If you have ever tried to run a user space program on Linux with a port below 1024 you know that this is a security problem and you are not allowed to do so. There is a simple fix for this, but it is not well known.
Once you know the binary that you will be using to open the low number (well known) port you can use this command to grant it permission to use these ports without otherwise compromising security.
setcap cap_net_bind_service+ep /my/binary/file
Now you can run your application. This is most commonly used for user space web applications that want to use port 80 or 443 without requiring that you run a reverse proxy in front of them.
It's an easy fix. Sometimes the directions for the upgrade don't account for the source location of the APT REPO for ProxMox. Check your /etc/apt files and see where your repo is configured. If you are going from Buster to Bullseye for example, make sure that you have this line somewhere and the error should go away...
deb http://download.proxmox.com/debian/pve bullseye pve-no-subscription
Yes, I've been saying this about certain core functionality for a long time. I try to avoid anything in plugins because there's so much fragility there. They are a constant source of problems on products like this.
I upgraded my platform this morning to v2.6.1 and I have no issue with the embed plugin working. It does give a warning on load.
In a Windows world, it seems it would be better to create a Storage Space, because it gives you the flexibility to extend the storage instead of having to add/mount another virtual drive if you were to run out of space.
Exactly. Same logic applies universally, always best to have that flexibility on your platform. It has no real overhead, but protects against the unknown.
Also, accepting insecure email is different than allowing your organization to send insecure email.
Very true. Accepting things insecurely is better than sending them.
I accept email in any way that it is sent. But all sent email is required to be TLS or it will not send. I have a couple of people that the boss cannot email because of it, as well as one prior customer that is still running an ancient ass GroupWise 6 email server. They email asking for one off support for their routers sometimes.
From that, you've drawn a huge number of untrue assumptions, such as I'm not really IT,
Where did I draw that conclusion? I asked you if you were and you've not said one way or the other. That's all. Repeating that you work for an ISV, whatever that means to you, in no way whatsoever answers the question. Just because an ISV is in no way an IT organization doesn't mean that they don't hire some IT staff internally. I feel like you are saying it to try to tell us you're not in IT, but it doesn't imply that.
Just like working at McDonald's includes both flipping burgers and being a CIO.
ISVs tend to have incredibly small IT needs, in general. But they certainly need IT. As someone that's owned an ISV for a very long time, we certainly have IT. But we don't offer IT, we offer software. But developers need IT support too. As do the office staff, etc.