Another company that are looking good so far are varidion www.varidion.com
Been looking through the offerings from virgin, bt, etc and came across them. They use Palo Alto Networks firewalls and the filtering options are amazing also looks quite easy to use.
I don't know any more about them so can't actually say if they are any good or not but the web demo looked really good.
Has any one else used them or have anything to say about them?
Just got a really good price for 1Gb from Virgin..........
I too are having doubts about LGFL2. Apparently the broadband consortium decided that logmein should be blocked - an unknown group that doesn't consult with the users. Why are we being dictated to by a supplier!!
Originally Posted by vhannaford
I can understand LGFL taking the decision to lock down on LogMeIn as they suggest it is not as secure as other methods and it does not leave a proper log so that if there ever was a security breach at a school, it would be extremely difficult to work out exactly what had happened, how etc.
I fully endorse their decision to make things more secure, we would all be the first to complain if there was ever a security breach and LGFL were unable to help work out who had done it.
However, the inflexible way this change is set to be implemented is a real cause for concern. Why on earth they don’t allow a school to make their own individual decision on allowing the use of LogMeIn or not I do not know.
If a school chooses to allow Facebook.com on their internet filtering policy, the school first takes the decision and also accepts responsibility for any issues that may arise from this choice. I don’t know why the blocking of LogMeIn cannot be made the decision of the school head for each individual school.
As some other users on the forum here have very rightly pointed out, schools have to pay for this directly from their own budgets since the HTG has stopped so unless LGFL can bend to the requirements of schools and deliver what we want, and allow things we have come to rely on, they may well see a flock of schools looking elsewhere.
CentraStage – the proposed replacement for LogMeIn for LGFL 2.0 looks impressive, it boasts many features that LogMeIn does not have, however none of the support companies my school work with use this. It is going to cost them extra as they will need to pay LGFL or CentraStage a subscription to use this system and we all know where that extra cost will get passed down to. All of a sudden, LGFL’s assurance that CentraStage will be free for all schools does not ring entirely true as yes, directly the school will not have to pay, but indirectly, via our support providers, we will be as our support costs will go up as a result of this new charge.
I'm not sure that's true - I think the idea is that WE have the subscription as part of LGFL and then when we need support from $company, we send them a url/code and then they can connect to our system. A bit like logmein123 in reverse.
Originally Posted by talksr
Since posting my above post #34, I have been informed by Martin from Atomwide that 3rd party support providers will also be able to use CentraStage or Rav3 for free just as the schools are able to.
I am glad he let me know as we were under the impression that these companies may well need to pay for subscriptions for this and we were expecting these charges would be passed down to us via our yearly subscription charges to their support service.
Just to let people know that as a school that has recently swapped to LGFL2.0 we are having a few issues.
The Web Filtering package is not easy to use and not even as intuative as the old NetSweeper although changes do happen instantly.
RAv3 is pants! it is impossible to test from within the LGFL and the support team seem to think we all have secondary broadband connections which we can use to test remote access or the resources to spend a day at home testing the services. Despite setting everything up we still cannot FTP to our LGFL hosted website from outside the school. However we have managed to get RDP working to allow our LEA to support our SIMS system.
BTW Team Viewer DOES work both in and out. You may have to have an account on the Team Viewer system but things do work OK.
No-one has mentioned Centra Stage to us despite a number of sevice calls and cases being rasied on the matter of remote access.
We do use our own firewall as well and have had to set up a number of NAT addresses to get things operational.
Contact me if anyone needs more info.
The LGFL people maintain that logmein is a security risk. If a computer is stolen then the whole network is put at risk. When logging in to logmein I have to enter a password and this isn't kept at the remote computer so there is no security risk. I think we should all shout and maybe they will change their minds.
People get confused between log me in rescue (log me in 123) and log me in remote access. Its the remote access that caused the security risk, and I am highly supportive of banning that. Log me in rescue is not such a risk (although there is still some risk), however according the LGFL its not possible for them to distinguish between the services at the firewall level so they blocked it completely. I can see the reasoning but it does cause problems with remote support.
Can anyone tell me of a security breach. I was told of a pcs stolen from a house could cause problems as passwords could be held locally for any user to access. I have to put the servers password in to access the servers which isn't stored on the local pc.
I can’t give any examples of security breaches, but if a computer linked to a school was stolen from a home, then it would be the responsibility of the head at the school for any security breaches and not the LGFL? Also, if this was the case, I would have thought the passwords on the server would be changed pretty quickly circumventing any potential security breaches from the stole equipment.
I don’t know what the problem is with the LGFL allowing schools on an individual basis to unlock logmein if they agree any security breaches that occur as a result are the responsibility of the school and not LGFL. We have used LogMeIn at my school for a number of years and it is used safely and responsibly. It is a real life saver of a product, both LogMeIn Rescue (123) and also LogMeIn remote access as well as Hamachi.
I can totally understand the reasoning behind the decisions by the LGFL but do not agree with the idea of blanket banning such a product. It needs to be up to the individual school in question as to whether or not they allow such a product to be used via their internet connection, which they are paying for.
Does anyone know if Centra Stage is available for "testing". As I have posted, we have been able to get Team Viewer working but they have blocked the website at the top level so you can't allow it. RAv3 is still not really up to the job as parts of it just do not work and the support team seem to ignore protests.
Interesting reading this thread. I'm in Buckinghamshire on the BucksGFL network supplied to our LEA by Atomwide. We too find RAV3 unworkable as many features simply do not work. However, while logmein is banned I do have access to LogMeIn Rescue (logmein123).
Originally Posted by esucmn
I attended the NC course last week and sat there thinking we have been mis-sold.
I will be writing to the Chief Executive regarding the way they have approached this.
The whole bunch of services included in their provision makes me think they are unaware of how schools operated under previous suppliers. We signed up for the service because we were interested in using the web filtering but now it seems we cannot, since we have our own firewall.
LGfL 2.0 wants Admin staff to enter details of student/staff into SIMS and then this to be updated to their system to create a USO account! That is all very interesting! So our domain user accounts will now have to be created by Atomwide using their pan-London database? And all these just so that users can suffer even more restriction when trying to gain remote access to the school network.
No equipment has been delivered or installed on our site so we are sure to pull out of this big brother system.
It all sounds very good to certain schools when they hear of secure e-mail, secure storage, digital signage, IP telephony, etc. But for schools who have had these services for more than 10 years now, this is one major disruption especially when you are told you have to make changes to your Network in order to benefit from these services.
We spent the course going over how to create mailboxes on @lgflmail.org (as if there are still schools who do not already have their own e-mail addresses and domain associated with their school name). How do you communicate to your staff that their e-mail addresses will now be @lgflmail.org? Makes no sense to me
How about the ADSynch which promises to redesign your AD for you! So policies developed over 10 years will have to be re-applied.
This service was clearly not for us and details should have been made available last March when they were harrassing people to sign up.
Anyone got ideas of alternative ISPs?
Shaun _dark_Lord - have you heard from the Chief Executive? Are they likely to shift in their position and allow schools who are used to a certain degree of autonomy to decide how secure they want their network and what remote access utilities they wish to use?
This 'one size fits all approach' simply will not work for us. So I quit!
I really hope this works for you but LGFLs position is that we have signed the contract, the contact has begun (despite no equipment), we are stuck. We've been trying to wiggle out of this for months with no luck. We had a much much better offer from BT - I advise trying to beat them up on the price and they will come down. We got 100Mb/s from BT down to half what LGFL were asking.
Originally Posted by jacksonwalsh
If you can find a loophole in this apparently water tight contract please let us know!