On 06.10.2018 г. 19:42, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:> Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in > news:gskhrdtud3u1jf0fi8un1si04cja0t9382@4ax.com: > >>> Always backup first for one thing, and I still >>> think you did something to cause the loss. >> >> The first step to solving a problem really is to blame someone, but >> never blame the person in charge of fixing the problem. They might >> get angry and do nothing. >> > > Especially when the FIRST thing they are ALWAYS supposed to do is perform a > backup. Yeah... you might get angry and... start blaming Microsoft for > your missteps. >At that frequency of "updates" I hear windows 10 is doing backing up a a few terabytes all the time sounds the practical thing to do, yeah. Dimiter ====================================================== Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com ====================================================== http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/
Supermicro server motherboards with hardware backdoor?
Started by ●October 4, 2018
Reply by ●October 6, 20182018-10-06
Reply by ●October 6, 20182018-10-06
On 10/06/18 17:55, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:> On 06.10.2018 г. 19:42, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote: >> Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in >> news:gskhrdtud3u1jf0fi8un1si04cja0t9382@4ax.com: >> >>>> Always backup first for one thing, and I still >>>> think you did something to cause the loss. >>> >>> The first step to solving a problem really is to blame someone, but >>> never blame the person in charge of fixing the problem. They might >>> get angry and do nothing. >>> >> >> Especially when the FIRST thing they are ALWAYS supposed to do is >> perform a >> backup. Yeah... you might get angry and... start blaming Microsoft for >> your missteps. >> > > At that frequency of "updates" I hear windows 10 is doing backing up a > a few terabytes all the time sounds the practical thing to do, yeah. > > Dimiter > > ====================================================== > Dimiter Popoff, TGI http://www.tgi-sci.com > ====================================================== > http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/ > > > >I wouldn't touch win 10 with yours, never mind my own. Completely untrustworthy if you value personal or even corporate privacy. Modern systems are getting so complex, who can verify what's been hidden in either the hardware or software ?. This report has really been a wakeup call for me, even though it doesn't impact work here at all. Never even considered that substitute or added h/w might have been fitted, but state level actors have the resources to do just that. Where are most of the management engine cpus made, for example ?... Chris
Reply by ●October 6, 20182018-10-06
Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> wrote in news:ppapdd$s8$1@dont-email.me:> > At that frequency of "updates" I hear windows 10 is doing backing up a > a few terabytes all the time sounds the practical thing to do, yeah. >The word for today is "Incremental" No guarantees that it will get properly interpreted. Still not convinced that it ws the update that caused it. Perhaps there was activity taking place during the update that should not have been. I set all my machines to manual and update regularly with that being all that runs during the update.
Reply by ●October 6, 20182018-10-06
Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> wrote in news:ppauu1$11ja$1 @gioia.aioe.org:> I wouldn't touch win 10 with yours, never mind my own. Completely > untrustworthy if you value personal or even corporate privacy. > Modern systems are getting so complex, who can verify what's been > hidden in either the hardware or software ?. >Ummm... the millions of folks using it. Particularly the pro installations.
Reply by ●October 6, 20182018-10-06
On 07.10.2018 г. 01:40, DLUNU wrote:> Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> wrote in news:ppapdd$s8$1@dont-email.me: > >> >> At that frequency of "updates" I hear windows 10 is doing backing up a >> a few terabytes all the time sounds the practical thing to do, yeah. >> > > The word for today is "Incremental" > > No guarantees that it will get properly interpreted. > > Still not convinced that it ws the update that caused it. Perhaps there > was activity taking place during the update that should not have been. > > I set all my machines to manual and update regularly with that being all > that runs during the update. >Do you claim you can switch autoupdate on windows 10 and go manually? That would be news I suppose.
Reply by ●October 6, 20182018-10-06
On 07.10.2018 г. 01:41, DLUNU wrote:> Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> wrote in news:ppauu1$11ja$1 > @gioia.aioe.org: > >> I wouldn't touch win 10 with yours, never mind my own. Completely >> untrustworthy if you value personal or even corporate privacy. >> Modern systems are getting so complex, who can verify what's been >> hidden in either the hardware or software ?. >> > > Ummm... the millions of folks using it. Particularly the pro > installations. >Millions or billions of users do not change the facts. Yes, millions are hooked and have no reasonable escape option, which is why windows 10 still has a market share - and why nobody cares to try to make something to replace it, because the effort looks (is) doomed.
Reply by ●October 6, 20182018-10-06
On 10/06/18 23:40, DLUNU wrote:> Dimiter_Popoff<dp@tgi-sci.com> wrote in news:ppapdd$s8$1@dont-email.me: > >> >> At that frequency of "updates" I hear windows 10 is doing backing up a >> a few terabytes all the time sounds the practical thing to do, yeah. >> > > The word for today is "Incremental" > > No guarantees that it will get properly interpreted. > > Still not convinced that it ws the update that caused it. Perhaps there > was activity taking place during the update that should not have been. > > I set all my machines to manual and update regularly with that being all > that runs during the update.Good luck with that, wading back through all the incrementals for system recovery. Sounds like seriously hard work for present day sysadmins :-)... Chris
Reply by ●October 6, 20182018-10-06
On 07/10/18 09:41, DLUNU wrote:> Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> wrote in news:ppauu1$11ja$1 > @gioia.aioe.org: > >> I wouldn't touch win 10 with yours, never mind my own. Completely >> untrustworthy if you value personal or even corporate privacy. >> Modern systems are getting so complex, who can verify what's been >> hidden in either the hardware or software ?. >> > > Ummm... the millions of folks using it. Particularly the pro > installations.Microsoft doesn't have users. They have hostages.
Reply by ●October 7, 20182018-10-07
On Sat, 6 Oct 2018 16:42:01 +0000 (UTC), DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:>Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in >news:gskhrdtud3u1jf0fi8un1si04cja0t9382@4ax.com: > >>>Always backup first for one thing, and I still >>>think you did something to cause the loss. >> >> The first step to solving a problem really is to blame someone, but >> never blame the person in charge of fixing the problem. They might >> get angry and do nothing.>Especially when the FIRST thing they are ALWAYS supposed to do is perform a >backup. Yeah... you might get angry and... start blaming Microsoft for >your missteps.Well, ok. If you need a detailed procedure on how to assign the blame, I can provide one. 1. The first step is to deny that there's a problem. If the problem goes away, you win, and can stop right here. If not, precede to the next step. 2. The next step is to misidentify the problem in a manner that deflects the blame from the obvious culprit and delivers it to your worst enemy. For example, if Microsoft delivers a self destructive Windoze update, it must be President Trump's fault. 3. When blaming your worst enemy no longer draws the necessary attention, the next step is to blame the innocent. The could mean a former employee, another department, the janitor, or anyone who is incapable of properly defending themselves. 4. Blaming the innocent will inevitably fail, but should give you time for the next step, which is appoint a committee of luminaries, experts, academics, and con artists who will approach the problem from as many directions as there are members, and reach an equal number of conclusions. Extra credit for also providing an equal number of useless solutions to the problem. 5. When the committee inevitably fails, a very expensive consultant will be hired to properly assign the blame. Of course he will be hired by the obvious culprit who cannot be blamed or the consultant might not get paid. 6. The absence of a suitable culprit is not a sufficient reason to bypass the punishment phase of the process. No progress can be made unless someone has been punished for allowing things to gone wrong. Generally, it will be someone already scheduled for early retirement, or perhaps someone who is disliked by management. Once out of the way, this person can also be blamed for a variety of other things that have gone wrong. Don't worry, they won't talk because they are collecting their golden parachute retirement pay off. I forgot to mention if someone accidentally finds the initiative to make a proper backup, the backup media will soon disappear to insure that the backup thief gets credit for finding the all important backups after a frantic search. I hope this help you understand the process should anyone actually trust you do solve a computer problem. (Hint: File by file incremental backups suck and are a giant time burn. Backing up only user data is worse. The only backup that really works for me are image backups and rsync type backups). -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Reply by ●October 7, 20182018-10-07
On Sun, 07 Oct 2018 11:56:53 +1100, Clifford Heath wrote:> On 07/10/18 09:41, DLUNU wrote: >> Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> wrote in news:ppauu1$11ja$1 >> @gioia.aioe.org: >> >>> I wouldn't touch win 10 with yours, never mind my own. Completely >>> untrustworthy if you value personal or even corporate privacy. Modern >>> systems are getting so complex, who can verify what's been hidden in >>> either the hardware or software ?. >>> >>> >> Ummm... the millions of folks using it. Particularly the pro >> installations. > > Microsoft doesn't have users. They have hostages.Succinctly put! :-) The last of Microsoft's customers who could still regard themselves as "Users" were running win2kSP4. After that with winXP, Microsoft's customers were on the downhill slope to becoming hostages. It started gently at first becoming a cliff like plummet into the depths of what Microsoft rather ironically named "Vista", after which it somehow just kept going from bad to worse. -- Johnny B Good
