Best posts made by Obsolesce

@ElecEng said in Is the domain .Local a real problem in a private lan that has no public facing services?:

@scottalanmiller What's the best thing to use on green field networks that are private and have no public facing services?

Not AD.

Here are some points to consider:

1. Consent and Notification: It's essential to have explicit consent from parents or legal guardians if students are minors. Even if students are not employees, they still have privacy rights. Proper notification to both students and parents is crucial.

2. FERPA Compliance: The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) protects the privacy of student education records. Any monitoring should be in compliance with FERPA regulations to avoid violations.

3. Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA): If the school is providing online services or websites to students under the age of 13, COPPA may come into play. It requires obtaining parental consent for collecting personal information from children.

4. Vendor Liability: If a breach of student private communications occurs due to IT or vendor mistakes, there could be potential liability issues. Schools should have agreements in place with vendors that address data security and liability.

5. Local and State Laws: Laws regarding electronic surveillance, data privacy, and education can vary by state and locality. It's important to consult with legal experts who are knowledgeable about local regulations.

6. Balancing Security and Privacy: Schools must strike a balance between ensuring network security and respecting student privacy. An overly intrusive monitoring system could raise concerns.

Ultimately, it's crucial to consult with legal counsel who specializes in education law and data privacy to ensure that the school system's practices comply with all applicable laws and regulations. Additionally, a transparent and well-documented approach to monitoring, including clear notification to students and parents, can help mitigate potential legal risks.

@JasGot said in Options to securely deliver electronic documents?:

We have a customer that is asking about delivering documents to their customers; securely.

Much like a bank would do it. They send you an email with instructions to visit their site, login, and download your file.

Anyone aware of a service that does this?

What do they define as delivering documents securely?

You'd need to host a site they can log in to, or use something else that requires an account they already have, such as requiring them to log in via a known MS or Google email. For example, send them a link of the doc(s) in OneDrive or Google Drive that requires them to authenticate.

Any other service that does this, you're just trusting that the correct person signs up for that "other service" to access the documents.

It works well for the bank because when your own bank does it, you already have an account to use to sign in and get get the doc.

In the case where a company wants to provide a document to a customer, then it needs to be with a service that the customer already has an account with or is capable of verifying the person before they create one to access it. If the company can, ideally they would make the document available via the service (OneDrive, Google Docs) to that specific customer's email. Then they'd be forced to sign up (if they don't have already) or use that email to access the docs.

@CCWTech I've used live migration of VMs successfully in the past, but not with Starwind. If Starwind offers a live V2V solution, I'd put my money on that more VS what I used successfully in the past.

If unsure, create a test VM to try.

@scottalanmiller oh I don't doubt there's a real person behind the account, but I don't think it has a single time engaged with the community other than to throw around marketing posts. Super duper spammy. I can't stand visiting the site without being logged in, having to navigate around all the spam from that account. If I want to browse StarWind Blog posts, I'll just visit their site.

@DustinB3403 said in CrowdStrike blames kernel level access on last month Microsoft outage, claims to:

want to find a non-kernel based solution and that the EU is at fault.

https://www.csoonline.com/article/3483641/crowdstrike-backs-microsofts-demand-for-reducing-kernel-level-access.html

I still say it could have been avoided if CrowdStrike had tested the change on a single device prior to releasing it publicly. It could have been a simple automated test as part of their release pipeline.

Even a better rollout strategy could have prevented it from going too far.