Exam Marker 2

[scargman]

Hi all. How the heck do I get rid of this program? I can't find it in control panel nor does there appear to be an option in setup.

[robintech]

Before I start on ours has anyone installed the new version yet, any workarounds needed etc.

[DrBeaker]

Nope sorry - for ours unless the funds go into the school pot - It's a BIG FAT NO from above. Makes a nice change.

[jthompson]

Before I start on ours has anyone installed the new version yet, any workarounds needed etc.

 

Just installed the Summer 2024 CMI+ version. It looks like it still needs to have TLS 1.0 enabled on in order to sign in, like in previous years.

[jthompson]

Just encountered this year's E-Marker2 now. The AppLocker rule for the main executable (DRS.PLATFORM.UI.FRAMEWORK.HOST.EXE) need adjusting to update the publisher and product name:

 

Rule type: EXE publisher rule

Action: Allow

Group: [your user group]

Publisher: O=AQA MILTON KEYNES LIMITED, L=MILTON KEYNES, C=GB

Product name: E-MARKER2®

File name: DRS.PLATFORM.UI.FRAMEWORK.HOST.EXE

File version: 24.17.0.0 and above

Edited May 21, 2024 by jthompson

[paulkerton]

Just installed the Summer 2024 CMI+ version. It looks like it still needs to have TLS 1.0 enabled on in order to sign in, like in previous years.

Do we know if this is definitely the case?

 

If it is, we are probably going to get a bunch of push back about it because its a security issue... but in trade off between security and someone else's priority, it's security.

[jthompson]

Do we know if this is definitely the case?

 

If it is, we are probably going to get a bunch of push back about it because its a security issue... but in trade off between security and someone else's priority, it's security.

 

It is in our environment. Turning TLS 1.0 back on on the client gets the software working. It seems surprising given how close to deprecation TLS 1.0 must be now in regular Windows 11 home computers.

[georgeescott]

It's worked for us in recent days, by having no https inspection. I wonder if there are some other domains to account for.

 

Had to allowlist some e-marker.co.uk domains from SSL/HTTPS deep Inspection today. When testing I saw it contact the following domains.

Not sure which one(s) exactly don't like being inspected, but we've allowed them all and it's working again for our staff:

 

e1p001dirsev.e-marker.co.uk

e1p001script.e-marker.co.uk

e1p001marker.e-marker.co.uk

e1p002marker.e-marker.co.uk

e1p003marker.e-marker.co.uk

e1p004marker.e-marker.co.uk

e1p005marker.e-marker.co.uk

emp001web.e-marker.co.uk

idp001web.e-marker.co.uk

[miloshmedia]

We have one VLAN with no MITM certificate - if it is installed under this then it runs with SSL interception when moved back to the staff laptops VLAN. If installed with interception then it needs interception disabled when running, so TLDR install it with no interception and it will run with interception...

[msi_school]

It is in our environment. Turning TLS 1.0 back on on the client gets the software working. It seems surprising given how close to deprecation TLS 1.0 must be now in regular Windows 11 home computers.

 

Why pay to update the software they know most of their markers are going to shout and scream until we make it work?

[k-strider]

It is in our environment. Turning TLS 1.0 back on on the client gets the software working. It seems surprising given how close to deprecation TLS 1.0 must be now in regular Windows 11 home computers.

 

this will be disabled here soon on all clients its only done on DCs at the mo - so hopefully next years version will support TLS 1.2 or 1.3

https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/windows-it-pro-blog/tls-1-0-and-tls-1-1-soon-to-be-disabled-in-windows/ba-p/3887947

i think its the Next major relase of 11 24H2 that it wil be disabled by default - i think i read that somewhere.

[DrCheese]

ew. I had to install this last year for a few staff (Who aren't here now) but the TLS 1.0 thing would give me cover to proclaim it as toast from a security standpoint if asked for again.

 

That's really nasty, it's 2024, not 1997.

[mikes]

Just had an issue not sure if people should be aware - I had installed it on staff laptops - but a member of staff has been off sick but has still been e-marking and has uploaded something with the school logo - I don't quite understand it myself but it breaches the employment contract you shouldn't be doing work for other companies if you are off sick.

[jthompson]

I'm not sure the fact that it's installed on a school-managed device would have any bearing there. They can fall foul of that just as easily using their own device.

[thebyronic]

Hi Guys, 

 

Just wanted to add to this as we've been hounded by some of our teachers to have this installed (they had it on their old staff laptops apparently, before my time).  It's so they can do marking for the WJEC outside of their day job. 

We remembered seeing something online a while back saying it should not be installed on work devices. Of course, typical we can't find the document again today. So my colleague decided to call the WJEC application support team. 

It turns out the teachers are told not to use work devices at all, the WJEC went as far as telling us that it's in their contracts with them, to not use a work device! They mentioned things like conflicts of interest and protentional data breaches as the reasoning. 

 

Before we saw that document many months ago, we did start doing what most of you are talking about here, trying to get the damn thing working on our network! 

But now it's an easy one for us, no! Check your contract. 

 

Hope that helps some of you!

 

AB