I have a github account, and I just visited my home page there and saw:
<person> started following you
1 hour ago
<anotherperson> started following you
yesterday
And all I can think is: “that’s creepy as hell”.
I think the temporal proximity makes it worse. They might as well say “Don’t turn around! They’re right behind you!!”
It’s THEM.
I felt like I’d solved a murder. The main suspect was the PC but the culprit was the TV in the other room. And he almost got away with it!!!
the tv maybe doing something stupid, but if something attached to the network can break your computer’s os, the OS has problems of its own.
Yeah, but you don’t expect Windows to get things right.
I expect windows to not have a trivial to exploit dos attack. It often fails to meet my expectations.
Joining in here temporarily to ask a question.
What do you people recommend for a relatively straight forward networking solution?
Context At the church I attend we are struggling with the number of connections people make. We use it for Audio/Visual networking (Dante/NDI), the worship team connecting to mix their IEM mix and checking kids in for church.
Currently using the BT business supplied router and several dumb netgear switches with a repurposed comsuner router in the main hall. The main phone line comes in the back hall and we sling an ethernet cable between them.
We need wired access for the AV network but everything else can be over WiFi.
Ideally management would be simple and we can VLAN the AV stuff and give that priority.
Do you have a network tech on staff? If so, Mikrotik (or give them an old PC to build their own). If you need an easy-to-use interface, Ubiquiti/UniFi.
For wifi access points, which really ought to be a separate thing from the router,I love UniFi.
The staff are currently a part time ops manager and a full time pastor
We have myself, an Apple business deployment person and a university network tech attending the church. So between us we can get something deployed.
The key thing is we won’t be able to respond quickly to issues.
UniFi or TP-Omada seem to be the way to go.
Aruba instant on is also worth looking at.
I’ve been using unifi stuff for years. The hardware (especially the radios) are great. The software sucks. The testing process is “the users will find the bugs”, and on average, releases introduce bugs faster than they get fixed.
We used UniFi at my work for a few years and had no complaints. It was super easy to set up and it just worked. We only started having some weird calling over WiFi issues once we changed over to Aruba, where phones just will not ring when called sometimes.
We have had a bunch of problems with WiFi calling. A lot was because the vlans philones are put on are ipv6 only. Cisco APs had some bugs that kept android devices from working, Aruba APs had other weird bugs, and juniper firewalls had a bug where they miscalculate a checksum for something, which breaks a few things, but only some of the time (because if it were always wrong, even juniper would notice). All of those bugs have been fixed, except for some users who have home APs that IPsec tunnel to the office network, because fixing this breaks other things.
I can’t make phone calls in my home office because of this— I am in the basement, and have poor cellular service, and my phone is configured to use the company WiFi network if is available. Since I make about two phone calls per year, this doesn’t bother me too much.
commandline of the week:
… --yes-I-know-this-is-the-express-train-to-clowntown …
And, indeed, it was a very fast trip in a peculiarly crowded car.
In “technology actually making my life easier” news…
I recently started working with a new-to-me but rather old code base, and quickly found that coding styles varied wildly across the files (ick), and some of the files (including some third-party libraries which aren’t really fair game for editing) had some very long code comment lines. The authors clearly weren’t fans of breaking comments over multiple lines, and when they did it was clear that they were using a very wide editing screen.
I invariably have at least two side-by-side editing windows, and I use large fonts compared to most folks (and hence fewer columns – with a two-window layout I get 92 in each), and so the comments were frequently a mess to read unless I dropped back to only a single window, which I didn’t want to have to do. I could enable word-wrapping in the buffer, but then the code would be wrapped as well as the comments, which I find hinders code comprehension. All in all, I could see this being a highly frustrating issue for me.
Fortunately my text editor is programmable, so I set about writing an extension to make it wrap code comments smartly (before words whenever possible, and with a wrap prefix based on a variety of common patterns to make things line up nicely).
In short, it’s working great! It even re-wraps dynamically when I change the window size (thanks to some prior art which taught me how to approach that), so it’s always wrapping at the edge of the window. So while the actual text might contain things like:
/**
* @param string|object $v is a timestamp string in YYYY-MM-DD HH-NN-SS format
*
* @return mixed date in unix timestamp format, or 0 if before TIMESTAMP_FIRST_YEAR, or false if invalid date format
*/
and
$QUOTE_FIELDNAMES; // Allows you to force quotes (backticks) around field names in queries generated by getinsertsql and getupdatesql.
My editor will display it to me something like this:
/**
* @param string|object $v is a timestamp string in
* YYYY-MM-DD HH-NN-SS format
*
* @return mixed date in unix timestamp format, or 0 if
* before TIMESTAMP_FIRST_YEAR, or false if
* invalid date format
*/
and
$QUOTE_FIELDNAMES; // Allows you to force quotes
// (backticks) around field names in
// queries generated by getinsertsql
// and getupdatesql.
(Albeit not normally quite that narrow, but it emphasised it better. If the comments were multi-line paragraphs then it might not look as clean as that – some of the fake lines might be “too short” – but it’s always more readable than it would have been otherwise.)
Naturally, after I had it mostly working I thought of a better way of doing it :). I’m not sure if I’ll pursue that, though – I’m pretty happy with the current version.
We have a machine or two at work that could use such a sign.
Sent this to Mastodon earlier but it seems appropriate here too.
I have reported one of our internal services as phishing before, because I guess IT (or whoever set it up) couldn’t be bothered to not make it look incredibly suspicious…
I had the same, which was training. The manager responsible for it got cross about the phishing report, until other managers told him it was obvious phishing.
The time someone tried social engineering us, masquerading as a call from IT, they got our awkward Yorkshireman and gave up.
I avoid this by not reading my work email.
