jthompson

I think it's reasonable for governments to take a role in this. After all, things like TV advertising are regulated to protect consumers, even though watching TV is a voluntary thing. The reality is that most people on Facebook are going to be using the service at face value, and not pondering the ins and outs of data protection implications of having data stored and processed overseas. That's perfectly reasonable, and it's reasonable also for them to expect governments to be taking care of the consumer protection side of things, at least to some degree.

Weird. It's probably not a 'broken' mandatory profile as such, just that the mandatory profile is missing something that gets included in local profiles for those systems. You'd have to see if you can spot any profile-based processes under local profiles that when killed, trigger the Fn key issue, and work from there.

If you were/are an EU citizen and didn't want a large firm like Facebook processing your data in another territory, then you'd probably need to have governments make that case on your behalf, as they're just about the only entity with enough bargaining power.

Could it be some helper agent installed with a driver that's not running under affected profiles for some reason, but does for admin? Without that helper agent the keyboard behaves wrongly?

Oil believe it when I see it.

Does the keyboard have an FN lock? It does sound like a manufacturing fault, though.

As much as I'm not a fan of FB et al, I can imagine that plenty of European businesses rely on those platforms to generate their business. The political response, whilst amusing, is likely lacking any real substance. Much like FB itself!

There mayo may not be any more eggs puns left, though.

Having recently had to do the usual faff to get Surpass SecureClient working and updating successfully, I was confronted with the task of getting the separate Surpass Viewer application to work. Given the death of Flash, this is a separate standalone app that's provided to allow for the marking of exams. That aspect is apparently still Flash-based and not yet updated to HTML5, hence the need for a separate app. For extra painfulness, it installs to the user profile, so needs to be installed by the end user. I thought I'd post this to save others the time and effort of wrestling with it. Three AppLocker 'executable' rules: A publisher rule to allow the downloaded setup exe to run A path rule to allow %OSDRIVE%\Users\*\AppData\Local\SurpassViewer\* Another path rule to allow %OSDRIVE%\Users\*\AppData\Local\SquirrelTemp\* The last one is used during installation. Given the need for wildcarded path rules in user profiles, maybe limit the rules to as minimal a group of users as possible.

In terms of blocking it with AppLocker, if you manage your GPOs from a server, you might not have the Calculator app present on the server when attempting to create a rule for it. You go to browse for an app to block and it's not there. You can get around that IIRC by going through the same steps on a Windows client system that does have the app, only using its local security policy editor instead of Group Policy editor, and copy and pasting the app ID (or whatever is needed) from that wizard over to your GPO.

Not encountered that before. At a guess I would say that it's down to something specific that the installer is attempting to do during the installation process. Maybe something like trying to add a device?

Weird one. I'd be tempted to see if the problem exists on a non-Windows OS, and also whether a USB keyboard plugged into the laptop exhibits the same behaviour as the built-in one does.

You may say that. I couldn't possibly comment

This is the table I used. I don't know that it would count as a cipher. Slightly the wrong way around in that the top line of each pair is the ciphertext (i.e. the letter used in the URL) and the lower line is the corresponding plaintext letter. abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

Having a quick look at that, it's a straightforward translation. Each position has a different offset. 1st letter: a->e 2nd letter: a->m 3rd letter: a->j 4th letter: a->x 5th letter: a->p By my reckoning, that means that https://mywordle.me/?word=yfrfv should have the solution "crack".

If the software is in the form of a deployable MSI, then you can do this using a GPO. Apply the GPO at the required users in AD, and add the packages to "User Configuration > Policies > Software Settings > Software installation". Set the deployment option as "Published" rather than "Assigned". The software will available for users to install via the Control Panel ("Install a program from the network").

Quick, make an NFT of the source code and sell it!

Got it in 6. I must admit I was thrown by an aspect of your Wordle that was a divergence from regulation Wordle.

Not come across that. We don't use Outlook web app here and it sounds like it's owa that's getting the grump with a particular message. Does the staff member who's sending the message each day use an exisitng message as the basis of the new one each day (or paste in content from some other application when composing it)? One thing to test after it next happens would be to have the sender copy the body of an offending message, start composing a new message,Ctrl+Shift+V to paste the content as plaintext without any formatting, and send it to a recipient who experienced a crash. If that then doesn't result in a crash, you know it's some hidden funkiness in the content.

I'll add my obligatory suggestion of checkmk. Runs on Linux and is well documented.

Recovering a mailbox (or indeed any individual email items) isn't something that I've ever been asked to do either, not since we migrated to Google a few years ago. That could be as much down to users not knowing that it's a thing they can ask for as to anything else. If a user connects their account to Office Outlook or something and presses the all of the wrong buttons, it's nice to know that it could be unshambles'd easily. We started with cloud-cloud backups prinicpally as a way to protect Google Drive and Shared Drives data from ransomware attacks, since staff love using the desktop sync client. Recovering data from a ransomware attack is not going to be Google's responsibility, it'd be ours. The mailboxes being protected as well is just a helpful bonus, really. If we were using O365 for anything meaty, I'd be wanting c2c backups in place.

The network effect aspect of it seems unlikely to survive much interference from a new owner, especially one buying it for the stated purpose of driving engagement with their other offerings, but then they must have bought it knowing that the network effect aspect was the game's secret sauce. I can't imagine they have any hope of successfully bottling the magic. Sometimes brands can put out nice things for free with no strings attached, no ads and no IAP. e.g. the brilliant Australian Open Game, but it generally almost never seems to happen.

Uhhh. It's been bought up by the NY Times. Seems like a 'nice while it lasted' sort of moment. I'm sure there'll be lots of imitators but the original is deceptively well executed.

If a user or malicious actor trashes a mailbox, a backup gives you a way to restore it easily. Without a backup, you're not going to be able to restore it for them, really.

Not using 365 here but we use Datto Backupify to backup our staff Gmail mailboxes and Google Drive data. It can do 365, which is why I mention it. Per user per month pricing, so only feasible for us to do the staff mailboxes, really.