|
At the place I used to work I waited almost a month before applying patches system wide. The week before I would deploy it to pilot/qa/dev boxes. Unless it is a big security vulnerability which happens 2-3 times a year then we would roll that out in a couple days. Keep in mind that patching is only part of the security equation; you also have virus protection, external firewall, web filtering appliances not to mention other intrusion prevention technologies and strategies in place.
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:05 |
|
|
Tab8715 posted:For organizations that don't deploy windows updates to desktops immediately after release, how do you keep the latest security threat out? If you have a IDP/IPS system facing the Internet and a reasonable network engineer they can simply block the attacks on that (e.g. the Signatures for shellshock came out pretty much straight after they announced it, and you could have written your own worst case). and they will never reach your "vulnerable" server. Obviously doesn't stop attacks internally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
adorai posted:hahahahahaha Uh well, there's this thing called Multicast. DrAlexanderTobacco posted:Money/lack thereof is viewed as most important because historically, that's what informants/spies fall for. If you have a weakness it's important to demonstrate how you're actively working to resolve that weakness. Dude, you missed a loving gem: quote:Case Number: 11-05850.h1 What loving goon was this? Zero VGS fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Oct 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
DrAlexanderTobacco posted:Money/lack thereof is viewed as most important because historically, that's what informants/spies fall for. If you have a weakness it's important to demonstrate how you're actively working to resolve that weakness. This is fascinating. Went looking through 2009 entries trying to find mine but I keep seeing some crazy results... murder = granted, debt = denied, drug dealer = granted, drug user = denied anyways edit: pedophile / hentai dude = granted  edit 2: seriously what the gently caress, in order quote:Case Number: 11-08262.h1 BANKRUPTCY = DENIED PEDOPHILE = GRANTED BANKRUPTCY = DENIED 
Fiendish Dr. Wu fucked around with this message at 01:50 on Oct 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
I think there more looking for honesty, we've all done stupid poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Actually yeah if you search the word "porn" on that page there's a lot of fascinating stuff. People will fess up to a lot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I think there more looking for honesty, we've all done stupid poo poo. I'm going to agree with you just to stop this conversation from happening  edit Zero VGS posted:Actually yeah if you search the word "porn" on that page there's a lot of fascinating stuff. People will fess up to a lot. Every other porn result from 2012 is denied. Except hentai dude. He got his. Ok sorry I said I wasn't having this conversation 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I think there more looking for honesty, we've all done stupid poo poo. "It's okay to be a pedophile as long as you're honest about it!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
You can't blackmail someone who isn't ashamed of their perversion. My favorite anecdote when it comes to espionage is Robert Hanssen's insistence on being paid in diamonds. It seems to me that unless you already have a bunch of contacts in the diamond business it'd be really obvious. Why not gold, or wads of cash?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:"It's okay to be a pedophile as long as you're honest about it!" Stupid poo poo is not ok. On the flipside, the FBI will fire you for smoking weed but beating your wife is acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Stupid poo poo is not ok. A lot of agencies are reconsidering their prior use policies (CIA has the lowest at 12 months) since so many IT people have smoked week/taken shrooms/bumped some molly before.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
Morning, thread. I've been reading this off and on recently because since May I was basically forced into a weird IT role at my company. Background: I was hired to do QA for the e-commerce team in June of 2013, but we lost our VERY LARGE client back in March/April of 2014. There wasn't enough e-commerce clients to support a full QA staff, so everyone but me and one contractor were fired...that included two other QA guys, one part-time QA intern, and the QA manager. It was then found there still wasn't enough QA to keep me AND the contractor busy, so since he was cheaper to keep as the full-time QA (not having to pay benefits and whatnot,) I was then "shuffled" into a weird role of QA when they need it...and IT support the rest of the time as part of the managed support team. Our company does both e-commerce development, AND managed support...and infrastructure designs, sales, and installations...the idea was we'd be a "one stop shop" for companies wanting to rebuild a new web presence from scratch. But the infrastructure and support teams branched out well beyond just e-commerce customers, and now we support a wide array of small and mid-sized businesses. They decided to put me in this role because, as a result of losing the large client (that paid money to ALL of our teams,) lay offs were made everywhere, and lots of jobs got merged. I had "good technical skills" so they figured they could save money by having me do some lower-level IT stuff and get rid of the higher paid guys. The problem here is that I am NOT an IT guy. Before working in QA, I worked a as biomedical technician...fixing and testing medical devices. I did a little IT stuff there, but 90% of the time I could pass anything related to that to a hospital's IT team. Do I have better than average computer/IT skills? Sure, but mostly on a personal/desktop level, not enterprise/server level. So since May, I've been pretty much thrown to the wolves most of the time to figure out the problem of the day/week as it comes in. It sucks, especially since we've since gotten on a few more customers, but haven't increased staffing...in fact, we've lost 3 more people who quit since then. So while I'd LOVE to actually take a course in something...anything...(I suppose starting with some Windows Server basics would be a good place to start,) there's been no time for that, and I don't really know where to start. While most of the time I do basic things like help-desk, or server patching, sometimes I fall into major issues that no one else has time for, and I feel like I'm wasting half my time on it just googling the issues and trying to find some KB article or forum posting that matches my problem. I'm wondering if there's a good online repository for classes or training I can look at. Free is obviously best, but I don't mind paying a little if it's a good quality (and I can probably get my department to reimburse me.) As said, the biggest problem is not even really knowing where to start. I don't want to take some course on Windows Server 2012 if it's a course that assumes I'm already intimately familiar with Server 2008, for instance. Should I just start poking around Udemy, Coursera, EdX, etc...?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
Put it this way, I found out that the contract IT guy I'm replacing, he's sort of mediocre, very basic skills, but they had to pay the contractor company $80 an hour for him. Suddenly I'm a bargain. They probably want the same thing out of you. If you're already in-house and can handle tickets they stand to save a ton of money with no commitment of hiring another full-time with benefits or paying out the rear end for a contractor. Anyway, Windows Server 2012 is available as a free, half-a-year trial. It took me a day to install it on two laptops, install the included Hyper-V on both of them, then create VMs for two domain controllers with DNS, print server, spiceworks, WSUS, RDP server, all that good stuff. Just try it out and you'll probably learn a ton, maybe watch some Youtubes. If you can get your work to pay for Microsoft Certified Solutions Expert (MCSE) then that's fantastic, but it's not a requirement. There's basically no difference at all in Windows Server 2003/2008/2012 except they keep fixing bugs, adding more features, and loving with the user interface. The things you want to learn like Active Directory and Group Policy don't really change that much. Learn the newest poo poo because it will carry backwards and people are only going to continue to upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
What kind of problems are you running into? A lot of what you'll learn you just learn on the job as you do it. I've been doing this a long time, and have all sorts of training and certs and my job still boils down to <google issue>, <fix issue>. You can always ask in the Windows thread, most of us would be happy to point you in the right direction, but really I've just learned by doing mostly. The books and courses can teach you about the systems and make you aware of features, but won't be that helpful when troubleshooting problems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:stuff QA is an extremely marketable skill set and my top QA people make every bit as much as senior devs. Assuming you have good interpersonal skills, you are an arm and a leg over most QA people (this is a generalization, because there are a LOT of foreign/H1B testers) so why change fields? It sounds like your company might be in the decline so I'm trying to wrap my head around why you are switching into a more competitive arena just to stay around. Admittedly, I have no idea how long you had been testing, or if you even like it. Or how the market is where you live/work...
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
What's BPM like? For some reaosn, this IT company I got hired wants me to start on their project there, but I've been trying to go with web development, started with .NET and been there for the past two years, so this move seems more like a shift than anything. I don't want to start anything on a place I've not even started working, but.. Honest Thief fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Oct 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:What kind of problems are you running into? A lot of what you'll learn you just learn on the job as you do it. I've been doing this a long time, and have all sorts of training and certs and my job still boils down to <google issue>, <fix issue>. All over the map. This past week, I dealt with a massive backup issue at one customer, I just did a McAfee vulnerability scan for another customer (admittedly, that's literally clicking a few buttons on McAfee's portal,) I've done some minor re-configs for firewalls/spam filters/similar devices, and then just some general Windows Server things like updates to GPO, some minor AD changes, fixing broken Windows update problems, etc... Dark Helmut posted:QA is an extremely marketable skill set and my top QA people make every bit as much as senior devs. Assuming you have good interpersonal skills, you are an arm and a leg over most QA people (this is a generalization, because there are a LOT of foreign/H1B testers) so why change fields? It sounds like your company might be in the decline so I'm trying to wrap my head around why you are switching into a more competitive arena just to stay around. Well, I didn't have much choice in going to the new position...my options were transition to a support role, or quit. I had also never done any QA before coming here, so I really don't have a lot of marketable QA skills as far as I'm concerned, other then knowledge of a couple platforms (TFS/Test Manager, mostly.) I had no desire to go back to my last job or anything like it, and there aren't a lot of tech places in the area, so I figured a goo-=paying job that I can get more skills and knowledge from is better than anything else I could find. Honestly, the company was in decline for a while, but is picking itself up again (at least on the support and enterprise infrastructure sides.) Though it sucked at the time, losing the giant client and the massive gravy-train cash flow it brought in was the best thing to happen here in years, from what I've seen. It forced the owners and managers to re-evaluate how they do business and realize that what worked in the mid 90's at the birth of e-commerce and whatnot doesn't really work anymore. DrBouvenstein fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Oct 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
I just had an interesting recruiter call. I read on your resume that you aren't interested in contract positions, does this also go for "contract to hire" positions? Since the only difference between the two is a small promise then yes, that does include "contract to hire". Thank you for your honesty. Do you have anyone in your network with your skillset that would like a contract position? Nope, not at this time. Would you mind please sending this job description to your entire network anyway? Thanks and have a gre..... umm what was that last part? Would you mind please sending this job description to your entire network anyway? I thought I just told you I didn't know anybody that met your criteria? Sorry for the confusion. In my experience with my own network I find that I am not up to date with everyone skills. How about I leave the recruiting work to you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Sickening posted:I just had an interesting recruiter call. Way to be a team player.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
A lazy recruiter that wants you to do their job for them?? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
stubblyhead posted:A lazy recruiter that wants you to do their job for them?? What did I just say...
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
Sickening posted:I just had an interesting recruiter call. lol. Shameless... For real though, in right to work states like VA and possibly beyond, CtH is very, very different than contract, and is in fact more like direct hire. In my state, you can be fired at any time for any reason, so there really is no more security in full time roles, it's just perceived that there is. A CtH is just a different way for companies to onboard a full time resource, similar to buying a car with cash up front or making payments (6 month contract to hire). In addition, it's sometimes actually an advantage for the employee. If you find yourself in a job that you hate, would you rather show that you left a full time job after 6 months (or be trapped!) or would you like the natural escape hatch that CtH provides so you can just call it a 6 month contract? There are no guarantees in a CtH, but if you have a good recruiter and make the most of your conversations with the hiring manager, you should feel good about it before you go in. Anyway, that recruiter just sounds like another one of the idiots that gives us a bad name. /recruiterspeak
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Dark Helmut posted:lol. Shameless... In any of those situations does the CtH get the same bennifits as the full time employee? Same pto, medical, 401k, the works?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
Dark Helmut posted:In my state, you can be fired at any time for any reason, so there really is no more security in full time roles, it's just perceived that there is. A CtH is just a different way for companies to onboard a full time resource, similar to buying a car with cash up front or making payments (6 month contract to hire). In addition, it's sometimes actually an advantage for the employee. If you find yourself in a job that you hate, would you rather show that you left a full time job after 6 months (or be trapped!) or would you like the natural escape hatch that CtH provides so you can just call it a 6 month contract? Helmut, your posts in this thread (these threads? I can never keep track who posts where, between the three threads here and the ones in CoC) are informative and I always enjoy seeing another perspective of the employer/recruiter/employee system. Especially since you seem to be one of the recruiters who actually work with people and businesses, rather than just spray gallons of spunk indiscriminately across linkedin without considering skills or job requirements or basically anything at all. I may not agree with everything you say, but it's usually at least worth consideration. So don't take what I'm about to say next personally. For the love of all that is holy, don't ever use that bolded term the way you just did. I know it's probably a recruiter thing and you talk that way among your recruiter colleagues and probably a lot of businesses' hiring departments and you don't actually think of people as disposable cow patties that terrible companies can get on the cheap to heat the building. But calling someone a loving resource is some of the most dehumanizing bullshit I can think of in the business world. It's pretty much the fastest way a company or recruiter can get on my permanent poo poo list; it screams that they aren't paying attention, don't consider me any different from anyone else they deal with, don't give a single gently caress, and consequently will not put in any effort to actually matching me up with a job that fits my skills at all. I don't expect you to treat me like a sultan. I don't expect you to learn my family history and my life story. I don't expect you to actually care about me on a personal level. I realize you have to deal with uncountable applicants and they all start to run together after a while. I just want you to make the smallest amount of effort to make me think that you will treat me like a person. Treat me with respect. Calling me a resource sends the message that you are actively trying to do the opposite, and moreover that you don't care if I know that. ---  over. ---As to the actual content of your post, I am going to say it's not our fault that businesses in this country can no longer be trusted to keep any kind of faith with their employees. At-will employment (I'm pretty sure you meant at-will, not right-to-work, right?) certainly means that permanent positions don't technically offer any more job security than contract positions. But a job posting for an actual permanent position carries the implication that the business has long-term, open-ended need for someone in that position, while contract and cth mean that they have some specific work they want done and may not need you any longer after that. I'm glad that you apparently work with some businesses that use cth to screen candidates and actually hire people on a permanent basis, but I'm sure you can't deny that plenty of them use it to attract a larger number of applicants that they would otherwise not be able to select from, knowing that they only need specific work done and have no intention of hiring on a permanent basis. Promises are worth exactly nothing, and until business culture or the law changes, any smart job seeker is going to treat "6 month contract-to-hire" as "6 month contract." If you're fine with contract work, that's fine, but it's just automatically riskier if you are actively seeking a permanent position.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Contract to hire is how you get schmucks to plan and act for the future of their work without having to offer them anything back. Its amazing, really. Also, resources lolol people are literally commodities
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
I'd rather be called a resource than an associate, which seems to be the lowest possible title a company can give someone while acknowledging they are possibly employed there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
human... resources
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
Dark Helmut posted:A CtH is just a different way for companies to onboard a full time resource, similar to buying a car with cash up front or making payments (6 month contract to hire). 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Sickening posted:In any of those situations does the CtH get the same bennifits as the full time employee? Same pto, medical, 401k, the works? In limited experience less than a decade in IT, it's almost always straight up cash and no benefits. One of my gigs had really crappy health insurance with a $20k deductible just incase you ever truly screw yourself over.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
Fiendish Dr. Wu posted:human... Soylent Green is people!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
You can be both a resource and a person. One does not preclude the other. "Please think of me as another resource at your disposal and call me with any questions you have." "I don't have the answer to that question but I've got resources who should be able to assist." "We need to have a meeting so we can work out a schedule and line up the appropriate resources." It's a really common pattern speech and it's just a way to refer to the way a particular set of skills aligns with a need. Your skills make you a particular type of resource for a company that is independent and distinct from your existence as a person. Resources provide value and are required to build something, which is a whole let better than being an employee, which is often treated as basically a position of charity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:In limited experience less than a decade in IT, it's almost always straight up cash and no benefits. One of my gigs had really crappy health insurance with a $20k deductible just incase you ever truly screw yourself over. That was my point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
I am a resource please utilize me beep boop
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I am a resource please utilize me beep boop I am a condescending robot who doesn't understand that human language is capable of nuance and that one word can express many concepts, beep boop
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
go3 posted:Also, resources lolol people are literally commodities
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
adorai posted:Actually the new hotness is to call employees "Human Capital". I feel like that's the worst. Capital implies ownership. When I think of Human Capital I think of slaves and indentured servants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAY27NU1Jog
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
Our HR department recently rebranded as the "Human department" and I've yet to decide if that's better or not. I was definitely in the "don't call me a resource" camp.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
NZAmoeba posted:Our HR department recently rebranded as the "Human department" and I've yet to decide if that's better or not. I was definitely in the "don't call me a resource" camp. Well at least you're safe when the robots take over. Or will have a dept dedicated to maintaining the human pets.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:05 |
|
|
Switching to a different topic, if you guys want to host something beyond a simple website. Who are you using? I'm a little preferential to Windows Azure since most of stuff that would be hosted is Microsoft-Centric.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 03:20
|
|