mpe

Alternativly try VLC.

You could try a blowtorch, though make sure that the fume extraction is up to dealing with PCB "cooking".

Have you tried SystemRescueCD? Which comes with both gparted and ntfsresize.

It's also likely to help matters if your workstations have WINS and DNS configured to look at the server.

Is your access through a proxy, especially an ISP/RBC proxy? Most likely it isn't you, but someone else using the same proxy. Of course if Google has done anything to upset the IWF you may well be using a "transparent" proxy even if you think you are connecting directly.

Unless you also turn off either "offline files" or user control of it. Not that to turn it off you have to explicitally select "disable".

You are sure that you have got the folder redirection correct? If you don't have HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT \CurrentVersion\Winlogon\ExcludeProfileDirs set to contain "Desktop" then you will get WIndows default "roaming profile" behaviour.

Even handing the teacher a UB40 isn't going to do much to help the students concerned. Who, it appears, would have to effectivly retate the exam. Instead it would make more sense for the school to lodge an appeal on behalf of the students.

No doubt they'd be most unhappy if they were sent something in an OASIS format

A wild guess would be some broken piece of software. IMHO it would probably be better to fix the software. Including looking at permissions on files/registry keys it is trying to use. Giving users local admin privs has lots of unwanted side effects.

You could also add "we DO actually have homes to go to" and "With most of the software we wouldn't know it it was doing the right thing even if we tried."

Ah the "telephathic reporting method". Which some people persist in using dispite it's poor sucess rate

I actually found that they'd opened TCP ports 22, 25, 80, 443 & 8383 on 10.3.48.4 together with a NAT from 62.171.195.12 to 10.3.48.4. Thus was after I discovered they had put in an outgoing rule to TCP port 80. Not only were these not requested they also appear to breach the "security policy"... Though it dosn't appear to be the best of ideas that anything between sites tends to get SNATed to 62.171.194.161.

Actually you can compete with the sun, just that you are better off using an active display. As recently demonstrated on Discovery Channel's "How do they do it?" One of these does not come cheap even before you consider that you'd be very luck not to need an additional substation in order to plug it in.

This would also be likely to mess up any access statistics. e.g. the output of webalizer (which produces lots of nice graphs from apache log files for anyone unfamiliar with it). Also they'd need to conduct a MITM attack on HTTPS.

Specific issues I have with the SWGfL are. They don't appear to have any plans for IPv6 support. Email delivery only to a specific IP address, I complained about this one back when they started up. If you have more than one H.323 video conferencing system they want you to point all of them at their gatekeeper. The idea of having an onsite gatekeeper to handle all onsite units dosn't appear to be something they have thought about. Having DNS records for your LAN on their servers. But being unwilling to configure their servers to be slaves so the data they contain dosn't follow the GIGO principle. (They appeared to get completly confused when I offered to send them instructions on how to do this). Effectivly they just havn't realised that both DNS and H.323 are designed to be hierarchical in structure. Connections between sites on the grid getting source NATed to 62.171.194.161. Which makes things both more complex and potentially less secure. They claim they can't fix things to have no NATing at all. All they can offer is to change what address things are NATed to, on a good day they might even consider setting something which has a DNAT to have the same SNAT. Again something which hasn't been thought about is people in secondary schools providing support to primary schools. Where the likes of VNC, RDP, SSH, HTTP(S), VoIP, etc can save time, money, shoe leather, petrol/diesel, etc. There is also the issue of roving technicians, teachers, etc who can need various VPN setups. "Change requests" virtually never happen according to the claimed timescale. Also they tend to get easily confused if the request just involves changing a firewall rule. Understanding protocols such as IAX and OpenVPN use UDP only also apparently causes confusion so they are apt to create rules for TCP as well. Fortunatly I havn't had to try asking for a an IP protocol other than TCP or UDP, wonder what they'd make of number 20 I've also stumbled over various things, notably firewall exceptions, which don't appear to be documented at all. The latest being the whole proxy mess.

Especially given that the drivers supplied by some vendors, such as Dell, turn off what Intel calls "prelogon connect" and make it not very obvious to turn on.

Also such systems may end up encouraging the kids to find words/spellings which make it through any blacklist.

The interface is rather clunky especially if you need to do this with a rather large set of URLs. Then there's the issue of if it dosn't like your web browser you tend to get something like "Browser: [Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.18) Gecko/20081113 Ubuntu/7.10 (gutsy) Firefox/2.0.0.18] SWGfL Filtering is only supported on Microsoft Internet Explorer 4 or above, on a Windows platform."

This is apparently what they are offering as a "smartcache proxy". With some various hoops to jump through. However IP based restrictions are only of much use in the case of a workstation or dedicated device. As I have a multi purpose server I can completly guarentee that this won't be remotly secure. I've tried to explain that proxy authentication would be far more useful in this situation. But they don't appear to understand.

IIRC it was necessary to specifically enable the unfiltered proxy and firewalling was mentioned in the instructions. I also have an issue with making the unfiltered proxy become a filtered one. Rather than displaying an explanation page.

Then you have issues like ensuring that none of these staff let kids know this information. But cover teachers can get hold of it. As well as it being an "all or nothing" approach. I'd also be reluctant to call something which only works in a few specific web browsers a "web interface" too.

For that amount of money you'd expect them to be able to not only make the tea but to also go any pick it from specific individual plants!

Do you know of a version of ident for Windows 2003 which works correctly with with terminal server. The version I have been using, since Windows 95, has a nasty habit of thinking everyone is the first user to log in.

Would this happen to be an Intel wireless card by any chance? If so check that the drive isn't configured to only switch the card on after logon. This being a (mis)feature of some such drivers. Especially, but not always, the Intel utility is handing the wireless configuration.