Best posts made by JaredBusch

@pattonb said in bitlocker suddenly enabled:

I have checked his Microsoft account

Bitlocker can be enabled with no need of , nor record of, it being in a Microsoft account.

Customer has a bunch of Access files with macros.

Macros cannot be run because I cannot mark the shared folder as a trusted location.

File location: \\192.168.1.11\Data Mapped as k:\.

Going into Microsoft Trust center, I cannot mark the location as trusted with either syntax.

@Dashrender said in Unable to mark NAS location trusted in Office:

is K mapped with a name or an IP?

By IP.

I assume it will work when I remap it with the DNS entry.

@DustinB3403 said in Unable to mark NAS location trusted in Office:

@JaredBusch said in Unable to mark NAS location trusted in Office:

@Dashrender said in Unable to mark NAS location trusted in Office:

is K mapped with a name or an IP?

By IP.

I assume it will work when I remap it with the DNS entry.

Had this same issue, had to map via dns name rather than ip address.

Microsoft claims this is a feature.

Except this worked until 2 weeks ago by IP. So fuck you Microsoft.

user is supposed to be back int he office Thursday, so I can test this.

@JasGot said in SIP to PA System gateway just stopped audio.:

I have never setup a SIP device in VitalPBX before

Don't do this. In Asterisk land (what VitalPBX uses) SIP (meaning anything using the chan_sip driver) is dead.

chan_pjsip is still SIP, just a different driver on the server. It has zero to do with anything not on the server.

If the device or provider accept the SIP protocol (aka everything does if it is not Cisco), then server side, you can use chan_pjsip.

@scottalanmiller said in Energy efficiency?:

Weird that they would go up in price when no new models have come out in so long.

Not weird, they haven't been available for months.

@scottalanmiller said in Unattended remote access utility/ computer:

@Dashrender said in Unattended remote access utility/ computer:

@scottalanmiller said in Unattended remote access utility/ computer:

@travisdh1 said in Unattended remote access utility/ computer:

@scottalanmiller said in Unattended remote access utility/ computer:

@travisdh1 said in Unattended remote access utility/ computer:

@AdamF said in Unattended remote access utility/ computer:

@scottalanmiller

Great video. Thanks for that. Your assumption is correct. There are no PCs or servers on this network, just other networking equipment. I like the idea of the Pi and Mesh Central. I finally was able to find one and have it on order. Time to setup a mesh central vm.

I also found this as an option as well https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B082VVCFNG/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&th=1

Not too badly priced either. But I am going with the Pi.

I'm leery about anything running a Celeron J or N series CPU, a Pi is probably going to perform better.

Actually they are probably faster than the Pi. But I like the Pi more.

Not in my experience, but I've also never run Windows on a Pi.

If you run a lean Debian similar to what RP has that people typically run on an RP4 on the Celerons, it's .... similar.

Right - why would you run windows on this? just because it's Intel? Run some 'nix thing like you would on the RPi and it should be faster than the RPi.

Exactly, apples to apples it should be like 20% faster at least, maybe more. Now, it also costs more, so factor that.

But typically available right now, unlike the Pi4

@scottalanmiller said in Save shell session to disk?:

Live without the ability to survive a SERVER side reboot, and just use screen and it is designed to do this (except for the reboot thing.) You disconnect your session and can pick it back up in situ from anywhere.

This is what I don on the rare occasion that i know ahead of time that I need to preserve an environment to come back to later.

It almost never happens that I know ahead of time, and I do not like to launch screen for no reason.

@Pete-S said in Save shell session to disk?:

Is there a way you can save a shell session to disk for later recall?
It would save your current directory, environment variables, screen buffer etc.

I've never heard of anything like this. I have also never looked, but if it exists, it is not commonly known.

I assume that Debian 11 uses NetworkManager? I don't have a clean Debian system running KVM to check.

If so nmcli and its related commands are your friend.

This is from Fedora 36 + KVM:

Hardware RAID cards will not go anywhere until we have systems designed to blind swap.

I have no issues with software RAID. I use it many places. But for most SMB, it is always hardware RAID cards because I phone it in and need that blind swap capability.

@Pete-S said in UFW or IPTABLES:

So I think the current recommendation is to either stick to ufw or firewall-cmd or just use nft directly.

I try to. This was the first time I've had a need to go outside the box of ufw or firewall-cmd to use direct iptables in years.

@Dashrender said in Tenant disabling of Basic Auth cause OAUTH iPhone to break:

is it possible to know which method was used when signing in with the native client?

I signed in via the oauth web page, so basic auth should have been in solved in nothing.

This is also not the first account hit. So now, I expect something similar as MS moved through the tenants I have accounts on.

MS just disabled Basic Auth this morning on the tenant of one of my clients. Did not know and did not care, because zero things at this site use basic auth. All the users are on the current O365 version of the installed apps.

But some of the iPhone users have been spammed with the pop up to enter their Exchange password.

This pop up actually is useless on iOS, because you have to sign in to MS services with the "log in" method by going into settings (repeatedly cancelling the password pop up box) and into mail -> accounts -> then tap re-enter password to get the auth webpage.

My phone, and all the other users were correctly setup with OAUTH style "log in" for their email in the Mail app on iOS.

Disabling of Basic Auth should have done nothing.

@Pete-S said in Windows 11 versus 10:

From a sysadmin's perspective, what is the difference between these OSes?

Nothing in my opinion.

Tested and it works all the time by hostname instead of IP.

@Yonah-S said in Another new server question:

If you want to know how to get something built like that without the constraint of the online configurators - hit me up on private message.

When I buy, this is what I do.

But for quick comparison or rough ideas, the online tools are easy

@Dashrender said in Turn server into backup storage for remote servers?:

@dafyre said in Turn server into backup storage for remote servers?:

@Pete-S SSH will pretty much only be limited by the bandwidth available for you to suck in the backups.

I actually just finished a script for doing almost exactly what you said just a few days ago. I sanitized it and dropped in in Gitlab if you want to take a look.

https://gitlab.com/dafyre/linux-utils/-/blob/master/autobackup/autobackup.sh

I think I made everything a variable, but since it's sanitized, it's quite possible I missed something.

This one is for pushing backups from the server with data out to the backup server. Once you get it working, just set it up in Cron and go.

Why push instead of pull? Wouldn't pulling be safer - i.e. the webserver has no information about the backup server, so if it's compromised, it can't give anything to the attackers about the backups.

Pull is nothing but stupid complexity. It has no control over the remote system to know when backups are available and you have to pin hole each system to allow the incoming connection.

A push happens as soon as the valid backup is created, so you know that your backup is gone to location 2 almost immediately. Location 2 then sends to location 3 via a cloud sync tool. Preferably location 3 is immutable storage.

@JasGot said in Hard disk encryption without OS access?:

encrypted when at rest.

Define encrypted at rest please. From the flow of your post, I assume it means when the server is shut off.

@JasGot said in Hard disk encryption without OS access?:

The OS will decrypt it when it needs access.

This means that the data is basically not encrypted as long as the OS is booted. Also, no system works this way.

Encrypted volumes are unlocked by the OS once and remain unlocked. No system that exists in the normal space works like you are wanting.