Meh, whatever. I'll probably end up dropping Facebook again soon anyway.

@gjacobse said in Facebook - 2FA question:

I'm about to tell everyone I have 'friended' on FB to go take a flying leap... and then delete it. all I see is crap and negative.. and I deal with enough of that now.

so - 2FA - not worth my time.

I've removed friends that just post junk. But there are plenty of other things I find worth my time, such as seeing tons of photos and videos of my nieces/nephews/events I can't attend.

@irj said in Facebook - 2FA question:

Dont use facebook if you want any type of privacy or security

While I understand I could very well just not join any online community to maintain privacy, that isn't helpful.

I still want to connect with family on a common platform they are all using; but there's a balance with knowing there is personal info out there, and using 2FA.

I just called a number listed for Facebook, on a Facebook forum, and was told "having the ability to bypass the 6 digit PIN using logon approvals is a feature by design", which is a nice way of saying "it's a security issue that there is no work around for". Just before being disconnected from the call, I had requested that the call be elevated; no dice.

Haven't been on Facebook in years. I jumped back on in the last couple days after reactivating my account, to connect with some family. I notice a gaping issue with security...Configured Facebook to work with Duo/2FA; works as intended.

But if I disable all notifications about "Logon Approvals" (i.e. remembering devices, browsers, etc), disapprove any/all devices, then you can still end up bypassing 2FA. What happens is the very browser/device prompts for a password, then a code (from Duo); as intended.

But the mobile app generates an alert that says "is this you?" If you select 'yes', then the browser is stored in Logon Approvals in Facebook (Windows 10 Firefox/Chrome/etc). When you then use that browser in a new session on that same computer, you put in your password and it sends you right on through. You can remove it from the approvals page and start over; but I'm wondering how you disable that entirely so you're forced to use Duo every time.

Surely someone on here uses Facebook and 2FA is configured without Logon Approvals.

@storageninja said in Ubiquiti WiFi vs... everyone:

@bbigford said in Ubiquiti WiFi vs... everyone:

What is garbage about UBNT zero hand off that I should know about?

You get stuck with a single channel for that SSID. Can't use the full spectrum.
That makes GI WIFI sad.

I haven't had a need for channel hopping. If more throughput is needed, I've bonded channels but just kept the hand off on the same channel.

In very high density areas with users who roam a campus, what kinds of issues have you had with an SSIF having to be on one channel in that case?

@jaredbusch said in Ubiquiti WiFi vs... everyone:

Zero handoff is something that you should never use with a really, really, good reason.

The UBNT implementation of it was bad 2 years ago. Not looked into it since.

So if that is something truly required, I would do a lot of research.

Normally devices will just roll between access points without a need for zero handoff.

I had issues in the past (Ruckus) where devices would disconnect before reconnecting to a new AP. With their mesh enabled it went away immediately. Rolled through like 3 patches before someone said anything.

I didn't get a chance to see UBNT back then as I was only messing with Cisco (pre-Meraki), Ruckus, Aerohive, Aruba, etc.

What is garbage about UBNT zero hand off that I should know about?

Re: Unifi WAP nanoHD - pre order

I was just thinking about WiFi improvements with Ubiquiti over the last couple years. They've really come a long way.

This question is directed at those who have to write off Ubiquiti because of certain lacking features; whether that is for enterprise size environments or not (thousands of users).

Anymore, Ubiquiti allows for multiple SSIDs, captive portal, multi-radio, RADIUS, high AP count per controller, reporting (maybe a little limited), and zero hand off... what else is missing for some decision makers other than level of support?

@jt1001001 said in Unifi WAP nanoHD - pre order:

Of couse, right after I just bought their Lite AP. Hmm, return and wait for these? The camo one would look cool in my garage

If you're comparing those two, I absolutely would.

5GHz has better performance on the nanoHD (866 Mbps difference... 1733 compared to 867), 2.4GHz is the same at 300.

The only one I've had to stop and think about is the AC Pro. It has 150 Mbps on 2.4GHz difference (Pro favored); so better for older laptops. But 5GHz it is 433 Mbps difference (nano favored).

@dustinb3403 said in Unifi WAP nanoHD - pre order:

@bbigford said in Unifi WAP nanoHD - pre order:

https://unifi-nanohd.ubnt.com/

New project coming up, and was going through the wireless portion. This is apparently out for pre-order. Doesn't come with PoE (I have a huge box of them already as they are typically unneeded), and apparently still post the same results as the larger variant.

+10 horsepower if you get the camo skin.

The Skins would actually be pretty useful in a lot of scenarios where you want to have an AP be installed, but not so blatantly obvious.

Looks like they have lower throughput for 2.4GHz, but perform really well with 5GHz.

https://unifi-nanohd.ubnt.com/

New project coming up, and was going through the wireless portion. This is apparently out for pre-order. Doesn't come with PoE (I have a huge box of them already as they are typically unneeded), and apparently still post the same results as the larger variant.

+10 horsepower if you get the camo skin.

Canonical already tried this and gave up... I'm curious to see if this succeeds. Honestly, I think it'll fail. This is even clunkier.

I have an infrastructure upgrade project near Santa Cruz that is going to require some cat5e/6 data cabling. Probably only 20-40 home runs, so a very small job.

Anyone know of a reputable company in the area? Going to be resorting to web searching and reviews otherwise.

@dbeato said in RDP to Server without Requesting Login Details:

Yes, you can use credential delegation:

Under Computer Configuration\Policies\Administrative Templates\System\Credential Delegation

Likely the culprit. Some environments this is required to be enabled; inconvenient though.

@jaredbusch said in VoIP service in Australia:

Huh, looks like VoIP.ms has a pop there. I never knew.

Where did you find that POP locator on their site?

I've never used sipcity but I've heard good things quite a while back on another forum.

https://sipcity.com.au/

@matteo-nunziati said in Server procurement process: HP vs. Dell:

I've used hpe config site in the past

I stumbled across that earlier today. Some gripes about it; but I guess it works alright.

When configuring a server, there is a rack section where you can add a rack if needed. What doesn't make sense is some say "Rack" and others say "Add to Rack". HPE chat said they are both the same thing, but if that were the case, why wouldn't they just both say "Rack". No idea what "Add to Rack" is.

@dbeato said in vSphere power supply count:

@bbigford said in vSphere power supply count:

@dbeato said in vSphere power supply count:

How many Host though you have in Vcenter? Or is it just one server with Vmware.

3 hosts, but the hardware status that is showing is only for the one host.

I found this:
https://kb.vmware.com/s/article/1010716
might not apply but it is where I am going to.

Hmm... appears to be a known bug then due to lack of support for certain things. Maybe it'll change in 6.7 but only an upgrade will tell.

That generates another question then... Are you using HP/Dell tools (thereby having to configure VIB with the tools being on a management/LOB VM), are you relying on 3rd party systems monitoring tools/vmware/etc?

@scottalanmiller said in Has ConnectWise Set ScreenConnect Adrift as Ghost Ship Software?:

That's what I've been going on. But the fact that they do offer paid software made me wonder if you can use it for single instances as needed, or if commercial use requires a license. I have been leaning to "use it for business only if you need the added features of the paid software".

@jmoore said in Has ConnectWise Set ScreenConnect Adrift as Ghost Ship Software?:

@bbigford This is really just for me as I have a few times a year I really need something. I use DameWare at work and love it but i don't want to pay that for personal needs. I'm not a fan of teamviewer either so will replace them with nomachine.

If this is for personal use, I would absolutely recommend Jump Desktop. It's free from PC to PC. From mobile to PC the app is $9 now I believe (down from $14 last year). For commercial, it is free from what I have found; I contacted their staff about commercial use, and can find nowhere in their fine print or on the site or community about commercial use (at the time of writing this). I reached out to their sales team about terms and conditions as it's pretty standard for companies to require a license for business use, but not for personal.