issues...
and that's true.. until you do need to worry about it! A different person sits down there and starts messin' around... or a virus gets on there and takes advantage.. etc.
The whole idea of fixing it only after it breaks just drives me insane!
I get where you're coming from, but flip it over. Why create additional issues for yourself when a solution is available in the name of what might happen? It's all a balancing act. Will the potential side effects of granting normal users admin rights to one program result in a greater cost to the client than trying to figure out the perfect solution that might not exist?
-
@MattSpeller said:
eesh, I despise that kinda stuff. Make em' scan to email. Safer, traceable, no permissions garbage, etc.
Yeah, I've become a big fan of scan-to-email, although for large documents, this can be MUCH slower and doesn't always work with attachment size limitations.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
doesn't always work with attachment size limitations.
Thats when you scan to USB stick, but it's gotta be a monster or the printer has really weak compression algorithms.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Yeah, that's technically true. But for this software, you setup the directory to scan to and they hit a button and it scans. Besides, if you knew these users...
THIS ^^ This right here is what I hear every day - my users will never do anything they aren't supposed to, so I don't need to worry about security issues...
and that's true.. until you do need to worry about it! A different person sits down there and starts messin' around... or a virus gets on there and takes advantage.. etc.
The whole idea of fixing it only after it breaks just drives me insane!
I get where you're coming from, but flip it over. Why create additional issues for yourself when a solution is available in the name of what might happen? It's all a balancing act. Is the potential side effects of granting normal users admin rights to one program result in a greater cost to the client than trying to figure out the perfect solution that might not exist?
This is probably one of the best arguments I've ever seen you make!
That said, it's definitely a case by case issue. and I'd personally spend at least 30 mins trying to make this work correctly before just tossing in the towel.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@MattSpeller said:
eesh, I despise that kinda stuff. Make em' scan to email. Safer, traceable, no permissions garbage, etc.
Yeah, I've become a big fan of scan-to-email, although for large documents, this can be MUCH slower and doesn't always work with attachment size limitations.
Scanning to network often solves this problem then!
-
It sounds like this printer/scanner is connected directly to a computer - but if it's not, I'd definitely setup both Scan to email and scan to network and ditch the local scanning software from the machine.
-
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
-
@g.jacobse said:
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
Same version of windows? Do all have UAC enabled?
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@g.jacobse said:
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
Same version of windows? Do all have UAC enabled?
This, UAC being disabled has cause no end of grief to me on a few computers, I had a Canon MFP that refused to scan to the local disk without UAC enabled.
-
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@g.jacobse said:
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
Same version of windows? Do all have UAC enabled?
This, UAC being disabled has cause no end of grief to me on a few computers, I had a Canon MFP that refused to scan to the local disk without UAC enabled.
Wow.. not that just seems backwards.
-
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
@Dashrender said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Yeah, that's technically true. But for this software, you setup the directory to scan to and they hit a button and it scans. Besides, if you knew these users...
THIS ^^ This right here is what I hear every day - my users will never do anything they aren't supposed to, so I don't need to worry about security issues...
and that's true.. until you do need to worry about it! A different person sits down there and starts messin' around... or a virus gets on there and takes advantage.. etc.
The whole idea of fixing it only after it breaks just drives me insane!
I get where you're coming from, but flip it over. Why create additional issues for yourself when a solution is available in the name of what might happen? It's all a balancing act. Is the potential side effects of granting normal users admin rights to one program result in a greater cost to the client than trying to figure out the perfect solution that might not exist?
This is probably one of the best arguments I've ever seen you make!
That said, it's definitely a case by case issue. and I'd personally spend at least 30 mins trying to make this work correctly before just tossing in the towel.
Oh I totally agree that totally not trying is a bad idea. However, balance is required. Thank you for the kind words.
-
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@g.jacobse said:
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
Same version of windows? Do all have UAC enabled?
This, UAC being disabled has cause no end of grief to me on a few computers, I had a Canon MFP that refused to scan to the local disk without UAC enabled.
Without it being ENABLED? That's just weird...
-
@Dashrender said:
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@g.jacobse said:
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
Same version of windows? Do all have UAC enabled?
This, UAC being disabled has cause no end of grief to me on a few computers, I had a Canon MFP that refused to scan to the local disk without UAC enabled.
Wow.. not that just seems backwards.
Ditto.
-
@Dashrender said:
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@g.jacobse said:
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
Same version of windows? Do all have UAC enabled?
This, UAC being disabled has cause no end of grief to me on a few computers, I had a Canon MFP that refused to scan to the local disk without UAC enabled.
Wow.. not that just seems backwards.
Agreed... I was trying to figure it out. Even made the user an admin temporarily to see if that had anything to do with it... still wouldn't scan. It was only after enabling UAC (which was off for some reason) that we were able to get it to work... even worked after demoting them to a standard user again.
-
@coliver said:
@Dashrender said:
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@g.jacobse said:
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
Same version of windows? Do all have UAC enabled?
This, UAC being disabled has cause no end of grief to me on a few computers, I had a Canon MFP that refused to scan to the local disk without UAC enabled.
Wow.. not that just seems backwards.
Agreed... I was trying to figure it out. Even made the user an admin temporarily to see if that had anything to do with it... still wouldn't scan. It was only after enabling UAC (which was off for some reason) that we were able to get it to work... even worked after demoting them to a standard user again.
When the standard user is running it, do they get a UAC prompt?
-
@Dashrender said:
@coliver said:
@Dashrender said:
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@g.jacobse said:
There are about four scanners in the office, and about 20 users.
It is not currently set to scan to the server, but to the local users computer. Each scanner is on the network, separate IP address.
Again, some computers are the issue,.. not all. many work fine with no issues. Pulling the same GPO and User rights.
Same version of windows? Do all have UAC enabled?
This, UAC being disabled has cause no end of grief to me on a few computers, I had a Canon MFP that refused to scan to the local disk without UAC enabled.
Wow.. not that just seems backwards.
Agreed... I was trying to figure it out. Even made the user an admin temporarily to see if that had anything to do with it... still wouldn't scan. It was only after enabling UAC (which was off for some reason) that we were able to get it to work... even worked after demoting them to a standard user again.
When the standard user is running it, do they get a UAC prompt?
Nope. I should have used Process Monitor to see what was being touched... but it is working as expected now.
-
@MattSpeller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
doesn't always work with attachment size limitations.
Thats when you scan to USB stick, but it's gotta be a monster or the printer has really weak compression algorithms.
In some cases it comes down to 'difficulty' and 'But that how we always did it.' mentality.
These units may not have the ability to scan to USB I haven't investigated that. AND scan to USB adds yet another step. Scan to USB, remove, plug into computer, copy from USB. Can it be done, sure,.. but do you want to do that 12 or more times a day? I don't, bit PITA.
Scan to email, it's great, but what if I am not needing to email it? again, extra step in some regard. The Fiscal Department at my last office scanned everything to the server for dual retention... Bit cumbersome to scan to email to have to save to network after.
@thecreativeone91
Windows 7 and Windows 8I've not check the UAC, but again, if GPO is setting those parameters, why are some working and some not?
-
@g.jacobse said:
@MattSpeller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
doesn't always work with attachment size limitations.
Thats when you scan to USB stick, but it's gotta be a monster or the printer has really weak compression algorithms.
In some cases it comes down to 'difficulty' and 'But that how we always did it.' mentality.
These units may not have the ability to scan to USB I haven't investigated that. AND scan to USB adds yet another step. Scan to USB, remove, plug into computer, copy from USB. Can it be done, sure,.. but do you want to do that 12 or more times a day? I don't, bit PITA.
Scan to email, it's great, but what if I am not needing to email it? again, extra step in some regard. The Fiscal Department at my last office scanned everything to the server for dual retention... Bit cumbersome to scan to email to have to save to network after.
@thecreativeone91
Windows 7 and Windows 8I've not check the UAC, but again, if GPO is setting those parameters, why are some working and some not?
The 8480 should have scan-to-USB but yeah, your users will not go for that. Can't remember if that model does scan-to-email but I want to say no. Again, it emails and then they have to download the attachment. Are the users registered with the scan-to button on the printer? Also, you say some users have the issue and others don't?
-
@handsofqwerty
It's not so much a 'scanning' issue as it is an 'application' issue. The Brother Utility starts - no issue there. but when the user clicks the Control Center 4 option, that is where the issue occurs. It does not run for the user. It does run for the domain and local admin.Even with GPO modifications and GPUPDATE /FORCE /BOOT
