Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

+1 on this.  I've benchmarked the linksys WRT54G against other
comparible models before, it it rated at the bottom of the list when
depending on hardware encryption performance.

I like it as a home routing device, but I dont recommend it for
site-to-site when performance needs to be maximized.

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Phil Brutsche  wrote:
> I don't know if I would go that route, just on a basis of CPU "horsepower".
>
> Most of the options I listed have either hardware cryptographic
> accelerators or enough horsepower to do it in software.
>
> The Linksys WRT54G(L) boxes have very, very weak CPUs and do not possess
> the necessary hardware acceleration.
>
> Derek Lidbom wrote:
>> If it were me, I would have to drop $100 on two Linksys WRT-54GLs and
>> try:
>> http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN_-_Site-to-Site_Bridged_VPN_
>> Between_Two_Routers
>>
>> I've had lots of luck with dd-wrt in other scenarios, and you could
>> double your purchase and have redundant backups as easy and re-flashing
>> an image (I'm assuming the VPN doesn't add complications with that).
>
> --
>
> Phil Brutsche
> p...@optimumdata.com
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: data-center in the sky

[Tim Vander Kooi]

works for = goofs off at

From: Erik Goldoff [mailto:egold...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:38 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: data-center in the sky

Have you checked with the folks at Peak10 ?   http://www.peak10.com/
They might suit your needs...  Not sure *where* in the East Coast you want 
them, Matt Searfoss is the VP/GM of the center they have in Norcross not far 
from me, holler if you want his contact info

( and I think Shook works for their Charlotte office )

Erik Goldoff

IT  Consultant

Systems, Networks, & Security



From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: data-center in the sky
I need to find a "data-center in the sky". That is, a company that has plenty 
of bandwidth and rents servers to their clients.

In a "past life" I used Softlayer and was happy with them, but I'm interested 
in knowing what else is out there (primarily interested in the East Coast USA).

Thanks.













~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Derek Lidbom]

Good point.

But I would still have to try... :)  Although agreed that if I were
setting this up for a paying client who wanted to do it "right" I
wouldn't go with DD-WRT.

I did find someone who indicated that vpn throughput from a windows box
to DD-WRT (didn't say IPSec or PPTP) was around 5Mbps:
http://forums.speedguide.net/archive/index.php/t-242584.html

-Derek

-Original Message-
From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:p...@optimumdata.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:15 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

I don't know if I would go that route, just on a basis of CPU
"horsepower".

Most of the options I listed have either hardware cryptographic
accelerators or enough horsepower to do it in software.

The Linksys WRT54G(L) boxes have very, very weak CPUs and do not possess
the necessary hardware acceleration.

Derek Lidbom wrote:
> If it were me, I would have to drop $100 on two Linksys WRT-54GLs and
> try:
>
http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN_-_Site-to-Site_Bridged_VPN_
> Between_Two_Routers
> 
> I've had lots of luck with dd-wrt in other scenarios, and you could
> double your purchase and have redundant backups as easy and
re-flashing
> an image (I'm assuming the VPN doesn't add complications with that).

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



~~~
Derek Lidbom
Director of Technology and Interactive Development, Trone
336.812.2010
dlid...@trone.com
http://www.trone.com/

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail communication and any attachments may 
contain confidential and privileged information for the use of the designated 
recipients named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that you have received this communication in error and that any 
review, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of it or its 
contents is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 
please notify me immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from 
your computer. Thank you.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Steve Ens]

I had to call them about a month back...and surprisingly the support has
improved 500%.  Not only did I get somebody within ten minutes, they knew
what they were talking about, and the actually followed up on the support
call.  Plus you can interact on the mysonicwall site with the support team.
Almost as good as Sunbelt I must say.  The trick is however, that in the
eight years I've owned Sonicwall products, I've only had to call twice.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Erik Goldoff  wrote:

>  -1 on the Sonicwall for me, more for the crappy support than the actual
> device.  Getting information from tech support was worse than pulling teeth,
> obvious script reader from a sub-asian country ( possibly the 2nd most
> populous ) had no knowledge beyond what was in the script, and when I asked
> for a supervisor did the VERY OBVIOUS pass to his neighbor to 'play'
> supervisor trick ...
>
> This was about 3 or 4 years ago, I haven't bothered with them since
>
>
>
> Erik Goldoff
> IT  Consultant
> Systems, Networks, & Security
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Derek Lidbom [mailto:dlid...@trone.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:58 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
>  Subject: RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?
>
> +1 on the SonicWALL.
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

I've spoken to them in the past couple of months a couple of times.
I've experienced nothing like that at all (thank goodness.)

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Erik Goldoff  wrote:
>  -1 on the Sonicwall for me, more for the crappy support than the actual 
> device.  Getting information from tech support was worse than pulling teeth, 
> obvious script reader from a sub-asian country ( possibly the 2nd most 
> populous ) had no knowledge beyond what was in the script, and when I asked 
> for a supervisor did the VERY OBVIOUS pass to his neighbor to 'play' 
> supervisor trick ...
>
> This was about 3 or 4 years ago, I haven't bothered with them since
>
>
>
> Erik Goldoff
> IT  Consultant
> Systems, Networks, & Security
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Derek Lidbom [mailto:dlid...@trone.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:58 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?
>
> +1 on the SonicWALL.
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

+1 on the SonicWALL.  Site-to-site VPN is as easy as pie...

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Derek Lidbom  wrote:
> +1 on the SonicWALL.
>
> My only question, if you're going to try 2 TZ180's talking to each other
> (the easiest to implement), is would the one at your HQ have to have an
> unlimited license (usually they are licensed per node on the network...I
> think 10, 25, unlimited).  The unlimited version should run you less
> than $600.
>
> Also, I don't know what you mean by SMB shares over the VPN "working
> well"...they'll work with a site-to-site SonicWALL IPSec Solution, but
> it can be painful if your branch is on a T1/partial T.
>
> If it were me, I would have to drop $100 on two Linksys WRT-54GLs and
> try:
> http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN_-_Site-to-Site_Bridged_VPN_
> Between_Two_Routers
>
> I've had lots of luck with dd-wrt in other scenarios, and you could
> double your purchase and have redundant backups as easy and re-flashing
> an image (I'm assuming the VPN doesn't add complications with that).
>
> -Derek
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:p...@optimumdata.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?
>
> SonicWALL TZ 180 - US $340 via NewEgg
> Cisco 851 - US $250 (not for the faint of heart, IMO the web interface
> is worthless)
> Cisco 1711 - under US $100 on eBay - again, not for the faint of heart
> Old PIII PC with 2 NICs and m0n0wall
>
> Matthew W. Ross wrote:
>> 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000. 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic
>> routing knowledge should be able to configure it. 3. Reliable. Works
>> well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop connections often, maybe
>> tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB shares over the
>> VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...
>
> --
>
> Phil Brutsche
> p...@optimumdata.com
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~~~
> Derek Lidbom
> Director of Technology and Interactive Development, Trone
> 336.812.2010
> dlid...@trone.com
> http://www.trone.com/
>
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail communication and any attachments may 
> contain confidential and privileged information for the use of the designated 
> recipients named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
> notified that you have received this communication in error and that any 
> review, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of it or its 
> contents is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 
> please notify me immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from 
> your computer. Thank you.
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Erik Goldoff]

  -1 on the Sonicwall for me, more for the crappy support than the actual 
device.  Getting information from tech support was worse than pulling teeth, 
obvious script reader from a sub-asian country ( possibly the 2nd most populous 
) had no knowledge beyond what was in the script, and when I asked for a 
supervisor did the VERY OBVIOUS pass to his neighbor to 'play' supervisor trick 
...

This was about 3 or 4 years ago, I haven't bothered with them since



Erik Goldoff
IT  Consultant
Systems, Networks, & Security 


-Original Message-
From: Derek Lidbom [mailto:dlid...@trone.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?

+1 on the SonicWALL.


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Phil Brutsche]

I don't know if I would go that route, just on a basis of CPU "horsepower".

Most of the options I listed have either hardware cryptographic
accelerators or enough horsepower to do it in software.

The Linksys WRT54G(L) boxes have very, very weak CPUs and do not possess
the necessary hardware acceleration.

Derek Lidbom wrote:
> If it were me, I would have to drop $100 on two Linksys WRT-54GLs and
> try:
> http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN_-_Site-to-Site_Bridged_VPN_
> Between_Two_Routers
> 
> I've had lots of luck with dd-wrt in other scenarios, and you could
> double your purchase and have redundant backups as easy and re-flashing
> an image (I'm assuming the VPN doesn't add complications with that).

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Steve Ens]

+2 for Sonicwall - TZ190s here connected to a base 3060.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Derek Lidbom  wrote:

> +1 on the SonicWALL.
>
> My only question, if you're going to try 2 TZ180's talking to each other
> (the easiest to implement), is would the one at your HQ have to have an
> unlimited license (usually they are licensed per node on the network...I
> think 10, 25, unlimited).  The unlimited version should run you less
> than $600.
>
> Also, I don't know what you mean by SMB shares over the VPN "working
> well"...they'll work with a site-to-site SonicWALL IPSec Solution, but
> it can be painful if your branch is on a T1/partial T.
>
> If it were me, I would have to drop $100 on two Linksys WRT-54GLs and
> try:
> http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN_-_Site-to-Site_Bridged_VPN_
> Between_Two_Routers
>
> I've had lots of luck with dd-wrt in other scenarios, and you could
> double your purchase and have redundant backups as easy and re-flashing
> an image (I'm assuming the VPN doesn't add complications with that).
>
> -Derek
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:p...@optimumdata.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
>  Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?
>
> SonicWALL TZ 180 - US $340 via NewEgg
> Cisco 851 - US $250 (not for the faint of heart, IMO the web interface
> is worthless)
> Cisco 1711 - under US $100 on eBay - again, not for the faint of heart
> Old PIII PC with 2 NICs and m0n0wall
>
> Matthew W. Ross wrote:
> > 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000. 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic
> > routing knowledge should be able to configure it. 3. Reliable. Works
> > well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop connections often, maybe
> > tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB shares over the
> > VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...
>
> --
>
> Phil Brutsche
> p...@optimumdata.com
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~~~
> Derek Lidbom
> Director of Technology and Interactive Development, Trone
> 336.812.2010
> dlid...@trone.com
> http://www.trone.com/
>
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail communication and any attachments may
> contain confidential and privileged information for the use of the
> designated recipients named above. If you are not the intended recipient,
> you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error
> and that any review, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of
> it or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify me immediately by replying to this message and deleting
> it from your computer. Thank you.
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: data-center in the sky

[Martin Blackstone]

I used Rackspace in a prior life and liked them a lot. They rented me the
server, gave me TS access and the admin password and let me go at it. Great
bandwidth, uptime, etc. I was always VERY pleased with the whole solution.

 

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 5:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: data-center in the sky

 

I need to find a "data-center in the sky". That is, a company that has
plenty of bandwidth and rents servers to their clients.

 

In a "past life" I used Softlayer and was happy with them, but I'm
interested in knowing what else is out there (primarily interested in the
East Coast USA).

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Derek Lidbom]

+1 on the SonicWALL.

My only question, if you're going to try 2 TZ180's talking to each other
(the easiest to implement), is would the one at your HQ have to have an
unlimited license (usually they are licensed per node on the network...I
think 10, 25, unlimited).  The unlimited version should run you less
than $600.

Also, I don't know what you mean by SMB shares over the VPN "working
well"...they'll work with a site-to-site SonicWALL IPSec Solution, but
it can be painful if your branch is on a T1/partial T.

If it were me, I would have to drop $100 on two Linksys WRT-54GLs and
try:
http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/OpenVPN_-_Site-to-Site_Bridged_VPN_
Between_Two_Routers

I've had lots of luck with dd-wrt in other scenarios, and you could
double your purchase and have redundant backups as easy and re-flashing
an image (I'm assuming the VPN doesn't add complications with that).

-Derek

-Original Message-
From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:p...@optimumdata.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

SonicWALL TZ 180 - US $340 via NewEgg
Cisco 851 - US $250 (not for the faint of heart, IMO the web interface
is worthless)
Cisco 1711 - under US $100 on eBay - again, not for the faint of heart
Old PIII PC with 2 NICs and m0n0wall

Matthew W. Ross wrote:
> 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000. 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic
> routing knowledge should be able to configure it. 3. Reliable. Works
> well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop connections often, maybe
> tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB shares over the
> VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



~~~
Derek Lidbom
Director of Technology and Interactive Development, Trone
336.812.2010
dlid...@trone.com
http://www.trone.com/

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail communication and any attachments may 
contain confidential and privileged information for the use of the designated 
recipients named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that you have received this communication in error and that any 
review, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of it or its 
contents is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 
please notify me immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from 
your computer. Thank you.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: data-center in the sky

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

Ive never had better hosting/renting than with the planet. Speed and price,
they are located in Texas FWIW. (www.theplanet.com)

 

 

 

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: data-center in the sky

 

I need to find a "data-center in the sky". That is, a company that has
plenty of bandwidth and rents servers to their clients.

 

In a "past life" I used Softlayer and was happy with them, but I'm
interested in knowing what else is out there (primarily interested in the
East Coast USA).

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: data-center in the sky

[Erik Goldoff]

Have you checked with the folks at Peak10 ?   http://www.peak10.com/
They might suit your needs...  Not sure *where* in the East Coast you want
them, Matt Searfoss is the VP/GM of the center they have in Norcross not far
from me, holler if you want his contact info
 
( and I think Shook works for their Charlotte office )
 

Erik Goldoff


IT  Consultant

Systems, Networks, & Security 

 

  _  

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: data-center in the sky



I need to find a "data-center in the sky". That is, a company that has
plenty of bandwidth and rents servers to their clients.

 

In a "past life" I used Softlayer and was happy with them, but I'm
interested in knowing what else is out there (primarily interested in the
East Coast USA).

 

Thanks.

 

 


 


 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Phil Brutsche]

SonicWALL TZ 180 - US $340 via NewEgg
Cisco 851 - US $250 (not for the faint of heart, IMO the web interface
is worthless)
Cisco 1711 - under US $100 on eBay - again, not for the faint of heart
Old PIII PC with 2 NICs and m0n0wall

Matthew W. Ross wrote:
> 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000. 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic
> routing knowledge should be able to configure it. 3. Reliable. Works
> well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop connections often, maybe
> tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB shares over the
> VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...

-- 

Phil Brutsche
p...@optimumdata.com

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

data-center in the sky

[Michael B. Smith]

I need to find a "data-center in the sky". That is, a company that has
plenty of bandwidth and rents servers to their clients.

 

In a "past life" I used Softlayer and was happy with them, but I'm
interested in knowing what else is out there (primarily interested in the
East Coast USA).

 

Thanks.

 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Erik Goldoff]

 You looking to setup a vpn tunnel to only one other location ?

You could for very low cost use a couple of NetGear FVS firewalls and just
have routing tables for each side point to the Netgear for the gateway to
the other network... Probably less than 30 minutes setup



Erik Goldoff
IT  Consultant
Systems, Networks, & Security 


-Original Message-
From: Matthew W. Ross [mailto:mr...@ephrataschools.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 6:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Site to Site VPN... What works?

Greetings List,

I've got a small lab of computers offsite. I want to be able to access them
for support from HQ. While dail-in style VPN works okay, I'm thinking of
getting a real site-to-site network solution working. I do want all traffic
between the two sites encrypted,

I've looked at IPSec and OpenVPN. For our situation, neither worked well.
So, I figured I'd ask the list:

What is a good Site to Site VPN solution?

Qualifications we're looking for (In order of importance):

1. Cheap, as in less than $1000.
2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic routing knowledge should be able to
configure it.
3. Reliable. Works well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop connections
often, maybe tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB shares over
the VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...

Anybody know of anything that can do these?

How about any 2 out of the 3?

Let me know what did work for you and what did not. Thanks!


--Matt Ross
Ephrata School District

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~
  ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Tom Miller]

I user Fortinet SOHO units for some small offices on cable modem needing 
site-to-site VPN to our HQ units.  They should speak to other non-Fortinet 
firewalls just fine since your HQ unit probably isn't Fortinet.  They are I 
think $300- $600 depending on the model and options.  The Fortinet devices can 
do all of them as well as content filtering, bandwidth managment, and other 
typical firewall options you'd expect.

Tom Miller
Engineer, Information Technology
Hampton-Newport News Community Services Board
757-788-0528
>>> "Matthew W. Ross"  02/25/09 6:33 PM >>>
Greetings List,

I've got a small lab of computers offsite. I want to be able to access them for 
support from HQ. While dail-in style VPN works okay, I'm thinking of getting a 
real site-to-site network solution working. I do want all traffic between the 
two sites encrypted,

I've looked at IPSec and OpenVPN. For our situation, neither worked well. So, I 
figured I'd ask the list:

What is a good Site to Site VPN solution?

Qualifications we're looking for (In order of importance):

1. Cheap, as in less than $1000.
2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic routing knowledge should be able to 
configure it.
3. Reliable. Works well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop connections 
often, maybe tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB shares over the 
VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...

Anybody know of anything that can do these?

How about any 2 out of the 3?

Let me know what did work for you and what did not. Thanks!


--Matt Ross
Ephrata School District

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including attachments, is for the 
sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and 
privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or 
distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please 
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original 
message.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

+1 pfsense is rock solid IMO

-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Phillips [mailto:jeremy.phill...@azaleos.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 7:40 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?

Check out pfSense (www.pfsense.org) - I've had fantastic success with it in
the past and commercial support is available if needed.

Thanks,

Jeremy Phillips
Director of Operations | Azaleos Corporation | T: 206.926.1945 | M:
540.322.7980
You rely on Exchange. We keep it running.


-Original Message-
From: Matthew W. Ross [mailto:mr...@ephrataschools.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

I re-read my post, yeah, I left some details out:

I tried linux hosted OpenVPN and IPSec with varying degrees of success. I
never got OpenVPN working (I really didn't get enough time to get into the
nitty gritty of setting it up, ran out of time) and IPSec worked, but it
wasn't reliable. (It disconnected within 24 hours, and would reconnect only
if I restarted the daemon on both sides. Also, neither is exactly "easy" for
a network novice to look over if I'm on vacation.)

I'll look into both the SonicWall and the WatchGuard. Hearing that you've
used WatchGuard with some success, what issues do you have with it?


--Matt Ross
Ephrata School District


- Original Message -
From: Kurt Buff
[mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com]
To: NT System Admin Issues
[mailto:ntsysad...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com]
Sent: Wed, 25 Feb 2009
16:16:05 -0800
Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?


> IPSec is a suite of protocols, which are implemented by various
> vendors, in varying degrees of quality. When you said you tried IPSec,
> what do you mean by that?
> 
> I'd also like to know what your issues were with OpenVPN, as it's
> something I'd like to try at some point myself.
> 
> Anyway, check out the offerings from Watchguard or SonicWall, I
> suppose. However, they will most likely be implemented in IPSec. I've
> used much older stuff from WG - their FB IIIs worked quite well, but
> they are long past EOL, so we moved on to Sidewinders for reasons
> other than their VPN technology.
> 
> Kurt
> 
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 15:33, Matthew W. Ross 
> wrote:
> > Greetings List,
> >
> > I've got a small lab of computers offsite. I want to be able to access
> them for support from HQ. While dail-in style VPN works okay, I'm thinking
> of getting a real site-to-site network solution working. I do want all
> traffic between the two sites encrypted,
> >
> > I've looked at IPSec and OpenVPN. For our situation, neither worked
well.
> So, I figured I'd ask the list:
> >
> > What is a good Site to Site VPN solution?
> >
> > Qualifications we're looking for (In order of importance):
> >
> > 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000.
> > 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic routing knowledge should be able to
> configure it.
> > 3. Reliable. Works well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop
> connections often, maybe tries to re-establish when connection is lost.
SMB
> shares over the VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...
> >
> > Anybody know of anything that can do these?
> >
> > How about any 2 out of the 3?
> >
> > Let me know what did work for you and what did not. Thanks!
> >
> >
> > --Matt Ross
> > Ephrata School District
> >
> > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> > ~   ~
> >
> >
> 
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
> 
> 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Kurt Buff]

OpenVPN uses SSL, and I don't play well with Linux (I use FreeBSD), so
if I get that up and running I'll let you know.

For the IPSec, it sounds like it might have been disconnecting after a
failed or expired re-key, and neither was set to initiate a
connection. That's something that you'll run into in any IPSec
implementation, I think, so whatever platform/vendor you decide on
will require some diligence on your part to set up.

Moving to Sidewinder: We're going to be moving our web site from a 3rd
party host to self-hosting, and I wanted a firewall that was a bit
more robust than the WGs for that kind of thing. Sidewinder as a
product has a *very* long history, and has been well regarded for many
years (and it doesn't hurt that it's based on a BSD distro, albeit
quite hacked up). The vendor we worked with originally on the WGs also
sells the Sidewinder, and after reviewing everything we settled on
that. Not cheap, but not really out of line with the offerings we saw
for other higher-end offerings either, and usually less. Now Secure
Computing (the next-most-recent owner of the Sidewinder line) has been
acquired by McAfee, I might have different thoughts if I were buying
again, but I'll reserve judgment on that for now.

Kurt

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 16:23, Matthew W. Ross  wrote:
> I re-read my post, yeah, I left some details out:
>
> I tried linux hosted OpenVPN and IPSec with varying degrees of success. I 
> never got OpenVPN working (I really didn't get enough time to get into the 
> nitty gritty of setting it up, ran out of time) and IPSec worked, but it 
> wasn't reliable. (It disconnected within 24 hours, and would reconnect only 
> if I restarted the daemon on both sides. Also, neither is exactly "easy" for 
> a network novice to look over if I'm on vacation.)
>
> I'll look into both the SonicWall and the WatchGuard. Hearing that you've 
> used WatchGuard with some success, what issues do you have with it?
>
>
> --Matt Ross
> Ephrata School District
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Kurt Buff
> [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com]
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> [mailto:ntsysad...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com]
> Sent: Wed, 25 Feb 2009
> 16:16:05 -0800
> Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?
>
>
>> IPSec is a suite of protocols, which are implemented by various
>> vendors, in varying degrees of quality. When you said you tried IPSec,
>> what do you mean by that?
>>
>> I'd also like to know what your issues were with OpenVPN, as it's
>> something I'd like to try at some point myself.
>>
>> Anyway, check out the offerings from Watchguard or SonicWall, I
>> suppose. However, they will most likely be implemented in IPSec. I've
>> used much older stuff from WG - their FB IIIs worked quite well, but
>> they are long past EOL, so we moved on to Sidewinders for reasons
>> other than their VPN technology.
>>
>> Kurt
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 15:33, Matthew W. Ross 
>> wrote:
>> > Greetings List,
>> >
>> > I've got a small lab of computers offsite. I want to be able to access
>> them for support from HQ. While dail-in style VPN works okay, I'm thinking
>> of getting a real site-to-site network solution working. I do want all
>> traffic between the two sites encrypted,
>> >
>> > I've looked at IPSec and OpenVPN. For our situation, neither worked well.
>> So, I figured I'd ask the list:
>> >
>> > What is a good Site to Site VPN solution?
>> >
>> > Qualifications we're looking for (In order of importance):
>> >
>> > 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000.
>> > 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic routing knowledge should be able to
>> configure it.
>> > 3. Reliable. Works well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop
>> connections often, maybe tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB
>> shares over the VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...
>> >
>> > Anybody know of anything that can do these?
>> >
>> > How about any 2 out of the 3?
>> >
>> > Let me know what did work for you and what did not. Thanks!
>> >
>> >
>> > --Matt Ross
>> > Ephrata School District
>> >
>> > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> > ~   ~
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Jeremy Phillips]

Check out pfSense (www.pfsense.org) - I've had fantastic success with it in the 
past and commercial support is available if needed.

Thanks,

Jeremy Phillips
Director of Operations | Azaleos Corporation | T: 206.926.1945 | M: 540.322.7980
You rely on Exchange. We keep it running.


-Original Message-
From: Matthew W. Ross [mailto:mr...@ephrataschools.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 4:24 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

I re-read my post, yeah, I left some details out:

I tried linux hosted OpenVPN and IPSec with varying degrees of success. I never 
got OpenVPN working (I really didn't get enough time to get into the nitty 
gritty of setting it up, ran out of time) and IPSec worked, but it wasn't 
reliable. (It disconnected within 24 hours, and would reconnect only if I 
restarted the daemon on both sides. Also, neither is exactly "easy" for a 
network novice to look over if I'm on vacation.)

I'll look into both the SonicWall and the WatchGuard. Hearing that you've used 
WatchGuard with some success, what issues do you have with it?


--Matt Ross
Ephrata School District


- Original Message -
From: Kurt Buff
[mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com]
To: NT System Admin Issues
[mailto:ntsysad...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com]
Sent: Wed, 25 Feb 2009
16:16:05 -0800
Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?


> IPSec is a suite of protocols, which are implemented by various
> vendors, in varying degrees of quality. When you said you tried IPSec,
> what do you mean by that?
> 
> I'd also like to know what your issues were with OpenVPN, as it's
> something I'd like to try at some point myself.
> 
> Anyway, check out the offerings from Watchguard or SonicWall, I
> suppose. However, they will most likely be implemented in IPSec. I've
> used much older stuff from WG - their FB IIIs worked quite well, but
> they are long past EOL, so we moved on to Sidewinders for reasons
> other than their VPN technology.
> 
> Kurt
> 
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 15:33, Matthew W. Ross 
> wrote:
> > Greetings List,
> >
> > I've got a small lab of computers offsite. I want to be able to access
> them for support from HQ. While dail-in style VPN works okay, I'm thinking
> of getting a real site-to-site network solution working. I do want all
> traffic between the two sites encrypted,
> >
> > I've looked at IPSec and OpenVPN. For our situation, neither worked well.
> So, I figured I'd ask the list:
> >
> > What is a good Site to Site VPN solution?
> >
> > Qualifications we're looking for (In order of importance):
> >
> > 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000.
> > 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic routing knowledge should be able to
> configure it.
> > 3. Reliable. Works well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop
> connections often, maybe tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB
> shares over the VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...
> >
> > Anybody know of anything that can do these?
> >
> > How about any 2 out of the 3?
> >
> > Let me know what did work for you and what did not. Thanks!
> >
> >
> > --Matt Ross
> > Ephrata School District
> >
> > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> > ~   ~
> >
> >
> 
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
> 
> 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Matthew W. Ross]

I re-read my post, yeah, I left some details out:

I tried linux hosted OpenVPN and IPSec with varying degrees of success. I never 
got OpenVPN working (I really didn't get enough time to get into the nitty 
gritty of setting it up, ran out of time) and IPSec worked, but it wasn't 
reliable. (It disconnected within 24 hours, and would reconnect only if I 
restarted the daemon on both sides. Also, neither is exactly "easy" for a 
network novice to look over if I'm on vacation.)

I'll look into both the SonicWall and the WatchGuard. Hearing that you've used 
WatchGuard with some success, what issues do you have with it?


--Matt Ross
Ephrata School District


- Original Message -
From: Kurt Buff
[mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com]
To: NT System Admin Issues
[mailto:ntsysad...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com]
Sent: Wed, 25 Feb 2009
16:16:05 -0800
Subject: Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?


> IPSec is a suite of protocols, which are implemented by various
> vendors, in varying degrees of quality. When you said you tried IPSec,
> what do you mean by that?
> 
> I'd also like to know what your issues were with OpenVPN, as it's
> something I'd like to try at some point myself.
> 
> Anyway, check out the offerings from Watchguard or SonicWall, I
> suppose. However, they will most likely be implemented in IPSec. I've
> used much older stuff from WG - their FB IIIs worked quite well, but
> they are long past EOL, so we moved on to Sidewinders for reasons
> other than their VPN technology.
> 
> Kurt
> 
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 15:33, Matthew W. Ross 
> wrote:
> > Greetings List,
> >
> > I've got a small lab of computers offsite. I want to be able to access
> them for support from HQ. While dail-in style VPN works okay, I'm thinking
> of getting a real site-to-site network solution working. I do want all
> traffic between the two sites encrypted,
> >
> > I've looked at IPSec and OpenVPN. For our situation, neither worked well.
> So, I figured I'd ask the list:
> >
> > What is a good Site to Site VPN solution?
> >
> > Qualifications we're looking for (In order of importance):
> >
> > 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000.
> > 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic routing knowledge should be able to
> configure it.
> > 3. Reliable. Works well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop
> connections often, maybe tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB
> shares over the VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...
> >
> > Anybody know of anything that can do these?
> >
> > How about any 2 out of the 3?
> >
> > Let me know what did work for you and what did not. Thanks!
> >
> >
> > --Matt Ross
> > Ephrata School District
> >
> > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> > ~   ~
> >
> >
> 
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
> 
> 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Kurt Buff]

IPSec is a suite of protocols, which are implemented by various
vendors, in varying degrees of quality. When you said you tried IPSec,
what do you mean by that?

I'd also like to know what your issues were with OpenVPN, as it's
something I'd like to try at some point myself.

Anyway, check out the offerings from Watchguard or SonicWall, I
suppose. However, they will most likely be implemented in IPSec. I've
used much older stuff from WG - their FB IIIs worked quite well, but
they are long past EOL, so we moved on to Sidewinders for reasons
other than their VPN technology.

Kurt

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 15:33, Matthew W. Ross  wrote:
> Greetings List,
>
> I've got a small lab of computers offsite. I want to be able to access them 
> for support from HQ. While dail-in style VPN works okay, I'm thinking of 
> getting a real site-to-site network solution working. I do want all traffic 
> between the two sites encrypted,
>
> I've looked at IPSec and OpenVPN. For our situation, neither worked well. So, 
> I figured I'd ask the list:
>
> What is a good Site to Site VPN solution?
>
> Qualifications we're looking for (In order of importance):
>
> 1. Cheap, as in less than $1000.
> 2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic routing knowledge should be able to 
> configure it.
> 3. Reliable. Works well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop connections 
> often, maybe tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB shares over 
> the VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...
>
> Anybody know of anything that can do these?
>
> How about any 2 out of the 3?
>
> Let me know what did work for you and what did not. Thanks!
>
>
> --Matt Ross
> Ephrata School District
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: OT: video-safe for work

[Sherry Abercrombie]

LOL, good one Shook!

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Andy Shook  wrote:

>  This so needs to be on Friday’s WServerNews and yes Stu, you can give me
> credit for the find. J
>
>
>
> http://www.break.com/index/all-purpose-pair-of-nunchucks.html
>
>
>
> Shook
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Site to Site VPN... What works?

[Matthew W. Ross]

Greetings List,

I've got a small lab of computers offsite. I want to be able to access them for 
support from HQ. While dail-in style VPN works okay, I'm thinking of getting a 
real site-to-site network solution working. I do want all traffic between the 
two sites encrypted,

I've looked at IPSec and OpenVPN. For our situation, neither worked well. So, I 
figured I'd ask the list:

What is a good Site to Site VPN solution?

Qualifications we're looking for (In order of importance):

1. Cheap, as in less than $1000.
2. Easy to use. Somebody with basic routing knowledge should be able to 
configure it.
3. Reliable. Works well with all kinds of traffic. Doesn't drop connections 
often, maybe tries to re-establish when connection is lost. SMB shares over the 
VPN work well. Maybe even a VOIP user or two...

Anybody know of anything that can do these?

How about any 2 out of the 3?

Let me know what did work for you and what did not. Thanks!


--Matt Ross
Ephrata School District

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

OT: video-safe for work

[Andy Shook]

This so needs to be on Friday's WServerNews and yes Stu, you can give me credit 
for the find. :)

http://www.break.com/index/all-purpose-pair-of-nunchucks.html

Shook


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: 0-Day Excel

[Free, Bob]

There is also an interesting bit of detail here-

http://blogs.technet.com/swi/archive/2009/02/24/more-information-about-t
he-new-excel-vulnerability.aspx

 

"We analyze a lot of Office content type exploits and this is the first
time we have seen a working exploit in-the-wild that is able to run code
on Office 2007."

 

From: Free, Bob 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 2:08 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: 0-Day Excel

 

Also
http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2009/02/24/microsoft-security-advi
sory-968272.aspx

 

 

From: Bill Songstad (WCUL) [mailto:administra...@waleague.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: 0-Day Excel

 

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/968272.mspx 

 

Bill 

 

From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: 0-Day Excel

 

Wow, I hadn't heard of this via my regular channels (SANS, patch mgmt
mailing list, here)

 

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090224/tc_pcworld/attackerstargetin
gunpatchedvulnerabilityinexcel2007

David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER 
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: 0-Day Excel

[Free, Bob]

Also
http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2009/02/24/microsoft-security-advi
sory-968272.aspx

 

 

From: Bill Songstad (WCUL) [mailto:administra...@waleague.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: 0-Day Excel

 

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/968272.mspx 

 

Bill 

 

From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: 0-Day Excel

 

Wow, I hadn't heard of this via my regular channels (SANS, patch mgmt
mailing list, here)

 

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090224/tc_pcworld/attackerstargetin
gunpatchedvulnerabilityinexcel2007

David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER 
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Michael B. Smith]

Well, that would certainly prevent us from needing IPv6, wouldn't it? :-)

-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 4:53 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Micheal Espinola Jr
 wrote:
> True, but I just dont like seeing apps like this encapsulated through
> HTTP.

  I think we're eventually going to get to the point where all
Internet traffic is on TCP/80 and every computer is going to think its
IP address is 192.168.1.2.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Mystery Domains

[David Lum]

Now, this is something I have done for a long time via GPO!

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Free, Bob [mailto:r...@pge.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Mystery Domains

Disable the computer browser service on your workstationswe did it years 
ago and never looked back. At the very least disable the ability of your 
workstations to maintain a browse list.

His computer has probably become a browse master (or backup) for the network it 
is on, is picking up all the workgroups/domains his fellow travelers are 
broadcasting on whatever adapter he has connected at the hotel and barfing them 
over the VPN adapter into your network.

From: Steven Calvanese [mailto:scalvan...@membersolutions.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:50 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Mystery Domains

I just noticed all of these extra domains in my Microsoft Windows Network list.

I have a user vpning to us from a hotel right now.  I think that is where these 
could be coming from.

Does anyone know how to stop this and how to flush this list?


CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email and any attachments are confidential and 
intended for the sole use of the persons named in the email.






~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

NAP anyone?

[Steve Ens]

I'm testing out NPS or NAP (whatever they call it) in a lab
setting...wondering if anyone has it running on production networks yet.  It
seems to do what it is supposed to do, as far as I can tell.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Ben Scott]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Micheal Espinola Jr
 wrote:
> True, but I just dont like seeing apps like this encapsulated through
> HTTP.

  I think we're eventually going to get to the point where all
Internet traffic is on TCP/80 and every computer is going to think its
IP address is 192.168.1.2.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Mystery Domains

[Free, Bob]

Disable the computer browser service on your workstationswe did it years 
ago and never looked back. At the very least disable the ability of your 
workstations to maintain a browse list.

His computer has probably become a browse master (or backup) for the network it 
is on, is picking up all the workgroups/domains his fellow travelers are 
broadcasting on whatever adapter he has connected at the hotel and barfing them 
over the VPN adapter into your network.

From: Steven Calvanese [mailto:scalvan...@membersolutions.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:50 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Mystery Domains

I just noticed all of these extra domains in my Microsoft Windows Network 
list.  
 
I have a user vpning to us from a hotel right now.  I think that is where these 
could be coming from.
 
Does anyone know how to stop this and how to flush this list?
 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email and any attachments are confidential and 
intended for the sole use of the persons named in the email. 

 

 
 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Ziots, Edward]

They aint the only l...@mers that do that sort of thing.. So AV companies and 
even patch management companies actually do the same thing. 

So goes ya Egress Filtering. 

Z

Edward Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +
ezi...@lifespan.org
Phone:401-639-3505

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
Way to go - not.

--
ME2



On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
 wrote:
> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
> you need to accept).
>
> Tom
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
> "SharedView"
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>  wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>
>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>
> -- Ben
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Flash patch, anyone?

[Ben Scott]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:32 AM, David Lum  wrote:
> Grrr…I have no way to push this…has anyone signed up for “Adobe Player
> Licensing” to take advantage of the network push capabilities?

  We do that for both Adobe Reader and Flash Player.  Gets us MSIs we
can tweak (transform) and then deploy with GPO.  Works fairly well.
Doesn't make Adobe Reader itself suck any less.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: 0-Day Excel

[Ziots, Edward]

We might see this one go Out-of-cycle if it becomes bad enough, it seems to be 
M$ M.O. 

Z

Edward Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +
ezi...@lifespan.org
Phone:401-639-3505

-Original Message-
From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:andyognen...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:35 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: 0-Day Excel

SANS had it yesterday:

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5923

 - Andy O. 

From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: 0-Day Excel

Wow, I hadn't heard of this via my regular channels (SANS, patch mgmt
mailing list, here)

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090224/tc_pcworld/attackerstargetingunp
atchedvulnerabilityinexcel2007
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER 
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764


 
 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Ziots, Edward]

That is p0rn! Get your http right :) 

Z

Edward Ziots
Network Engineer
Lifespan Organization
MCSE,MCSA,MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +
ezi...@lifespan.org
Phone:401-639-3505
-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:40 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

HAHAHAHAHA.

Not. It was for pr0n! :-)

-Original Message-
From: Troy Meyer [mailto:troy.me...@monacocoach.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:37 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

ME2,

Totally agree, all that stupid encapsulation c...@p for work purposes.  We all
know what HTTP was intended for:

http://www.cnet.com/8301-18603_1-10170726-73.html


-troy



-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 6:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

True, but I just dont like seeing apps like this encapsulated through
HTTP. Its not what it was intended for.  They should at least have the
decency to pick another port for this sort of thing.

Plus, I had to come in a couple of hours early today, and I needed to
complain about something.  ;-)

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:
> Well, encapsulated connections are here to stay.
>
> I agree that they should be encrypted.
>
> It's not exactly as if it is a Microsoft specific thing. SSL VPNs, ssh
> tunneling - lots of examples in the OSS world too.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:38 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
"SharedView"
>
> Decisions, decisions!  :-)
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Michael B. Smith
>  wrote:
>> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
> "SharedView"
>>
>> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
>> Way to go - not.
>>
>> --
>> ME2
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>  wrote:
>>> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
>>> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
>>> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
>>> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
>>> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
>>> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
>>> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
>>> you need to accept).
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>>> "SharedView"
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>>  wrote:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>>>
>>>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>>>
>>> -- Ben
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ 

RE: Mystery Domains

[David Mazzaccaro]

Both work fine. 

-Original Message-
From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 4:28 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Mystery Domains

\\server.domain.tld\share, vs. \\server\share

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:27, David Mazzaccaro 
 wrote:
> correct.  No WINS.
> \\server\share works fine.
> What do you mean by a UNC that aren't FQDN?
>
> 
> From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 3:16 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Mystery Domains
>
> Really? And I'll assume no WINS either?  How do UNC's  that aren't 
> FQDN work then? I'm missing some knowledge here...
>
> David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764
>
> From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:48 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Mystery Domains
>
>
>
> At least not for me - haven't used NetBIOS over TCP/IP in years.
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 2:25 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Mystery Domains
>
> Won't that cause other issues?
>
> David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764
>
> From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:58 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Mystery Domains
>
>
>
> disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP
>
> (WINS tab of your network connection's IP settings)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> From: Steven Calvanese [mailto:scalvan...@membersolutions.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:50 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Mystery Domains
>
> I just noticed all of these extra domains in my Microsoft Windows 
> Network list.
>
>
>
> I have a user vpning to us from a hotel right now.  I think that is 
> where these could be coming from.
>
>
>
> Does anyone know how to stop this and how to flush this list?
>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email and any attachments are confidential 
> and intended for the sole use of the persons named in the email.
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ 
  ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Mystery Domains

[Kurt Buff]

\\server.domain.tld\share, vs. \\server\share

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:27, David Mazzaccaro
 wrote:
> correct.  No WINS.
> \\server\share works fine.
> What do you mean by a UNC that aren't FQDN?
>
> 
> From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 3:16 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Mystery Domains
>
> Really? And I’ll assume no WINS either?  How do UNC’s  that aren’t FQDN work
> then? I’m missing some knowledge here…
>
> David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764
>
> From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:48 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Mystery Domains
>
>
>
> At least not for me - haven't used NetBIOS over TCP/IP in years.
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 2:25 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Mystery Domains
>
> Won’t that cause other issues?
>
> David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764
>
> From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:58 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Mystery Domains
>
>
>
> disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP
>
> (WINS tab of your network connection's IP settings)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> From: Steven Calvanese [mailto:scalvan...@membersolutions.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:50 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Mystery Domains
>
> I just noticed all of these extra domains in my Microsoft Windows Network
> list.
>
>
>
> I have a user vpning to us from a hotel right now.  I think that is where
> these could be coming from.
>
>
>
> Does anyone know how to stop this and how to flush this list?
>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email and any attachments are confidential and
> intended for the sole use of the persons named in the email.
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Alverson, Tom (Xetron)]

The E200/128 controller will not do RAID5 unless you add the 128MB BBWC
upgrade.

-Original Message-
From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:20 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

Two of the servers will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os
and 3 x 146gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
These are for MS-Hyper-v use.
Exchange server will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os, 2
x 146gig 10krpm 2.5 inch sas raid 1 for logs and 3 x 300gig 10krpm
2.5inch sas for exchange dbs.
Last server is for a users home directories.  It will have 2 x 72gig
15krpm raid 1 for OS, 6 x 300gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
The one other server may be even worse.  It is for a domain controller,
dhcp and dns.  It has the E200/128 controller.  Any bad news on that
controller?



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Mystery Domains

[Klint Price - ArizonaITPro]

Hopefully you really only need to worry about it if you have a 
single-label domain.

Klint



Scott Kaufman at HQ wrote:
>
> You don't need WINS to do hostname resolution.
>
> If DNS is correctly configured, hostname resolution will work just fine.
>
> Since 2000, the OS uses DNS first before WINS for name resolution
>
>  
>
> * *
>
> *Scott Kaufman*
>
> Lead Network Analyst
>
> ITT ESI, Inc.
>
>  
>
> *From:* David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 3:28 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Mystery Domains
>
>  
>
> correct.  No WINS.
>
> \\server\share  works fine.
>
> What do you mean by a UNC that aren't FQDN?
>
>  
>
>  
>
> 
>
> *From:* David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 3:16 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Mystery Domains
>
> Really? And I'll assume no WINS either?  How do UNC's  that aren't 
> FQDN work then? I'm missing some knowledge here...
>
> */David Lum/*/ /*// *SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> (Desk) 971.222.1025 *// *(Cell) 503.267.9764
>
> *From:* David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:48 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Mystery Domains
>
>  
>
> At least not for me - haven't used NetBIOS over TCP/IP in years.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> 
>
> *From:* David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 2:25 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Mystery Domains
>
> Won't that cause other issues?
>
> */David Lum/*/ /*// *SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> (Desk) 971.222.1025 *// *(Cell) 503.267.9764
>
> *From:* David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:58 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Mystery Domains
>
>  
>
> disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP
>
> (WINS tab of your network connection's IP settings)
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> 
>
> *From:* Steven Calvanese [mailto:scalvan...@membersolutions.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:50 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Mystery Domains
>
> I just noticed all of these extra domains in my Microsoft Windows 
> Network list. 
>
>  
>
> I have a user vpning to us from a hotel right now.  I think that is 
> where these could be coming from.
>
>  
>
> Does anyone know how to stop this and how to flush this list?
>
>  
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email and any attachments are confidential 
> and intended for the sole use of the persons named in the email.
>
> 
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Kurt Buff]

Both, and that overloading ports with too many protocols is bad, too,
especially well-known ports and protocols that are ill-defined.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 05:19, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:
> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>
> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"
>
> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
> Way to go - not.
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>  wrote:
>> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
>> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
>> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
>> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
>> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
>> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
>> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
>> you need to accept).
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>> "SharedView"
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>  wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>>
>>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>>
>> -- Ben
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Steve Ens]

Yes the 1TB drives are 3.5.  454146-B21

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron) <
tom.alver...@ngc.com> wrote:

>  Are the 1TB SATA’s 2.5 or 3.5inch?  I’m amazed that you can get 500GB in
> a 2.5in drive, so I would guess 3.5.  Do you have a PN on the 450GB 2.5in
> SAS?
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:45 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions
>
>
>
> I think they actually have 450GB 2.5" SAS drives alreadyplus the 1TB
> SATAs...
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron) <
> tom.alver...@ngc.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Can AD child domains establish outside trust without parent permission?

[Jay Kulsh]

Thanks Bob and Anders.
We will start monitoring the specific events in logs.

Jay
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Steve Ens]

454232-B21  450GB SAS



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron) <
tom.alver...@ngc.com> wrote:

>  Are the 1TB SATA’s 2.5 or 3.5inch?  I’m amazed that you can get 500GB in
> a 2.5in drive, so I would guess 3.5.  Do you have a PN on the 450GB 2.5in
> SAS?
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:45 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions
>
>
>
> I think they actually have 450GB 2.5" SAS drives alreadyplus the 1TB
> SATAs...
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron) <
> tom.alver...@ngc.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Glen Johnson]

Here is the part # from our quote.
HP 300GB 10K rpm Hot Plug SAS 2.5
Dual Port Hard Drive
492620-B21

Thanks for the performance data.  I'll definitely do some testing when
the systems arrive.

-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Tom (Xetron) [mailto:tom.alver...@ngc.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:14 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

I have never used the E200/128 controller.  Based on my experience here,
I would probably want to get any battery or memory options available.
When you first set it up, run the ATTO bench32.exe program to make sure
it's working OK.  Bench32 writes then reads back a file (you can change
the file size, default is 256MB) using many different block sizes.  Very
small blocks of data are less efficient, so the speed is lower.  With a
normal drive or RAID array, even with the smallest block sizes you will
still get around 4000 KB/sec read and write speeds.  On the RAID5 array,
I am getting 2 KB/Sec for that block size.  For large block sizes you
will get the native speed of a single drive, or higher speeds for an
array of disks.  Most drives these days get between 5 and 10
KB/sec with large block sizes.  My encrypted laptop drive gets
50,000KB/sec write and 42,000KB/sec read for 8192 KB block size.

I did not know that HP is now selling the long rumored 300GIG 2.5 inch
SAS drives.  Do you have a part number?

-Original Message-
From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:20 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

Two of the servers will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os
and 3 x 146gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
These are for MS-Hyper-v use.
Exchange server will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os, 2
x 146gig 10krpm 2.5 inch sas raid 1 for logs and 3 x 300gig 10krpm
2.5inch sas for exchange dbs.
Last server is for a users home directories.  It will have 2 x 72gig
15krpm raid 1 for OS, 6 x 300gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
The one other server may be even worse.  It is for a domain controller,
dhcp and dns.  It has the E200/128 controller.  Any bad news on that
controller?



-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Tom (Xetron) [mailto:tom.alver...@ngc.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:27 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions
I would definitely get the battery/memory add-on option if I were you.
Are you going to use SAS or SATA drives?  What size?

-Original Message-
From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 9:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

Tom.
I am very interested in the outcome of this as I have 5 servers on order
and 4 of them will have this same controller.
I forwarded the first email from this thread to our rep to see if he had
heard anything and asked if we should be concerned.
He said he would do some checking and let me know what he learns.
I'll let everyone know if he shares anything of value.
I sure hope it is something that can easily be fixed as it may be too
late for us to change the order.
Thanks.
Glen.



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Mystery Domains

[Troy Meyer]

Couldn't these just be workgroups that someone's home computer was configured 
for when they plugged into your wall jack?  I don't know how your network is 
configured, but you may have a hard time stopping this behavior.  We see it 
every once in a while; we give every machine an IP, but home machines sure 
aren't able to do much with it.  It tends to work itself out (people realize 
they cant use their sweet new netbook at work, so they take it home, and the 
workgroup name eventually disappears).


-troy

-Original Message-
From: Steven Calvanese [mailto:scalvan...@membersolutions.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:50 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Mystery Domains

I just noticed all of these extra domains in my Microsoft Windows Network list. 
 
 
I have a user vpning to us from a hotel right now.  I think that is where these 
could be coming from.
 
Does anyone know how to stop this and how to flush this list?
 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email and any attachments are confidential and 
intended for the sole use of the persons named in the email. 


 


 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[Michael B. Smith]

You just need to read the help with adfind. If you don't want the DN, then
add -nodn to the command line.

 

I don't know what you mean by "with and without commas".

 

Adfind -default -f
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyServer*))
" -csv -nodn sAMAccountName givenName homeDirectory >
c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv

 

From: MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:39 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

 

Adfind for some reason returns the dn of every object in AD and instead of
displaying the attributes pertaining to that server it populates those rows
with sAMAccountName, which in turn causes the file to grow to 64MB. So I end
up with the following: 

 

Adfind -default -f
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyServer*))
" -csv sAMAccountName givenName homeDirectory >
c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv

 

I've tried this with and without the commas.

 

thanks

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, KenM  wrote:

+1 on ADFIND. Use this instead of DSQUERY. It will make your life a lot
easier. 





On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:

Use adfind from www.joeware.net   instead of
dsquery.

 

Adfind -default -f
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectory
path*))" -csv sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv

 

Adfind has been around a long time, much longer than dsquery, and is much
more powerful.  Basic syntax for dsquery was basically stolen from adfind. J


 

From: MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:27 PM 


To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

 

This may seem dumb but what's the best way to add additional attributes and
have them delimited in spreadsheet form? It wants to place everything into
one row and I'm tried using commas to no avail.

 

dsquery * domainroot -limit 3000 -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectory
path*))" -attr sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv

 

tia


 

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:42 AM, MarvinC  wrote:

Abso-freakin-YES!! 

 

Thank you sir!

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:

You are close.

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt

 

Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
works. Note that you PROBABLY want a "*" after myserver. You shouldn't be
able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory.

 

From: MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM 


To: NT System Admin Issues

Subject: Re: A simple yet...not so simple ?? 

 

Tried that with this and still no luck: 

 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$)
)" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv

and with this:

 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))
" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt

 

 

and with this: 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv


 

What am I missing?

 

 

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:

try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath) 






On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))
" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv

  

This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
doing wrong?

 

Any responses appreciated

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Alverson, Tom (Xetron)]

Are the 1TB SATA's 2.5 or 3.5inch?  I'm amazed that you can get 500GB in
a 2.5in drive, so I would guess 3.5.  Do you have a PN on the 450GB
2.5in SAS?  

 

From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:45 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

 

I think they actually have 450GB 2.5" SAS drives alreadyplus the 1TB
SATAs...

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
 wrote:

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[KenM]

Try this

Adfind –default –f
"&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyServer*)"
sAMAccountName givenName homeDirectory -csv -nodn -nolabel >
c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv


On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:39 PM, MarvinC  wrote:

> Adfind for some reason returns the dn of every object in AD and instead of
> displaying the attributes pertaining to that server it populates those rows
> with sAMAccountName, which in turn causes the file to grow to 64MB. So I end
> up with the following:
>
> Adfind –default –f
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyServer*))"
> -csv sAMAccountName givenName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>
> I've tried this with and without the commas.
>
> thanks
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, KenM  wrote:
>
>> +1 on ADFIND. Use this instead of DSQUERY. It will make your life a lot
>> easier.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Michael B. Smith <
>> mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  Use adfind from www.joeware.net instead of dsquery.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Adfind –default –f
>>>  
>>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
>>> -csv sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
>>> c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Adfind has been around a long time, much longer than dsquery, and is much
>>> more powerful.  Basic syntax for dsquery was basically stolen from adfind.
>>> J
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:27 PM
>>>
>>> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>>> *Subject:* Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This may seem dumb but what's the best way to add additional attributes
>>> and have them delimited in spreadsheet form? It wants to place everything
>>> into one row and I'm tried using commas to no avail.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> dsquery * domainroot -limit 3000 -filter
>>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
>>> -attr sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
>>> c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> tia
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:42 AM, MarvinC  wrote:
>>>
>>> Abso-freakin-YES!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you sir!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Michael B. Smith <
>>> mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>  You are close.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
>>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
>>> works. Note that you PROBABLY want a “*” after myserver. You shouldn’t be
>>> able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory…
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM
>>>
>>>
>>> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>>>
>>> *Subject:* Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tried that with this and still no luck:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$))"
>>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv
>>>
>>> and with this:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))"
>>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> and with this:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
>>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What am I missing?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:
>>>
>>> try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:
>>>
>>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))"
>>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who
>>> homeDirectory path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and
>>> there are no errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on
>>> what it is I'm doing wrong?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any responses appreciated
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Steve Ens]

I think they actually have 450GB 2.5" SAS drives alreadyplus the 1TB
SATAs...

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron) <
tom.alver...@ngc.com> wrote:

> I have never used the E200/128 controller.  Based on my experience here,
> I would probably want to get any battery or memory options available.
> When you first set it up, run the ATTO bench32.exe program to make sure
> it's working OK.  Bench32 writes then reads back a file (you can change
> the file size, default is 256MB) using many different block sizes.  Very
> small blocks of data are less efficient, so the speed is lower.  With a
> normal drive or RAID array, even with the smallest block sizes you will
> still get around 4000 KB/sec read and write speeds.  On the RAID5 array,
> I am getting 2 KB/Sec for that block size.  For large block sizes you
> will get the native speed of a single drive, or higher speeds for an
> array of disks.  Most drives these days get between 5 and 10
> KB/sec with large block sizes.  My encrypted laptop drive gets
> 50,000KB/sec write and 42,000KB/sec read for 8192 KB block size.
>
> I did not know that HP is now selling the long rumored 300GIG 2.5 inch
> SAS drives.  Do you have a part number?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:20 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions
>
> Two of the servers will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os
> and 3 x 146gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
> These are for MS-Hyper-v use.
> Exchange server will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os, 2
> x 146gig 10krpm 2.5 inch sas raid 1 for logs and 3 x 300gig 10krpm
> 2.5inch sas for exchange dbs.
> Last server is for a users home directories.  It will have 2 x 72gig
> 15krpm raid 1 for OS, 6 x 300gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
> The one other server may be even worse.  It is for a domain controller,
> dhcp and dns.  It has the E200/128 controller.  Any bad news on that
> controller?
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Alverson, Tom (Xetron) [mailto:tom.alver...@ngc.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:27 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions
> I would definitely get the battery/memory add-on option if I were you.
> Are you going to use SAS or SATA drives?  What size?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 9:51 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions
>
> Tom.
> I am very interested in the outcome of this as I have 5 servers on order
> and 4 of them will have this same controller.
> I forwarded the first email from this thread to our rep to see if he had
> heard anything and asked if we should be concerned.
> He said he would do some checking and let me know what he learns.
> I'll let everyone know if he shares anything of value.
> I sure hope it is something that can easily be fixed as it may be too
> late for us to change the order.
> Thanks.
> Glen.
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[Steven Peck]

ok, I did this because I was curious to see if I could, not because
it's better/worse.  ADquery is probably faster.  I tested this on our
internal file pats and it worked.

Requires: Powershell v1, Quest AD cmdlets

# Get the users into a local variable, you can limit with a -searchroot switch
PS: > $users = Get-QADusers -SizeLimit 3000

# Filter by criterea, select output information (the -notype cleans up
the first line of output)
PS:\> $users | where { $_.homedirectory -like
"\\5c\5cmydirectorypath*" } |  select samaccountname, givenName,
profilepath,
 homedirectory | Export-Csv ./test.csv -notype

Steven


On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:20 AM, KenM  wrote:
> +1 on ADFIND. Use this instead of DSQUERY. It will make your life a lot
> easier.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Michael B. Smith
>  wrote:
>>
>> Use adfind from www.joeware.net instead of dsquery.
>>
>>
>>
>> Adfind –default –f
>>  "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
>> -csv sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
>> c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>>
>>
>>
>> Adfind has been around a long time, much longer than dsquery, and is much
>> more powerful.  Basic syntax for dsquery was basically stolen from adfind. J
>>
>>
>>
>> From: MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:27 PM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>>
>>
>>
>> This may seem dumb but what's the best way to add additional attributes
>> and have them delimited in spreadsheet form? It wants to place everything
>> into one row and I'm tried using commas to no avail.
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -limit 3000 -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
>> c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>>
>>
>>
>> tia
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:42 AM, MarvinC  wrote:
>>
>> Abso-freakin-YES!!
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you sir!
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Michael B. Smith
>>  wrote:
>>
>> You are close.
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>>
>>
>>
>> Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
>> works. Note that you PROBABLY want a “*” after myserver. You shouldn’t be
>> able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory…
>>
>>
>>
>> From: MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM
>>
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>
>> Subject: Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>>
>>
>>
>> Tried that with this and still no luck:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv
>>
>> and with this:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> and with this:
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>
>>
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:
>>
>> try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>
>>
>>
>> This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
>> path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
>> errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
>> doing wrong?
>>
>>
>>
>> Any responses appreciated
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Alverson, Tom (Xetron)]

I have never used the E200/128 controller.  Based on my experience here,
I would probably want to get any battery or memory options available.
When you first set it up, run the ATTO bench32.exe program to make sure
it's working OK.  Bench32 writes then reads back a file (you can change
the file size, default is 256MB) using many different block sizes.  Very
small blocks of data are less efficient, so the speed is lower.  With a
normal drive or RAID array, even with the smallest block sizes you will
still get around 4000 KB/sec read and write speeds.  On the RAID5 array,
I am getting 2 KB/Sec for that block size.  For large block sizes you
will get the native speed of a single drive, or higher speeds for an
array of disks.  Most drives these days get between 5 and 10
KB/sec with large block sizes.  My encrypted laptop drive gets
50,000KB/sec write and 42,000KB/sec read for 8192 KB block size.

I did not know that HP is now selling the long rumored 300GIG 2.5 inch
SAS drives.  Do you have a part number?

-Original Message-
From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:20 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

Two of the servers will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os
and 3 x 146gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
These are for MS-Hyper-v use.
Exchange server will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os, 2
x 146gig 10krpm 2.5 inch sas raid 1 for logs and 3 x 300gig 10krpm
2.5inch sas for exchange dbs.
Last server is for a users home directories.  It will have 2 x 72gig
15krpm raid 1 for OS, 6 x 300gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
The one other server may be even worse.  It is for a domain controller,
dhcp and dns.  It has the E200/128 controller.  Any bad news on that
controller?



-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Tom (Xetron) [mailto:tom.alver...@ngc.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:27 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions
I would definitely get the battery/memory add-on option if I were you.
Are you going to use SAS or SATA drives?  What size?

-Original Message-
From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 9:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

Tom.
I am very interested in the outcome of this as I have 5 servers on order
and 4 of them will have this same controller.
I forwarded the first email from this thread to our rep to see if he had
heard anything and asked if we should be concerned.
He said he would do some checking and let me know what he learns.
I'll let everyone know if he shares anything of value.
I sure hope it is something that can easily be fixed as it may be too
late for us to change the order.
Thanks.
Glen.



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[MarvinC]

Adfind for some reason returns the dn of every object in AD and instead of
displaying the attributes pertaining to that server it populates those rows
with sAMAccountName, which in turn causes the file to grow to 64MB. So I end
up with the following:

Adfind –default –f
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyServer*))"
-csv sAMAccountName givenName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv

I've tried this with and without the commas.

thanks

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:20 PM, KenM  wrote:

> +1 on ADFIND. Use this instead of DSQUERY. It will make your life a lot
> easier.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Michael B. Smith <
> mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote:
>
>>  Use adfind from www.joeware.net instead of dsquery.
>>
>>
>>
>> Adfind –default –f
>>  
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
>> -csv sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
>> c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>>
>>
>>
>> Adfind has been around a long time, much longer than dsquery, and is much
>> more powerful.  Basic syntax for dsquery was basically stolen from adfind.
>> J
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:27 PM
>>
>> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>> *Subject:* Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>>
>>
>>
>> This may seem dumb but what's the best way to add additional attributes
>> and have them delimited in spreadsheet form? It wants to place everything
>> into one row and I'm tried using commas to no avail.
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -limit 3000 -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
>> c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>>
>>
>>
>> tia
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:42 AM, MarvinC  wrote:
>>
>> Abso-freakin-YES!!
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you sir!
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Michael B. Smith <
>> mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote:
>>
>>  You are close.
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>>
>>
>>
>> Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
>> works. Note that you PROBABLY want a “*” after myserver. You shouldn’t be
>> able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory…
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM
>>
>>
>> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>>
>>
>>
>> Tried that with this and still no luck:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv
>>
>> and with this:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> and with this:
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:
>>
>> try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>
>>
>>
>> This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
>> path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
>> errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
>> doing wrong?
>>
>>
>>
>> Any responses appreciated
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[KenM]

+1 on ADFIND. Use this instead of DSQUERY. It will make your life a lot
easier.



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Michael B. Smith <
mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote:

>  Use adfind from www.joeware.net instead of dsquery.
>
>
>
> Adfind –default –f
>  
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
> -csv sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
> c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>
>
>
> Adfind has been around a long time, much longer than dsquery, and is much
> more powerful.  Basic syntax for dsquery was basically stolen from adfind.
> J
>
>
>
> *From:* MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:27 PM
>
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>
>
>
> This may seem dumb but what's the best way to add additional attributes and
> have them delimited in spreadsheet form? It wants to place everything into
> one row and I'm tried using commas to no avail.
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -limit 3000 -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
> -attr sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
> c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv
>
>
>
> tia
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:42 AM, MarvinC  wrote:
>
> Abso-freakin-YES!!
>
>
>
> Thank you sir!
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Michael B. Smith <
> mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote:
>
>  You are close.
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>
>
>
> Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
> works. Note that you PROBABLY want a “*” after myserver. You shouldn’t be
> able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory…
>
>
>
> *From:* MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM
>
>
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>
> *Subject:* Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>
>
>
> Tried that with this and still no luck:
>
>
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv
>
> and with this:
>
>
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>
>
>
>
>
> and with this:
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>
>
>
>
> What am I missing?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:
>
> try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath)
>
>
>
>
>
>  On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>
>
>
> This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
> path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
> errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
> doing wrong?
>
>
>
> Any responses appreciated
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Can AD child domains establish outside trust without parent permission?

[Free, Bob]

In the absence of 3rd party tools, probably the simplest way to monitor trust 
creation/modification is via the security log. You want Policy Change auditing 
enabled and watch for events 610/611/620 in W2K/W2K3. Different events in 08 
but you get the idea.

610- New Trusted Domain
611- Trusted Domain Removed
620- Trusted Domain Information Modified

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc781549.aspx






From: Anders Blomgren [mailto:chanks...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 2:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Can AD child domains establish outside trust without parent 
permission?

Since the forest is the security boundary you can't actually prevent the local 
domain administrators from forming a direct ntlm trust. You can use the netdom 
or nltest command line tools to query each domain for trusts. You can also use 
adfind or dsquery to search for trustedDomain objects in each domain. They'll 
be under the System container in the default naming context.
 
-Anders

 
On 2/25/09, Jay Kulsh  wrote: 
Can AD child domains establish outside trust without permission of admin of the 
parent/root domain? Can this be prevented? If not, how can we monitor this? 
Thanks.

Jay Kulsh
So. Pasadena, CA
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

 
 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Viewing log files in realtime

[David Lum]

+1 x10! This tool is invaluable!


David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764




-Original Message-
From: Steven Peck [mailto:sep...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:54 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Viewing log files in realtime

Since we wandered a little into free tools and I saw mention of
someone working on SMS tomorrow..  Our former SMS guru (now SCCM guru)
found this a while ago and for SMS/SCCM clients it is a must have
tool.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/smsclictr

Steven Peck
http://www.blkmtn.org

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Micheal Espinola Jr
 wrote:
> baremetal makes up a couple of great utilities.  I'm a huge fan of the
> baregrep util.  Very fast searching with the power of regular
> expressions.
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Free, Bob  wrote:
>> http://www.baremetalsoft.com/baretail/index.php
>>
>> Awesome little free tool, standalone (no install), can run from network etc
>>
>> Simultaneously monitor multiple files for changes using tabs, multi color 
>> highlighting for different strings and so on
>>
>> From: cs [mailto:chr...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 10:06 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Viewing log files in realtime
>>
>> Is there a tool that can can track ASCII-based log files in realtime?
>> To add some context, I have a robocopy job that transfers a bunch of files 
>> from one server to another and would like to keep tabs on progress without 
>> tediously reopening the log file in Wordpad, i.e. after new transactions are 
>> added.
>> I'm thinking maybe a more robust text editor will do the trick nicely.
>> Hope that makes sense.
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[Michael B. Smith]

Use adfind from www.joeware.net instead of dsquery.

 

Adfind -default -f
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectory
path*))" -csv sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv

 

Adfind has been around a long time, much longer than dsquery, and is much
more powerful.  Basic syntax for dsquery was basically stolen from adfind. J


 

From: MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:27 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

 

This may seem dumb but what's the best way to add additional attributes and
have them delimited in spreadsheet form? It wants to place everything into
one row and I'm tried using commas to no avail.

 

dsquery * domainroot -limit 3000 -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectory
path*))" -attr sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv

 

tia


 

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:42 AM, MarvinC  wrote:

Abso-freakin-YES!! 

 

Thank you sir!

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:

You are close.

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt

 

Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
works. Note that you PROBABLY want a "*" after myserver. You shouldn't be
able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory.

 

From: MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM 


To: NT System Admin Issues

Subject: Re: A simple yet...not so simple ?? 

 

Tried that with this and still no luck: 

 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$)
)" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv

and with this:

 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))
" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt

 

 

and with this: 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv


 

What am I missing?

 

 

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:

try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath) 







On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))
" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv

  

This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
doing wrong?

 

Any responses appreciated

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[MarvinC]

This may seem dumb but what's the best way to add additional attributes and
have them delimited in spreadsheet form? It wants to place everything into
one row and I'm tried using commas to no avail.

dsquery * domainroot -limit 3000 -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmydirectorypath*))"
-attr sAMAccountName givenName profilePath homeDirectory >
c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hd.csv

tia


On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:42 AM, MarvinC  wrote:

>  Abso-freakin-YES!!
>
> Thank you sir!
>
>  On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Michael B. Smith <
> mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote:
>
>>  You are close.
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>>
>>
>>
>> Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
>> works. Note that you PROBABLY want a “*” after myserver. You shouldn’t be
>> able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory…
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM
>> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>> *Subject:* Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>>
>>
>>
>> Tried that with this and still no luck:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv
>>
>> and with this:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> and with this:
>>
>>
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:
>>
>> try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:
>>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>
>>
>>
>> This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
>> path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
>> errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
>> doing wrong?
>>
>>
>>
>> Any responses appreciated
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Viewing log files in realtime

[Steven Peck]

Since we wandered a little into free tools and I saw mention of
someone working on SMS tomorrow..  Our former SMS guru (now SCCM guru)
found this a while ago and for SMS/SCCM clients it is a must have
tool.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/smsclictr

Steven Peck
http://www.blkmtn.org

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Micheal Espinola Jr
 wrote:
> baremetal makes up a couple of great utilities.  I'm a huge fan of the
> baregrep util.  Very fast searching with the power of regular
> expressions.
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Free, Bob  wrote:
>> http://www.baremetalsoft.com/baretail/index.php
>>
>> Awesome little free tool, standalone (no install), can run from network etc
>>
>> Simultaneously monitor multiple files for changes using tabs, multi color 
>> highlighting for different strings and so on
>>
>> From: cs [mailto:chr...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 10:06 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Viewing log files in realtime
>>
>> Is there a tool that can can track ASCII-based log files in realtime?
>> To add some context, I have a robocopy job that transfers a bunch of files 
>> from one server to another and would like to keep tabs on progress without 
>> tediously reopening the log file in Wordpad, i.e. after new transactions 
>> are added.
>> I'm thinking maybe a more robust text editor will do the trick nicely.
>> Hope that makes sense.
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: 0-Day Excel

[David Lum]

Grrafter reading the MS KB link Bill posted I do remember seeing it, the 
funny sounding "Microsoft Office Isolated Conversion Environment (MOICE)" piece 
snapped me back to "oh yeah, seen it".

Sorry for the additional traffic.

David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764

-Original Message-
From: Andy Ognenoff [mailto:andyognen...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:35 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: 0-Day Excel

SANS had it yesterday:

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5923

 - Andy O.

From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: 0-Day Excel

Wow, I hadn't heard of this via my regular channels (SANS, patch mgmt
mailing list, here)

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090224/tc_pcworld/attackerstargetingunp
atchedvulnerabilityinexcel2007
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764






~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~




~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Michael B. Smith]

HAHAHAHAHA.

Not. It was for pr0n! :-)

-Original Message-
From: Troy Meyer [mailto:troy.me...@monacocoach.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 11:37 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

ME2,

Totally agree, all that stupid encapsulation c...@p for work purposes.  We all
know what HTTP was intended for:

http://www.cnet.com/8301-18603_1-10170726-73.html


-troy



-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 6:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

True, but I just dont like seeing apps like this encapsulated through
HTTP. Its not what it was intended for.  They should at least have the
decency to pick another port for this sort of thing.

Plus, I had to come in a couple of hours early today, and I needed to
complain about something.  ;-)

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:
> Well, encapsulated connections are here to stay.
>
> I agree that they should be encrypted.
>
> It's not exactly as if it is a Microsoft specific thing. SSL VPNs, ssh
> tunneling - lots of examples in the OSS world too.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:38 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
"SharedView"
>
> Decisions, decisions!  :-)
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Michael B. Smith
>  wrote:
>> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
> "SharedView"
>>
>> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
>> Way to go - not.
>>
>> --
>> ME2
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>  wrote:
>>> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
>>> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
>>> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
>>> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
>>> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
>>> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
>>> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
>>> you need to accept).
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>>> "SharedView"
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>>  wrote:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>>>
>>>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>>>
>>> -- Ben
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Adobe 0-day

[Sam Cayze]

Thanks for posting.  Curious, will this work with restricted users since
logons scripts run under the user's context?



From: 8400...@gmail.com [mailto:8400...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of jond
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:34 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Adobe 0-day


Here example of the code I put in our login script if anyone needs it. 
It will need to be modified if you want to use it, and do your own DD,
and testing before you blow up all your users computers :)



@echo off
::
if exist c:\jon\acrobat_java_disable.txt goto endaj
:: Determine version
regedit /e c:\jon\acrobatver.txt HKEY_CURRENT_USER\software\adobe
::
::
more C:\jon\acrobatver.txt | FIND "Acrobat Reader\9.0" >>
c:\jon\junk.txt
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 goto next1
echo installing patch for reader 9
regedit /s
\\fileserver06\shared\jon\2009\disable_acrobat9_js\acrobat_reader_9.reg
:next1
::
more C:\jon\acrobatver.txt | FIND "Adobe Acrobat\9.0" >> c:\jon\junk.txt
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 goto next2
echo installing patch for acrobat 9
regedit /s
\\fileserver06\shared\jon\2009\disable_acrobat9_js\acrobat_acrobat_9.reg
:next2
::
more C:\jon\acrobatver.txt | FIND "Acrobat Reader\8.0" >>
c:\jon\junk.txt
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 goto next3
echo installing patch for reader 8
regedit /s
\\fileserver06\shared\jon\2009\disable_acrobat9_js\acrobat_reader_8.reg
:next3
::
more C:\jon\acrobatver.txt | FIND "Adobe Acrobat\8.0" >> c:\jon\junk.txt
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 goto next4
echo installing patch for acrobat 8
regedit /s
\\fileserver06\shared\jon\2009\disable_acrobat9_js\acrobat_acrobat_8.reg
:next4
::
echo ... > c:\jon\acrobat_java_disable.txt
:endaj
---




This is an example of one of the reg keys:
-
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\software\adobe\Adobe Acrobat\9.0\jsprefs]
"bConsoleOpen"=dword:
"bEnableGlobalSecurity"=dword:0001
"bEnableJS"=dword:
"bEnableMenuItems"=dword:
-



Jon






On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Andy Ognenoff 
wrote:


More stuff concerning the PDF/JBIG issues:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2668
(Has got some reg tweaks and such for disabling auto open in IE)

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5926

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5932


 - Andy O.

>-Original Message-
>From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:55 PM
>To: NT System Admin Issues
>Subject: RE: Adobe 0-day
>
>This just floated across the patch management list
>
>""During our analysis, Secunia managed to create a reliable,
fully working
>exploit (available for Secunia Binary Analysis customers),
which does not
>use JavaScript and can therefore successfully compromise users,
who may
>think they are safe because JavaScript support has been
disabled."
>
>http://secunia.com/blog/44/
>
>Comments? I do remember seeing the Jscript doesn't prevent it,
just makes
>engineering the exploit tougher.
>
>David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
>NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
>(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog!
~
~   ~



 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Troy Meyer]

ME2,

Totally agree, all that stupid encapsulation c...@p for work purposes.  We all 
know what HTTP was intended for:

http://www.cnet.com/8301-18603_1-10170726-73.html


-troy



-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 6:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

True, but I just dont like seeing apps like this encapsulated through
HTTP. Its not what it was intended for.  They should at least have the
decency to pick another port for this sort of thing.

Plus, I had to come in a couple of hours early today, and I needed to
complain about something.  ;-)

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:
> Well, encapsulated connections are here to stay.
>
> I agree that they should be encrypted.
>
> It's not exactly as if it is a Microsoft specific thing. SSL VPNs, ssh
> tunneling - lots of examples in the OSS world too.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:38 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"
>
> Decisions, decisions!  :-)
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Michael B. Smith
>  wrote:
>> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
> "SharedView"
>>
>> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
>> Way to go - not.
>>
>> --
>> ME2
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>  wrote:
>>> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
>>> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
>>> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
>>> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
>>> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
>>> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
>>> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
>>> you need to accept).
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>>> "SharedView"
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>>  wrote:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>>>
>>>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>>>
>>> -- Ben
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: 0-Day Excel

[Andy Ognenoff]

SANS had it yesterday:

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5923

 - Andy O. 

From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: 0-Day Excel

Wow, I hadn’t heard of this via my regular channels (SANS, patch mgmt
mailing list, here)

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090224/tc_pcworld/attackerstargetingunp
atchedvulnerabilityinexcel2007
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER 
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764


 
 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Adobe 0-day

[jond]

Here example of the code I put in our login script if anyone needs it.
It will need to be modified if you want to use it, and do your own DD, and
testing before you blow up all your users computers :)



@echo off
::
if exist c:\jon\acrobat_java_disable.txt goto endaj
:: Determine version
regedit /e c:\jon\acrobatver.txt HKEY_CURRENT_USER\software\adobe
::
::
more C:\jon\acrobatver.txt | FIND "Acrobat Reader\9.0" >> c:\jon\junk.txt
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 goto next1
echo installing patch for reader 9
regedit /s
\\fileserver06\shared\jon\2009\disable_acrobat9_js\acrobat_reader_9.reg
:next1
::
more C:\jon\acrobatver.txt | FIND "Adobe Acrobat\9.0" >> c:\jon\junk.txt
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 goto next2
echo installing patch for acrobat 9
regedit /s
\\fileserver06\shared\jon\2009\disable_acrobat9_js\acrobat_acrobat_9.reg
:next2
::
more C:\jon\acrobatver.txt | FIND "Acrobat Reader\8.0" >> c:\jon\junk.txt
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 goto next3
echo installing patch for reader 8
regedit /s
\\fileserver06\shared\jon\2009\disable_acrobat9_js\acrobat_reader_8.reg
:next3
::
more C:\jon\acrobatver.txt | FIND "Adobe Acrobat\8.0" >> c:\jon\junk.txt
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 goto next4
echo installing patch for acrobat 8
regedit /s
\\fileserver06\shared\jon\2009\disable_acrobat9_js\acrobat_acrobat_8.reg
:next4
::
echo ... > c:\jon\acrobat_java_disable.txt
:endaj
---




This is an example of one of the reg keys:
-
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\software\adobe\Adobe Acrobat\9.0\jsprefs]
"bConsoleOpen"=dword:
"bEnableGlobalSecurity"=dword:0001
"bEnableJS"=dword:
"bEnableMenuItems"=dword:
-



Jon





On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Andy Ognenoff wrote:

> More stuff concerning the PDF/JBIG issues:
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2668
> (Has got some reg tweaks and such for disabling auto open in IE)
>
> http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5926
>
> http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5932
>
>
>  - Andy O.
>
> >-Original Message-
> >From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
> >Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:55 PM
> >To: NT System Admin Issues
> >Subject: RE: Adobe 0-day
> >
> >This just floated across the patch management list
> >
> >""During our analysis, Secunia managed to create a reliable, fully working
> >exploit (available for Secunia Binary Analysis customers), which does not
> >use JavaScript and can therefore successfully compromise users, who may
> >think they are safe because JavaScript support has been disabled."
> >
> >http://secunia.com/blog/44/
> >
> >Comments? I do remember seeing the Jscript doesn't prevent it, just makes
> >engineering the exploit tougher.
> >
> >David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
> >NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
> >(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: 0-Day Excel

[Bill Songstad (WCUL)]

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/968272.mspx 

 

Bill 

 

From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:29 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: 0-Day Excel

 

Wow, I hadn't heard of this via my regular channels (SANS, patch mgmt
mailing list, here)

 

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090224/tc_pcworld/attackerstargetin
gunpatchedvulnerabilityinexcel2007

David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER 
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

0-Day Excel

[David Lum]

Wow, I hadn't heard of this via my regular channels (SANS, patch mgmt mailing 
list, here)

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20090224/tc_pcworld/attackerstargetingunpatchedvulnerabilityinexcel2007
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Glen Johnson]

Two of the servers will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os
and 3 x 146gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
These are for MS-Hyper-v use.
Exchange server will have 2 x 72gig 15krpm sas 2.5inch raid 1 for os, 2
x 146gig 10krpm 2.5 inch sas raid 1 for logs and 3 x 300gig 10krpm
2.5inch sas for exchange dbs.
Last server is for a users home directories.  It will have 2 x 72gig
15krpm raid 1 for OS, 6 x 300gig 10krpm 2.5inch sas raid 5 for data.
The one other server may be even worse.  It is for a domain controller,
dhcp and dns.  It has the E200/128 controller.  Any bad news on that
controller?



-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Tom (Xetron) [mailto:tom.alver...@ngc.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:27 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions
I would definitely get the battery/memory add-on option if I were you.
Are you going to use SAS or SATA drives?  What size?

-Original Message-
From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 9:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

Tom.
I am very interested in the outcome of this as I have 5 servers on order
and 4 of them will have this same controller.
I forwarded the first email from this thread to our rep to see if he had
heard anything and asked if we should be concerned.
He said he would do some checking and let me know what he learns.
I'll let everyone know if he shares anything of value.
I sure hope it is something that can easily be fixed as it may be too
late for us to change the order.
Thanks.
Glen.



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Flash patch, anyone?

[Kennedy, Jim]

It's no big deal to get. Free, fill out the forms and they send you the link 
via email right away. You are just agreeing to only distribute it to your 
network computers.

http://www.adobe.com/products/players/fpsh_distribution1.html



From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Flash patch, anyone?

Grrr...I have no way to push this...has anyone signed up for "Adobe Player 
Licensing" to take advantage of the network push capabilities?

http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb09-01.html
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764







~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[MarvinC]

Abso-freakin-YES!!

Thank you sir!

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Michael B. Smith <
mich...@theessentialexchange.com> wrote:

>  You are close.
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>
>
>
> Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
> works. Note that you PROBABLY want a “*” after myserver. You shouldn’t be
> able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory…
>
>
>
> *From:* MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??
>
>
>
> Tried that with this and still no luck:
>
>
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv
>
> and with this:
>
>
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt
>
>
>
>
>
> and with this:
>
>
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>
>
>
>
> What am I missing?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:
>
> try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:
>
> dsquery * domainroot -filter
> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))"
> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>
>
>
> This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
> path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
> errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
> doing wrong?
>
>
>
> Any responses appreciated
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Flash patch, anyone?

[Sam Cayze]

I have for their Reader products.  Pretty straight forward and easy
process.  Open up access to a lot of deployment tools and options.



From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:33 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Flash patch, anyone?



Grrr...I have no way to push this...has anyone signed up for "Adobe
Player Licensing" to take advantage of the network push capabilities?

 

http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb09-01.html

David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER 
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764

 


 

 


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Flash patch, anyone?

[David Lum]

Grrr...I have no way to push this...has anyone signed up for "Adobe Player 
Licensing" to take advantage of the network push capabilities?

http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb09-01.html
David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[Michael B. Smith]

You are close.

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5cmyserver))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt

 

Notice that I removed an extra slash you had in there. I tested this, it
works. Note that you PROBABLY want a "*" after myserver. You shouldn't be
able to specify a servername without a share as a home directory.

 

From: MarvinC [mailto:marv...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:17 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

 

Tried that with this and still no luck: 

 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$)
)" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv

and with this:

 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))
" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt

 

 

and with this: 

 

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv


 

What am I missing?

 

 

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:

try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath) 








On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))
" -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv

  

This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
doing wrong?

 

Any responses appreciated

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Adobe 0-day

[Andy Ognenoff]

More stuff concerning the PDF/JBIG issues:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2668
(Has got some reg tweaks and such for disabling auto open in IE)

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5926

http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=5932


 - Andy O.

>-Original Message-
>From: David Lum [mailto:david@nwea.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:55 PM
>To: NT System Admin Issues
>Subject: RE: Adobe 0-day
>
>This just floated across the patch management list
>
>""During our analysis, Secunia managed to create a reliable, fully working
>exploit (available for Secunia Binary Analysis customers), which does not
>use JavaScript and can therefore successfully compromise users, who may
>think they are safe because JavaScript support has been disabled."
>
>http://secunia.com/blog/44/
>
>Comments? I do remember seeing the Jscript doesn't prevent it, just makes
>engineering the exploit tougher.
>
>David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER
>NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION
>(Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

LOL


On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Andy Shook  wrote:
> Please someone call the Waaa-bulance :)
>
> Shook
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:43 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"
>
> True, but I just dont like seeing apps like this encapsulated through
> HTTP. Its not what it was intended for.  They should at least have the
> decency to pick another port for this sort of thing.
>
> Plus, I had to come in a couple of hours early today, and I needed to
> complain about something.  ;-)
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Michael B. Smith
>  wrote:
>> Well, encapsulated connections are here to stay.
>>
>> I agree that they should be encrypted.
>>
>> It's not exactly as if it is a Microsoft specific thing. SSL VPNs, ssh
>> tunneling - lots of examples in the OSS world too.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:38 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"
>>
>> Decisions, decisions!  :-)
>>
>> --
>> ME2
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Michael B. Smith
>>  wrote:
>>> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>>>
>>> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>> "SharedView"
>>>
>>> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
>>> Way to go - not.
>>>
>>> --
>>> ME2
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>>  wrote:
 Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
 appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
 firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
 ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
 Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
 you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
 session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
 you need to accept).

 Tom

 -Original Message-
 From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
 To: NT System Admin Issues
 Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
 "SharedView"

 On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
  wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView

  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.

 -- Ben

 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
 ~   ~

 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
 ~   ~


>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Andy Shook]

Please someone call the Waaa-bulance :) 

Shook

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:43 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

True, but I just dont like seeing apps like this encapsulated through
HTTP. Its not what it was intended for.  They should at least have the
decency to pick another port for this sort of thing.

Plus, I had to come in a couple of hours early today, and I needed to
complain about something.  ;-)

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:
> Well, encapsulated connections are here to stay.
>
> I agree that they should be encrypted.
>
> It's not exactly as if it is a Microsoft specific thing. SSL VPNs, ssh
> tunneling - lots of examples in the OSS world too.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:38 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"
>
> Decisions, decisions!  :-)
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Michael B. Smith
>  wrote:
>> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
> "SharedView"
>>
>> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
>> Way to go - not.
>>
>> --
>> ME2
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>  wrote:
>>> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
>>> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
>>> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
>>> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
>>> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
>>> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
>>> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
>>> you need to accept).
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>>> "SharedView"
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>>  wrote:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>>>
>>>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>>>
>>> -- Ben
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~


~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

True, but I just dont like seeing apps like this encapsulated through
HTTP. Its not what it was intended for.  They should at least have the
decency to pick another port for this sort of thing.

Plus, I had to come in a couple of hours early today, and I needed to
complain about something.  ;-)

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:
> Well, encapsulated connections are here to stay.
>
> I agree that they should be encrypted.
>
> It's not exactly as if it is a Microsoft specific thing. SSL VPNs, ssh
> tunneling - lots of examples in the OSS world too.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:38 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"
>
> Decisions, decisions!  :-)
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Michael B. Smith
>  wrote:
>> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
> "SharedView"
>>
>> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
>> Way to go - not.
>>
>> --
>> ME2
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>  wrote:
>>> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
>>> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
>>> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
>>> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
>>> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
>>> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
>>> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
>>> you need to accept).
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>>> "SharedView"
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>>  wrote:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>>>
>>>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>>>
>>> -- Ben
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Alverson, Tom (Xetron)]

I would definitely get the battery/memory add-on option if I were you.
Are you going to use SAS or SATA drives?  What size?

-Original Message-
From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 9:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

Tom.
I am very interested in the outcome of this as I have 5 servers on order
and 4 of them will have this same controller.
I forwarded the first email from this thread to our rep to see if he had
heard anything and asked if we should be concerned.
He said he would do some checking and let me know what he learns.
I'll let everyone know if he shares anything of value.
I sure hope it is something that can easily be fixed as it may be too
late for us to change the order.
Thanks.
Glen.



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Alverson, Tom (Xetron)]

I did not see any way to choose the strip and cluster sizes while
creating the array, so they are at the default.  I may be able to see
what the defaults were by running the raid array utility in windows.

 

From: Brian Hintz [mailto:bhi...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 6:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

 

What stripe and cluster sizes are being used?

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
 wrote:

Well I am hoping that someone else on this list may have solved this
problem already.  No such luck yet.  My guess is that adding
memory/battery or changing to a P800 card will help, and I am testing
that guess buy purchasing both (on order, not here yet).

If someone tells me that card XXX will fix all my problems I would
probably order one of those.  I have had good luck with 3ware SATA raid
cards, but I'm not sure I could use them with the HP DL380 internal
drive slots because of the cabling used.

Tom


-Original Message-
From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 5:52 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
 wrote:
> If the chip did not have the guts to perform the RAID calculations
fast enough,
> I doubt that both Intel and HP would have chosen this chip for their
RAID controllers.

 So, in other words, you have absolutely no basis for thinking that
it can perform as desired, other than a vague hope that Intel and HP
are real nice guys who never do anything wrong.

 I've got a Dell PowerEdge 2500 with a "PERC 3" RAID controller,
which is based on an Adaptec chipset.  Normally, I really like
Adaptec's stuff, and Dell's PERC cards, but this one sucks monkey
balls.  Performance absolutely blows.  Turns out this card just sucks.
 Dell/Adaptec turned in a stinker.  I've even had Dell's tech guys say
this.  The only solution is to use a different card.

 Every company on Earth turns out crap sometimes.  You may have
encountered one of those times.  You either have assurance that it
works as you desire, or you don't.  So far, you have no such
assurances.  Get some specs and stop guessing.

 Or, go right on guessing and hoping, if that's what you want.  I
assumed you were posting because you needed help.  I've identified
what you need to do.  It's not my job to make sure you like it.  Not
at the rates you're paying me.

-- Ben

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Alverson, Tom (Xetron)]

I don't know if it will do RAID10.   It won't even do RAID6 until you
add the extra memory/battery option.  My only options (as the card sits
now) are RAID0 RAID1 or RAID5.

 

From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:ezi...@lifespan.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 7:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

 

Also what are the sizes of the files you are reading/write from the
drive. 

 

HP Has tools to measure the performance of the reading and writing from
disk. Although I have heard the P400 controller rant before about the
slowness. Is it any better if you use RAID 10? I am also looking to do a
specification on P800 controllers with BB Cache and MIN 256-512 Memory
on the Controller card as a minimum specification. 

 

Z

 

Edward E. Ziots

Network Engineer

Lifespan Organization

Email: ezi...@lifespan.org

Phone: 401-639-3505

MCSE, MCP+I, ME, CCA, Security +, Network +



From: Brian Hintz [mailto:bhi...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 6:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

[Alverson, Tom (Xetron)]

Just do a google search for "P400 raid slow" and you will see a bunch of
posting (mostly on HP forums).  They usually say "update your firmware
and drivers" but I always do that before starting any install.

-Original Message-
From: Glen Johnson [mailto:gjohn...@vhcc.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 9:51 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: HP RAID5 P400 SATA questions

Tom.
I am very interested in the outcome of this as I have 5 servers on order
and 4 of them will have this same controller.
I forwarded the first email from this thread to our rep to see if he had
heard anything and asked if we should be concerned.
He said he would do some checking and let me know what he learns.
I'll let everyone know if he shares anything of value.
I sure hope it is something that can easily be fixed as it may be too
late for us to change the order.
Thanks.
Glen.



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: A simple yet...not so simple ??

[MarvinC]

Tried that with this and still no luck:


dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homedirectory=\5c\5c\myserver$))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.csv
and with this:


dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\5c\5c\myserver))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\scripts\adinfo\hdprofile.txt


and with this:

dsquery * domainroot -filter
"(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\directorypath))"
-attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv


What am I missing?


On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 PM, KenM  wrote:

> try (homedirectory=\5c\5cdirectorypath)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM, MarvinC  wrote:
>
>> dsquery * domainroot -filter
>> "(&(objectCategory=Person)(objectClass=User)(homeDirectory=\\directorypath))"
>> -attr sAMAccountName homeDirectory > c:\temp\hdir.csv
>>
>> This "simple" query is suppose to write all domain users who homeDirectory
>> path resides on a particular server. The file gets created and there are no
>> errors but nothings' written to it. Can someone quide me on what it is I'm
>> doing wrong?
>>
>> Any responses appreciated
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Out of band patches ?

[Martin Blackstone]

Pretty much. I usually just sit on the non security stuff until the next
monthly security patch release.

For example the ones that come out Monday will sit until next month.

Defender ones I do as they come out.

 

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 10:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Out of band patches ?

 

It's more like 2nd Tuesday for security updates, 2nd or 4th Tuesday for
non-security updates, and signature updates "all the time".

 

Carl

 

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 1:46 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Out of band patches ?

 

Security patches are released once a month. 

 

Other stuff is released for download all the time (Microsoft even has a
weekly email you can sign up for, and there used to be a 3rd party RSS feed
that showed downloads released every day)

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: HELP_PC [mailto:g...@enter.it] 
Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 2009 5:42 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Out of band patches ?

 

 

 

Is it a default that MS system patches may be released out of band ? 
(Today MS KB 967715 and 961118) 

GuidoElia 
HELPPC 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Michael B. Smith]

Well, encapsulated connections are here to stay.

I agree that they should be encrypted.

It's not exactly as if it is a Microsoft specific thing. SSL VPNs, ssh
tunneling - lots of examples in the OSS world too.

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:38 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

Decisions, decisions!  :-)

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:
> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>
> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
"SharedView"
>
> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
> Way to go - not.
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>  wrote:
>> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
>> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
>> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
>> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
>> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
>> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
>> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
>> you need to accept).
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>> "SharedView"
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>  wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>>
>>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>>
>> -- Ben
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: AD & General audit tool

[Michael B. Smith]

Most, if not all, of this is available free from MSFT. Active Directory
Topology Mapper, Group Policy Management Console, icacls - these do
everything you listed.

 

From: Cesare' A. Ramos [mailto:cra...@idfllc.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 11:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: AD & General audit tool

 

Hellos..

 

We are currently in research and eval mode for a software tool that will
allow us to gather all configuration data from a server (i.e. AD structure,
policies, folder security information, etc.).

 

Anyone using anything like this?

 

CAR

 

  _  

This e-Mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this e-Mail in error please notify the sender via
returned e-Mail. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this
e-Mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of the company. Although IDF operates anti-virus programs, it does not
accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is caused by viruses
being passed.

** Think before you print this message. **

 

 

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

Decisions, decisions!  :-)

--
ME2



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Michael B. Smith
 wrote:
> Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?
>
> Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"
>
> Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
> Way to go - not.
>
> --
> ME2
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>  wrote:
>> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
>> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
>> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
>> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
>> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
>> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
>> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
>> you need to accept).
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
>> "SharedView"
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>>  wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>>
>>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>>
>> -- Ben
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>> ~   ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Michael B. Smith]

Are you saying that encapsulated communications are bad?

Or that unencrypted encapsulated communications are bad?

-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespin...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:14 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
Way to go - not.

--
ME2



On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
 wrote:
> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
> you need to accept).
>
> Tom
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
> "SharedView"
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>  wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>
>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>
> -- Ben
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Viewing log files in realtime

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

baremetal makes up a couple of great utilities.  I'm a huge fan of the
baregrep util.  Very fast searching with the power of regular
expressions.

--
ME2



On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Free, Bob  wrote:
> http://www.baremetalsoft.com/baretail/index.php
>
> Awesome little free tool, standalone (no install), can run from network etc
>
> Simultaneously monitor multiple files for changes using tabs, multi color 
> highlighting for different strings and so on
>
> From: cs [mailto:chr...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 10:06 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Viewing log files in realtime
>
> Is there a tool that can can track ASCII-based log files in realtime?
> To add some context, I have a robocopy job that transfers a bunch of files 
> from one server to another and would like to keep tabs on progress without 
> tediously reopening the log file in Wordpad, i.e. after new transactions 
> are added.
> I'm thinking maybe a more robust text editor will do the trick nicely.
> Hope that makes sense.
> Any thoughts?
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft "SharedView"

[Micheal Espinola Jr]

Good to see Microsoft still supports bitching things through port 80.
Way to go - not.

--
ME2



On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
 wrote:
> Similar but different.  Netmeeting is point to point.  SharedView
> appears to communicate through Microsoft servers on ports 80 and 443 so
> firewalls should not be a problem.  In netmeeting you have an optional
> ILS server which is basically just a list of names and IP addresses.
> Sharedview requires you to login to a "passport" type of login and then
> you can easily send an email to the other end which has a URL with the
> session name and password embedded (they just need to click the link and
> you need to accept).
>
> Tom
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:19 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Another screen sharing gizmo (free) from Microsoft
> "SharedView"
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Alverson, Tom (Xetron)
>  wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SharedView
>
>  Sounds like NetMeeting all over again.
>
> -- Ben
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: Can AD child domains establish outside trust without parent permission?

[Anders Blomgren]

Since the forest is the security boundary you can't actually prevent the
local domain administrators from forming a direct ntlm trust. You can use
the netdom or nltest command line tools to query each domain for trusts. You
can also use adfind or dsquery to search for trustedDomain objects in each
domain. They'll be under the System container in the default naming context.

-Anders


On 2/25/09, Jay Kulsh  wrote:
>
> Can AD child domains establish outside trust without permission of admin of
> the parent/root domain? Can this be prevented? If not, how can we monitor
> this? Thanks.
>
> Jay Kulsh
> So. Pasadena, CA
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~   ~
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Can AD child domains establish outside trust without parent permission?

[Jay Kulsh]

Can AD child domains establish outside trust without permission of admin of the 
parent/root domain? Can this be prevented? If not, how can we monitor this? 
Thanks.

Jay Kulsh
So. Pasadena, CA
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

Re: AD & General audit tool

[senlerk]

Hi,

You can use ADManager plus. I've tried it before, it's a good program

For more info

http://manageengine.adventnet.com/products/ad-manager/download.html


Quoting "Cesare' A. Ramos" :


Hellos..

We are currently in research and eval mode for a software tool that  
will allow us to gather all configuration data from a server (i.e.  
AD structure, policies, folder security information, etc.).


Anyone using anything like this?

CAR


This e-Mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and  
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they  
are addressed. If you have received this e-Mail in error please  
notify the sender via returned e-Mail. Please note that any views or  
opinions presented in this e-Mail are solely those of the author and  
do not necessarily represent those of the company. Although IDF  
operates anti-virus programs, it does not accept responsibility for  
any damage whatsoever that is caused by viruses being passed.


** Think before you print this message. **

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~





~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~

RE: OOO responsibility

[René de Haas]

I have been asked to do this about 4 times in 12 years, so doesn't happen a lot.

René

-Original Message-
From: Steven Peck [mailto:sep...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 5:55 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: OOO responsibility

There are occasions we do it.  It's a pain for them so it's rare.

Generally it is when an employee had an emergency (medical, family,
leave of absence, they had to leave the office "now" type of thing)
and it is at the request of their director or above and in order to
'validate' they are in the employees management chain it has to go
through our security group which can check on this.  This happens
maybe once every month or two. And they must supply the text we copy
and paste without proofreading into the OOO field.

We have around 5,000 employees nationwide.  We are not administrative
assistants for people who forget their responsibilities and it's just
not something we do for random requests.

Steven

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Mark Boersma  wrote:
> Only if it's one of the few that sign my paycheck J
>
>
>
> Mark
>
> -
>
> Two rules to success in life:
>
> 1. Never tell people everything you know.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Jason Gauthier [mailto:jgauth...@lastar.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 9:06 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: OOO responsibility
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
>  Wanted to take a poll.
>
>
>
>   How many of you in IT positions are responsible for setting other people's
> OOO when they forget?
>
> This has been a recent point of irritation for me.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Jason
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
> 
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is
> for the sole use of the intended recipients(s) and may contain confidential
> and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
> message.
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~



***
The information in this e-mail is confidential and intended solely for the 
individual or entity to whom it is addressed.  If you have received this e-mail 
in error please notify the sender by return e-mail delete this e-mail and 
refrain from any disclosure or action based on the information.
***

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~   ~