Re: Look at this rubbish

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Enkidu, Jun 22, 2008.

  1. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Peter wrote:
    > Bobs wrote:
    > http://blogs.nzherald.co.nz/blog/mac-planet/2008/6/20/pity-poor-it-guy/?c_id=1501832
    >
    >
    >> So this tosser just connects his laptop to a corporate lan despite
    >> the person in charge of it, saying no? The look on their faces in
    >> probably one of utter amazement that this guy thinks it's perfectly
    >> acceptable to plug in a networked device onto a lan despite not
    >> having permission to do so.

    >
    > The IT folk would perhaps get on better if they explained their
    > position a bit more clearly, ... 1. the LAN is mission critical for
    > the organisation 2. the IT folk don't know what is on foreign laptops
    > (of any type) and can't be sure this doesn't threaten the LAN
    > therefore, they can't allow foreign laptops to connect to the LAN.
    >
    > (Of course, if the system is so mission critical, one wonders why
    > they chose to use the OS that all the malware was written for.)
    >
    > What they should do is provide an internet connection for visitors.
    > This can be wireless or cable, and just gives raw connectivity (no
    > firewall). More firms are providing this, and it is just common
    > courtesy IMO.
    >

    No need to go that far. A sandpit LAN with a file server and printer
    that can be safely accessed from the corporate LAN would be better. Yes,
    access from the sandpit to the Internet would be nice too.

    I'm struggling to understand WHY the Mac guy wanted to connect to the
    network anyway.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or
    'hilarious', it usually isn't?
     
    Enkidu, Jun 22, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Enkidu

    peterwn Guest

    On Jun 22, 10:33 pm, Enkidu <> wrote:
    > Peter wrote:
    > > Bobs wrote:
    > >http://blogs.nzherald.co.nz/blog/mac-planet/2008/6/20/pity-poor-it-gu...

    >
    > >> So this tosser just connects his laptop to a corporate lan despite
    > >> the person in charge of it, saying no? The look on their faces in
    > >> probably one of utter amazement that this guy thinks it's perfectly
    > >>  acceptable to plug in a networked device onto a lan despite not
    > >> having permission to do so.

    >
    > > The IT folk would perhaps get on better if they explained their
    > > position a bit more clearly, ... 1. the LAN is mission critical for
    > > the organisation 2. the IT folk don't know what is on foreign laptops
    > >  (of any type) and can't be sure this doesn't threaten the LAN
    > > therefore, they can't allow foreign laptops to connect to the LAN.

    >
    > > (Of course, if the system is so mission critical, one wonders why
    > > they chose to use the OS that all the malware was written for.)

    >
    > > What they should do is provide an internet connection for visitors.
    > > This can be wireless or cable, and just gives raw connectivity (no
    > > firewall). More firms are providing this, and it is just common
    > > courtesy IMO.

    >
    > No need to go that far. A sandpit LAN with a file server and printer
    > that can be safely accessed from the corporate LAN would be better. Yes,
    > access from the sandpit to the Internet would be nice too.
    >
    > I'm struggling to understand WHY the Mac guy wanted to connect to the
    > network anyway.
    >


    It all depends on the material facts of the case. We do not know what
    were the policies of the LAN the guy was wanting to connect to. We do
    not why the guy had a MAC, but bear in mind that MAC's are very
    popular in the graphical / creative industries. He may have been a
    contractor who was working on the client's premises for a few days a
    week, had legitimate access to the client's information, but needed to
    use a tool kit with which he was familiar. He probably had full
    approval of the CEO or other top manager, but then finds his work is
    impeded by a IT manager who 'does not want to know'.

    It is interesting that Microsoft Australia is selling academic
    versions of its stuff very cheaply (almost giving them away - It seems
    the deal is far sweeter than what Kiwi academics and students can get)
    presumably to try and ease pressures on universities to 'open up' IT
    practices and policies.

    Similarly it is interesting that prior to start of the USA University
    year, the Microsoft shills start twittering away about how Linux
    machines and MAC's are not welcome on campus.
     
    peterwn, Jun 23, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    peterwn wrote:
    >
    > It all depends on the material facts of the case. We do not know
    > what were the policies of the LAN the guy was wanting to connect to.
    > We do not why the guy had a MAC, but bear in mind that MAC's are very
    > popular in the graphical / creative industries. He may have been a
    > contractor who was working on the client's premises for a few days a
    > week, had legitimate access to the client's information, but needed
    > to use a tool kit with which he was familiar. He probably had full
    > approval of the CEO or other top manager, but then finds his work is
    > impeded by a IT manager who 'does not want to know'.
    >

    What a lot of assumptions! On the other hand he could simply be an
    obnoxious bastard! Sounds more likely from the context.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or
    'hilarious', it usually isn't?
     
    Enkidu, Jun 23, 2008
    #3
  4. Collector¤NZ <> wrote:

    > Enkidu wrote:
    > > peterwn wrote:
    > >>
    > >> It all depends on the material facts of the case. We do not know
    > >> what were the policies of the LAN the guy was wanting to connect to.
    > >> We do not why the guy had a MAC, but bear in mind that MAC's are very
    > >> popular in the graphical / creative industries. He may have been a
    > >> contractor who was working on the client's premises for a few days a
    > >> week, had legitimate access to the client's information, but needed
    > >> to use a tool kit with which he was familiar. He probably had full
    > >> approval of the CEO or other top manager, but then finds his work is
    > >> impeded by a IT manager who 'does not want to know'.
    > >>

    > > What a lot of assumptions! On the other hand he could simply be an
    > > obnoxious bastard! Sounds more likely from the context.
    > >
    > > Cheers,
    > >
    > > Cliff
    > >

    > Try my corporate Wan/Lan with 8000 plus users, a mac wouldn't even get
    > an IP let alone see any printers. Bye Bye wanker reporter.
    > Now as a Lan/Wan God (Domain Admin for the rest of you) I could register
    > his machine in the AD structure I could spend hours getting the system
    > to accept his login to the system and shares, but it would be cheaper
    > for me to give him a new machine from my stock, not to mention cheaper
    > for us to support. (TCOO)


    Why would this take hours?
    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
     
    Jamie Kahn Genet, Jun 23, 2008
    #4
  5. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Collector€NZ wrote:
    >
    > Try my corporate Wan/Lan with 8000 plus users, a mac wouldn't even
    > get an IP let alone see any printers. Bye Bye wanker reporter. Now as
    > a Lan/Wan God (Domain Admin for the rest of you) I could register his
    > machine in the AD structure I could spend hours getting the system to
    > accept his login to the system and shares, but it would be cheaper
    > for me to give him a new machine from my stock, not to mention
    > cheaper for us to support. (TCOO)
    >

    It wouldn't take hours. Minutes probably, if you could get the laptop to
    join the Domain properly. Registering it to the Domain would be tricky -
    my guess is that he would need an AD client on his machine, which Macs
    probably don't have.

    Since 'Everyone' usually has at least read access to most resources he
    could do a lot of reading and pulling down of stuff without be
    specifically given any permissions or even being joined to the Domain.

    There may be areas with 'Guest' permissions too - too many AD
    administrators use 'Guest' internally do that.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or
    'hilarious', it usually isn't?
     
    Enkidu, Jun 23, 2008
    #5
  6. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
    > Collector¤NZ <> wrote:
    >
    >> Enkidu wrote:
    >>> peterwn wrote:
    >>>> It all depends on the material facts of the case. We do not know
    >>>> what were the policies of the LAN the guy was wanting to connect to.
    >>>> We do not why the guy had a MAC, but bear in mind that MAC's are very
    >>>> popular in the graphical / creative industries. He may have been a
    >>>> contractor who was working on the client's premises for a few days a
    >>>> week, had legitimate access to the client's information, but needed
    >>>> to use a tool kit with which he was familiar. He probably had full
    >>>> approval of the CEO or other top manager, but then finds his work is
    >>>> impeded by a IT manager who 'does not want to know'.
    >>>>
    >>> What a lot of assumptions! On the other hand he could simply be an
    >>> obnoxious bastard! Sounds more likely from the context.
    >>>

    >> Try my corporate Wan/Lan with 8000 plus users, a mac wouldn't even get
    >> an IP let alone see any printers. Bye Bye wanker reporter.
    >> Now as a Lan/Wan God (Domain Admin for the rest of you) I could register
    >> his machine in the AD structure I could spend hours getting the system
    >> to accept his login to the system and shares, but it would be cheaper
    >> for me to give him a new machine from my stock, not to mention cheaper
    >> for us to support. (TCOO)

    >
    > Why would this take hours?
    >

    IMO it shouldn't. The hard part would be joining his machine to the
    Domain. But that's not necessary for resources that are not properly
    protected - eg if 'Everyone' access is at least 'read'.

    If his machine is joined to AD (and that's the hard part), then it
    becomes like any other machine on the network. Assuming he's also given
    an AD login, then setting up permissions is not that difficult and
    time-consuming.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or
    'hilarious', it usually isn't?
     
    Enkidu, Jun 23, 2008
    #6
  7. Enkidu

    Alan Guest

    "Collector€NZ" <> wrote in message
    news:485f686a$...
    > Enkidu wrote:
    >> peterwn wrote:
    >>>
    >>> It all depends on the material facts of the case. We do not know
    >>> what were the policies of the LAN the guy was wanting to connect
    >>> to.
    >>> We do not why the guy had a MAC, but bear in mind that MAC's are
    >>> very
    >>> popular in the graphical / creative industries. He may have been
    >>> a contractor who was working on the client's premises for a few
    >>> days a week, had legitimate access to the client's information,
    >>> but needed
    >>> to use a tool kit with which he was familiar. He probably had
    >>> full approval of the CEO or other top manager, but then finds his
    >>> work is impeded by a IT manager who 'does not want to know'.
    >>>

    >> What a lot of assumptions! On the other hand he could simply be an
    >> obnoxious bastard! Sounds more likely from the context.
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >>
    >> Cliff
    >>

    > Try my corporate Wan/Lan with 8000 plus users, a mac wouldn't even
    > get an IP let alone see any printers. Bye Bye wanker reporter.
    > Now as a Lan/Wan God (Domain Admin for the rest of you) I could
    > register his machine in the AD structure I could spend hours getting
    > the system to accept his login to the system and shares, but it
    > would be cheaper for me to give him a new machine from my stock, not
    > to mention cheaper for us to support. (TCOO)


    If it would work at all. If you are running NAP then I'm not even
    sure that a Mac could pass the security requirements? Not saying it
    wouldn't - just that I'm not sure and you could spend a lot of time
    trying to work it out.

    --

    Alan.

    The views expressed are my own, and not those of my employer or anyone
    else associated with me.

    My current valid email address is:



    This is valid as is. It is not munged, or altered at all.

    It will be valid for AT LEAST one month from the date of this post.

    If you are trying to contact me after that time,
    it MAY still be valid, but may also have been
    deactivated due to spam. If so, and you want
    to contact me by email, try searching for a
    more recent post by me to find my current
    email address.

    The following is a (probably!) totally unique
    and meaningless string of characters that you
    can use to find posts by me in a search engine:

    ewygchvboocno43vb674b6nq46tvb
     
    Alan, Jun 24, 2008
    #7
  8. Enkidu

    Enkidu Guest

    Bobs wrote:
    > Enkidu wrote:
    >> Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
    >>> Collector¤NZ <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Enkidu wrote:
    >>>>> peterwn wrote:
    >>>>>> It all depends on the material facts of the case. We do not know
    >>>>>> what were the policies of the LAN the guy was wanting to connect to.
    >>>>>> We do not why the guy had a MAC, but bear in mind that MAC's are very
    >>>>>> popular in the graphical / creative industries. He may have been a
    >>>>>> contractor who was working on the client's premises for a few days a
    >>>>>> week, had legitimate access to the client's information, but needed
    >>>>>> to use a tool kit with which he was familiar. He probably had full
    >>>>>> approval of the CEO or other top manager, but then finds his work is
    >>>>>> impeded by a IT manager who 'does not want to know'.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> What a lot of assumptions! On the other hand he could simply be an
    >>>>> obnoxious bastard! Sounds more likely from the context.
    >>>>>
    >>>> Try my corporate Wan/Lan with 8000 plus users, a mac wouldn't even get
    >>>> an IP let alone see any printers. Bye Bye wanker reporter.
    >>>> Now as a Lan/Wan God (Domain Admin for the rest of you) I could
    >>>> register
    >>>> his machine in the AD structure I could spend hours getting the system
    >>>> to accept his login to the system and shares, but it would be cheaper
    >>>> for me to give him a new machine from my stock, not to mention cheaper
    >>>> for us to support. (TCOO)
    >>>
    >>> Why would this take hours?
    >> >

    >> IMO it shouldn't. The hard part would be joining his machine to the
    >> Domain. But that's not necessary for resources that are not properly
    >> protected - eg if 'Everyone' access is at least 'read'.
    >>
    >> If his machine is joined to AD (and that's the hard part), then it
    >> becomes like any other machine on the network. Assuming he's also
    >> given an AD login, then setting up permissions is not that difficult
    >> and time-consuming.

    >
    > Or the elitist wanker can just use a laptop from the company that is
    > supported, proven to work, and is already preconfigured and requires a
    > whole 0 minutes of work time. What happens if you spend 15 mins
    > configuring one elitist wankers laptop (be it apple or windows) only for
    > five more to come the next day, and then ten the next day? What happens
    > if you are required to change settings on their PERSONAL laptops to get
    > it to work on the lan, and then they take it home and can;t get it to
    > work on their home lan and call you at 11pm pissed off. Believe me,
    > these wankers exist...I've been there.
    >

    Best one is where they decide that what they need is to connect to their
    local workgroup, so they configure their laptops, bring it back to work
    and wonder why they can't connect to the domain. Even after you told
    them NOT to do it. Several times. We had one guy who would do it *every
    time* he took the laptop home (about once a month).

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or
    'hilarious', it usually isn't?
     
    Enkidu, Jun 24, 2008
    #8
  9. Enkidu

    Fantail Guest

    Cliff said:

    > Best one is where they decide that what they need is to connect to their
    > local workgroup, so they configure their laptops, bring it back to work
    > and wonder why they can't connect to the domain. Even after you told
    > them NOT to do it. Several times.


    So how does one do it? (Print from a work laptop, set up for a
    corporate domain, to a local printer on an XP PC at home.)

    Regards, John
     
    Fantail, Jun 25, 2008
    #9
  10. Enkidu

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <f9810718-a026-4bb5-a620-71ba33bba795
    @u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, says...
    > Cliff said:
    >
    > > Best one is where they decide that what they need is to connect to their
    > > local workgroup, so they configure their laptops, bring it back to work
    > > and wonder why they can't connect to the domain. Even after you told
    > > them NOT to do it. Several times.

    >
    > So how does one do it? (Print from a work laptop, set up for a
    > corporate domain, to a local printer on an XP PC at home.)


    Being on a domain doesn't stop one from connecting to "things" on a
    workgroup at home. Most of the users I know doing this just logon to
    the domain (at home) (using cached credentials) and still have an
    internet connection (DHCP) and that's all they do. However, you could
    logoff and logon to the notebook itself (not the domain logon).

    --
    Duncan
     
    Dave Doe, Jun 25, 2008
    #10
  11. Enkidu

    Rhino Guest

    On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:02:44 +1200, Dave Doe <> wrote:

    >Being on a domain doesn't stop one from connecting to "things" on a
    >workgroup at home. Most of the users I know doing this just logon to
    >the domain (at home) (using cached credentials) and still have an
    >internet connection (DHCP) and that's all they do. However, you could
    >logoff and logon to the notebook itself (not the domain logon).

    If i use my work laptop at home, I login to the local machine (not the
    domain login) and have it setup to reconnect all my shares to
    workgroup drives and printers.

    All done via my wireless AP and works brilliantly.

    Cheers, Rhino
     
    Rhino, Jun 25, 2008
    #11
  12. Enkidu

    EMB Guest

    Fantail wrote:
    > So how does one do it? (Print from a work laptop, set up for a
    > corporate domain, to a local printer on an XP PC at home.)


    Logging onto the domain at home works quite well for me.
     
    EMB, Jun 25, 2008
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Tony Evans

    Blocking Rubbish

    Tony Evans, Jun 28, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    1,077
  2. Jekyll and Hyde

    Re: Look at this rubbish

    Jekyll and Hyde, Jun 21, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    711
    Enkidu
    Jun 25, 2008
  3. Roger Johnstone

    Re: Look at this rubbish

    Roger Johnstone, Jun 21, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    649
    Enkidu
    Jun 23, 2008
  4. PeeCee

    Re: Look at this rubbish

    PeeCee, Jun 21, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    318
    Jamie Kahn Genet
    Jun 22, 2008
  5. peterwn

    Re: Look at this rubbish

    peterwn, Jun 21, 2008, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    321
    Enkidu
    Jun 22, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page