Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Securing Sensitive WO Information
Roger is correct. Configuring multi-tenancy is not worth the ROI in this instance. Neither is Case Management. We were hoping for a simpler solution at the Support Group level. Regards, Jim -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Roger Justice Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 4:14 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Securing Sensitive WO Information ** His statement is specific Support Group not separate companies. -Original Message- From: Deepak Pathak <dpathak1...@gmail.com> To: arslist <arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> Sent: Fri, Aug 18, 2017 3:52 pm Subject: Re: Securing Sensitive WO Information ** I believe that feature is called Multi-Tenancy. On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Rackley, James A CIV <james.a.rack...@uscg.mil> wrote: Oh Mighty Brain Trust, What is the recommended method to ensure that users with Work Order permissions CANNOT see a specific subset of WOs via Global Search, WO Console, Overview, AR Reporting, Analytics, or Smart Reporting? Essentially, only users in a specific Support Group should be able to see anything at all about WOs assigned to this Support Group. Thanks in advance! Regards, Jim Rackley, PMP CGFIXIT Service Manager USCG, C4ITSC, Business Operations Division "You can't help everyone. But everyone can help someone." ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.arslist.org=DwMCaQ=0NKfg44GVknAU-XkWXjNxQ=iuYYqFqKHbSOeyo5LY9dkV5F4FpNAQQwkv53Lj1KZMQ=bhbd2MzApvpTGxeBSWoFc2I-6QzdkhsaQKFVVHfXFuY=Me9JYEPDXPdI2JMa6-H17FULCBbOSVMPpO-lnzyqdD8=> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years" _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Securing Sensitive WO Information
My apologies; we're running 9.1. Regards, Jim -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Roger Justice Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 12:03 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Securing Sensitive WO Information ** Please provide the release you are working on. There is nothing in the base capability to do this. -Original Message- From: Rackley, James A CIV <james.a.rack...@uscg.mil> To: arslist <arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> Sent: Fri, Aug 18, 2017 11:35 am Subject: Securing Sensitive WO Information Oh Mighty Brain Trust, What is the recommended method to ensure that users with Work Order permissions CANNOT see a specific subset of WOs via Global Search, WO Console, Overview, AR Reporting, Analytics, or Smart Reporting? Essentially, only users in a specific Support Group should be able to see anything at all about WOs assigned to this Support Group. Thanks in advance! Regards, Jim Rackley, PMP CGFIXIT Service Manager USCG, C4ITSC, Business Operations Division "You can't help everyone. But everyone can help someone." ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.arslist.org=DwMCaQ=0NKfg44GVknAU-XkWXjNxQ=iuYYqFqKHbSOeyo5LY9dkV5F4FpNAQQwkv53Lj1KZMQ=bAlriophZgQ10jNadNjX_K1xVNNywYmVMeZkiA-bF6U=Q3XktB0m8kLLidxSkkieFz3zmk-_Ch6VDJn8GzA_2BU=> "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years" _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Securing Sensitive WO Information
Oh Mighty Brain Trust, What is the recommended method to ensure that users with Work Order permissions CANNOT see a specific subset of WOs via Global Search, WO Console, Overview, AR Reporting, Analytics, or Smart Reporting? Essentially, only users in a specific Support Group should be able to see anything at all about WOs assigned to this Support Group. Thanks in advance! Regards, Jim Rackley, PMP CGFIXIT Service Manager USCG, C4ITSC, Business Operations Division "You can't help everyone. But everyone can help someone." ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
DISA STIG for Mongo DB (Fed Gov Environment)
Listers, Greetings, all! As a warning, if you don't know what the acronyms DISA and STIG are, this discussion will likely give you a headache. If you do know what they mean, you've likely had a headache for a very long time. :D We're looking at an 8.1 to 9.1 upgrade of our environment and would like to use Smart/My IT. However, these apps require the installation of the Mongo DB product which has no DISA approved STIG. Because we have no control over DISA's timeline, we've now decided not to deploy Smart/My IT until we can get an approved STIG. We are proceeding with what I've termed "Vanilla 9.1". Is anyone else out there in the Fed Gov space working on a Mongo DB STIG with DISA? If so, I'd love to chat with you. Perhaps we can combine efforts/resources and get this thing moving. Just as importantly, I don't want to waste resources if someone else is well into the process. Thanks in advance! Regards, Jim Rackley CGFIXIT (Remedy) Service Manager, ITILv3© USCG, C4ITSC, Business Operations Division Phone: (757) 628-4039 Cell: (757) 609-0909 "You can't help everyone. But everyone can help someone." ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
Re: Join form question
With both tables, this should work... SELECT DISTINCT(A.X) FROM A INNER JOIN B ON A.X=B.X WHERE B.Y=20 However, it seems like you don't really need a join - probably because you kept the description simple. SELECT DISTINCT(B.X) FROM B WHERE B.Y=20 If the second SQL statement yields the correct results, then the first should work for the join. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 4:07 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Join form question ** It appears like you are looking for a join between A and distinct of B, which is only possible if you customize your system such that you actually create a view containing distinct values of B, and then use that to create a join with A. Otherwise as far as the AR System is concerned that second or third or fourth row it might see of 100 if you had that many, are separate rows. No way for it to know that you are seeking for distinct values. Joe From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of L G Robinson Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 2:14 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Join form question ** Hi Folks, I need some help with a join. I'm not sure if this is possible or not. In simple terms, I have two forms, Form A and Form B They have one field in common, lets call it X. Form A has the following values for X: 100 200 300 Form B has two fields X and Y. There may be multiple entries in Form B where X is repeated: XY 10020 10020 10030 20030 20030 20040 30020 Is there a way to join these two forms together so that if I search for Y=20 I will get this: X 100 300 instead of this: X 100 100 300 I have tried a number of variations on inner/outer and switching primary but I haven't been able to get what I want. Thanks for any suggestions you may have. Larry ARS: 7.6.04 SP3 201201302357 on Solaris 10 Oracle 11.2.0.3.0 Larry Robinson Remedy Developer/Admin NC State University Raleigh, NC _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: [EXTERNAL] Recruiters Odd NDA
Personally, I would responds with my own contractual clause, such as... 1) During the period for which the Company markets ENTERNAMEHERE's (My, Myself, Me) skills, the Company shall perform no action that, in My opinion, reflects poorly upon My character or professionalism. Furthermore, the Company shall not market My skills nor introduce Me to a Customer without written approval from Myself. 2) The Company shall not provide any written documentation to any Customer concerning Myself that contains spelling, grammar, or mathematical errors. 3) The Company agrees to pay Me an hourly stipend (Stipend) of $125 for each Evaluatory interview. The Stipend begins when I leave My home and ends upon My return to said home. The Stipend shall be remitted to Me within 14 days of said Evaluatory interview. The Company agrees to reimburse within 60 days any Evalutory interview related travel expenses. 4) In the event the Company breaches the provisions of this Agreement, the Company agrees to pay Me, as liquidated damages and not as a penalty, a further sum of US Dollars One Hundred Thousand. The Company acknowledges that liquidated damages in such amount is reasonable under the circumstances in light of the fact that significant damages and expenses will be suffered or incurred by Me. Just my 3 cents - I have to operate at 150% to keep up :D Jim -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Stroud, Natalie K Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 4:09 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Recruiters Odd NDA ** Scott: I do see where the guy is coming from – he’s looking after his own interests, and I can understand his wanting to do that. I can even imagine a few experiences which may have prompted the writing of that particular NDA. I think the problem is, he’s so busy looking after his own interests that he doesn’t really think about how confining the arrangement being proposed is for the people he’s claiming to serve by hooking them up with prospective employers. I can’t imagine anyone except someone desperate agreeing to that. While it can be helpful to work with recruiters, that particular arrangement seems a bit too one-sided in his side’s favor to me. And if he’s pressuring you, on the one hand, I can appreciate that he’s out hustling to try and find people, but on the other, he really does need to leave things up to you. Letting people make their own decisions is basic respect, and if he has a valid position with competitive wages to offer, he shouldn’t need to pressure you – you’re either interested or you’re not. So either he’s a basically decent guy who is simply trying too hard or else he’s a not-so-decent sort with some other agenda motivating him. Personally, I’d probably steer clear. I see enough yellow flags here that working with “the Company” seems like a risk I’d prefer to avoid. Best of luck, Natalie Stroud SAIC @ Sandia National Laboratories ARS-ITSM Reporting Specialist Albuquerque, NM USA nkst...@sandia.gov ITSM 7.6.04 SP2 – Windows 2003 – SQL Server 2008 From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Scott Hallenger Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 1:08 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: [EXTERNAL] Recruiters Odd NDA ** I've been goig back and fourth with a recruiter on a position that is totally remote. Mind you I have no hire letter, and have had no interview thus far, and this all started today. I dont know this guy from adam. Below is what he sends me in his NDA doc. Sorry but I refused to sign his doc which he tried to pressure me into signing like a car salesman or something. Did I over react? 1. During the period when Name_Less, Inc. (the “Company”) is marketing your skills and for a period of 3 months thereafter, you shall not directly or indirectly solicit the business of (or otherwise deal in a manner adverse to the Company with) or provide any software engineering, consulting or programming services to any customer or prospective customer of the Company where you are introduced by the Company. Furthermore, during the course of Evaluatory interviews and other meetings that the Company organizes between you and its customers or prospective customers, you agree that you will not offer your services directly or indirectly to (or otherwise deal in a manner adverse to the Company with) the Customers or prospective customers of the Company. 2. In the event that you breach the provisions of this Agreement, you agree to pay the Company as liquidated damages and not as a penalty a further sum of US Dollars Ten Thousand. You acknowledge that liquidated damages in such amount is reasonable under the circumstances in light of the fact that significant damages and expenses will be suffered or incurred by the Company _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and
