251–260 of 456 posts
AFAIK, the Oauth claims of SharePoint don't allow specifying particular projects only. (BTW: same counts for platforms like ACC/BIM360)
We need more Red Hat and less Microsoft in the on-prem enterprise business. These exploitable vulnerabilities are unacceptable when your customers are the likes of DoD. No one considers Google anything less than an impenetrable fortress, but when it's some government entity responsible for keeping American lives safe it's like "ah yeah they probably have a vulnerable on-prem Sharepoint that could easily be pwned." So…
Did you already forget about log4j?
Senior VP at CrowdStrike, so a professional in destroying large amounts of systems.
> cybersecurity firm
Sure, might as well call it that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why bother when not a single vulnerability has resulted in any appreciable fines or loss of market share? it's absurd how untouchable their ubiquity has become.
They’re the Boeing of software. They go down with the ship, but, critically, it means they also can’t go down until and unless the ship also does. It’s a symbiotic relationship that allows them to stop having to spend resources to compete in the market on merit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust is very popular and quickly getting adopted. The number of Debian packages that use Rust libraries more then doubled and is now at 8% https://www.phoronix.com/news/Rust-Debian-2025
Rust has never been successfully used to develop large-scale software of the size of SharePoint, Exchange, or anything of that order of magnitude: gigabytes of compiled code with the main executable being 10s of megabytes in size. An observation I've made about Rust is that because it eschews OOP, it tends not to "scale" to large development teams for single applications. It's great for CLI tools, small web apps, etc…
> CISA advises vulnerable organizations [...] to disconnect affected products from the public-facing Internet until an official patch is available. It's interesting to me that you'd go the hassle of hosting your own SharePoint on prem, but leave it internet facing. I would have assumed a the Venn diagram of these organizations to be entirely contained in orgs forcing you to use a VPN.
It likely will be entirely contained, at least in theory. Because is your IT and OT isolated? They should be, but man could I tell you something about the energy and public sectors... Let's just say, that if you're in an organisation with any sort of OT, then you may as well assume that everything you have is facing the internet in some way. I suspect it's frankly like this in any sort of enterprise organisation getting worse the more the org views IT purely as a cost center.
This is why we don't just rely on things like VPNs. Everything we have uses port security (mac-adresses) at a much more ganular level than the VPN does. At least for the parts of our systems landscape where this is possible. With something like SharePoint it's hard to allow specific devices because it's usually something everyone should have some sort of access to. Then you have all the organisations where SharePoint also has some sort of non-VPN access because some CEO level wanted it at one point since they can't be bothered to bring a work PC to their Holiday home.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Private Teams messages are stored in individual Exchange mailboxes. Good lord. It truly is a layer of dung layered upon more layers of dung.
To be fair exchange works quite well for mail and calendar, it syncs very fast, is easy to set up and the cloud version is easy to administer (i never had to admin an on-prem exchange but ive heard its not fun). Using this infra for teams makes sense since it already works well. As one poster said, its probably via some hidden folder. I wonder what they did with skype, did they actually integrate any of it into teams…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rust has never been successfully used to develop large-scale software of the size of SharePoint, Exchange, or anything of that order of magnitude: gigabytes of compiled code with the main executable being 10s of megabytes in size. An observation I've made about Rust is that because it eschews OOP, it tends not to "scale" to large development teams for single applications. It's great for CLI tools, small web apps, etc…
Gigabytes of compiled source code sounds kind of sus, considering size of chromium and linux kernel etc.
Chromium is similar. It's practically an operating system now, it even has USB drivers! I had to compile Chromium from scratch once, for which I spun up a 120-core cloud VM with 456 GB of memory so that it wouldn't take all day.
With Rust... that would take all week even on that box.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most enterprise PCs are Windows machines and integrate with Microsoft services easily. The only way Microsoft is going to lose the enterprise market is if enterprise PCs move away from Windows. But, for enterprises, the only reasonable migration away from Windows is Mac. JAMF Pro for Mac can be hosted on-premise on Linux. The majority of enterprise software runs on Mac. However, Macs are expensive so it's unlikely to…
"Hardware support for Linux PCs is poor and lacks the manageable of Windows PCs with Active Directory and GPO, or JAMF for Macs. Enterprise software usually doesn't support Linux. Linux PCs are uncommon for personal use and corporations don't want to train users how to use Linux." I would dispute the "hardware support" comment. Linux has pretty good hardware support nowadays. And "enterprise" software is a vague term…