Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
MikusR
Jan 5, 2008


xzzy posted:

Windows Defender is a default block, correct?

I'm running WSL2 and getting X11 working, and am trying to make a rule that restricts the X11 ports to ONLY the WSL2 subnet. So I make a rule that specifies the port, and in the Scope tabe for 'remote ip address' I put the WSL2 subnet. However with this rule active the port is still accessible to the world. My expectation is that any address outside the specified subnet would get blocked.

I'm more of a linux person and while I kinda understand the difference in philosophy between iptables and the defender firewall, clearly I'm missing something.

You should investigate more, but as i understand due to WSL2 being a VM your Windows also is an VM so its firewall does nothing because it runs parallel to WSL2. Also don't connect your PC directly to internet.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

xzzy
Mar 5, 2009



WSL2 does appear to work with the windows firewall because I can generate rules to filter traffic to/from the linux image. I just have not been able to craft rules that block from all subnets except the WSL2 VM's. That doesn't mean there is not caveats using the firewall with WSL2, I'm certainly no expert on any of it, but the basic functionality is there.

And it's not connected directly to the internet, but I still want a functioning firewall (especially for something as dangerous as X11).

Medullah
Aug 13, 2003

FEAR MY SHARK ROCKET IT REALLY SUCKS AND BLOWS


Does anyone use any type of download manager? I've downloaded a couple of large files over the last week or so and Chrome stops here and there, and fails on them. Are there any options that are a bit more robust?

MikusR
Jan 5, 2008


Medullah posted:

Does anyone use any type of download manager? I've downloaded a couple of large files over the last week or so and Chrome stops here and there, and fails on them. Are there any options that are a bit more robust?

I use Firefox and you just press resume if transfer fails.

Uthor
Jul 9, 2006

Gummy Bear Heaven ... It's where I go when the world is too mean.

MikusR posted:

I use Firefox and you just press resume if transfer fails.

I've had poo poo not resume depending on where you are downloading from (Humble Bundle, mostly).

Flipperwaldt
Nov 11, 2011

Won't somebody think of the starving hamsters in China?



The server has to offer the possibility or it just can't be done. I don't know if there's even a way to know without trying.

Shumagorath
Jun 5, 2001


Hoping someone can provide a different perspective or solution for this:

My family's PC runs a backup solution that requires access to a network drive, and Plex. I could move the network drive to a direct USB connection and change how it's mapped for everyone else, and Plex has a service wrapper that looks a bit janky, but it would be much easier to just log on and lock the account that runs them both whenever the PC reboots from updates. I've found a group policy that will let me log-in and lock the last interactive user when a PC reboots, but the account I need to do that with is actually the least likely to be the last interactive user (I remote in via SSH + RDP to provide tech support). Is there any way to tweak that policy to always fire for a specific account (like making the object for a single account via snap-in) or another way that isn't woefully insecure? It's just a local admin account with no Microsoft services attached, so I could dial security down for reliability if I really had to.

Toast Museum
Dec 3, 2005

30% Iron Chef


Shumagorath posted:

Hoping someone can provide a different perspective or solution for this:

My family's PC runs a backup solution that requires access to a network drive, and Plex. I could move the network drive to a direct USB connection and change how it's mapped for everyone else, and Plex has a service wrapper that looks a bit janky, but it would be much easier to just log on and lock the account that runs them both whenever the PC reboots from updates. I've found a group policy that will let me log-in and lock the last interactive user when a PC reboots, but the account I need to do that with is actually the least likely to be the last interactive user (I remote in via SSH + RDP to provide tech support). Is there any way to tweak that policy to always fire for a specific account (like making the object for a single account via snap-in) or another way that isn't woefully insecure? It's just a local admin account with no Microsoft services attached, so I could dial security down for reliability if I really had to.

How about using Task Scheduler to launch those apps with the required credentials at startup?

Shumagorath
Jun 5, 2001


Plex is apparently weird with updates if you use the service wrapper but I could get around to it. The backup has a start/stop .vbs or .bat (I forget which) so that might work.

The more elegant solution might just be to promote one of the family accounts so if they notice Plex is out they log in by themselves. The backup notifies me after three days and barely ever changes, so I could fix that whenever. Or maybe leave them as Users and teach them Run As just for Plex....

slidebite
Nov 6, 2005

Good egg


Uthor posted:

I've had poo poo not resume depending on where you are downloading from (Humble Bundle, mostly).

Ironically, I've had the resume not work when trying it right away, but going back a while later (~20 min+) it worked.

Ur Getting Fatter
Jun 9, 2007

Fast Food Fight



Grimey Drawer

Hey all, I asked a similar question ages ago but I wanted to get some updated input.

We have a small (5 person) office running G Suite for email/cloud storage (on a custom domain), and Office 365 just for the productivity apps. We've had this setup for approximately 7 years now with mostly no complaints.

I'm the one that runs the "tech side" since I'm the only one that "knows computers" and since we're probably going full remote soon, I'm thinking of moving everything to just Microsoft 365 just so that I don't have to handle 2 different configurations for everything, and also since we use Office so much it'd be nice to have the integrated cloud storage and document collaboration.

I'm just wondering if anyone's done a similar transition, or if you have any opinions about Microsoft 365 in general. Mostly I'm worried about the admin stuff being at least as easy as G Suite since I'll be handling that.

Thanks!

Thanks Ants
May 21, 2004

#essereFerrari


If you use all the Office apps then it makes very little sense to use Google Apps G Suite Google Workspace for email.

The actual migration is pretty simple, for the small amount of users you have get some BitTitan MigrationWiz licenses and follow their documentation:

https://help.bittitan.com/hc/en-us/articles/360049370794-G-Suite-Gmail-API-to-Exchange-Online-Microsoft-365-Migration-Guide

If you're going fully remote and you use Windows then consider Microsoft 365 Business Premium which has a load of endpoint management features, and probably costs the same as you're paying now for Office apps + Google.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ur Getting Fatter
Jun 9, 2007

Fast Food Fight



Grimey Drawer

Thanks, for the link!

Yeah, it's mostly a legacy thing, we had G suite from when Office 365 was a shitshow, and also M365 Business is significantly more expensive than the combo because we're on legacy G Suite pricing, but apparently that's going away soon, which prompted me to look into this.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply