network admin

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

My friendly network admin remotely synchronized my computer to the
network while I was saving a very large wav in sound forge. The
result? Corrupted file, and the project I worked for 2 weeks on,
completely ruined.

Network admins: stay away from our audio!

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Kayte" <k.revitte@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1124204607.892440.228080@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> My friendly network admin remotely synchronized my computer to the
> network while I was saving a very large wav in sound forge. The
> result? Corrupted file, and the project I worked for 2 weeks on,
> completely ruined.
>
> Network admins: stay away from our audio!


I won't say a thing... other than to remind you of all that I *didn't*
say when we were discussing this in the "SF Problem" thread.

You were definitely warned by someone, to disconnect from any
network (especially one that's run by folks who believed that you
had to upgrade your workstation to XP in the first place) before
working on serious audio.

I'm surprised that Forge didn't offer a recovery file. And just so
you know... I honestly am sorry that this happened to you.

<Your local XP & networking sceptic>

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Kayte" wrote ...
> My friendly network admin remotely synchronized my computer to the
> network while I was saving a very large wav in sound forge. The
> result? Corrupted file, and the project I worked for 2 weeks on,
> completely ruined.
>
> Network admins: stay away from our audio!

Workstation users: SAVE locally then COPY the file across the network!

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I'll speak for the network admins: keep your non-company applications off of
company hardware and you won't have that problem again.

-Ben

"Kayte" <k.revitte@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124204607.892440.228080@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> My friendly network admin remotely synchronized my computer to the
> network while I was saving a very large wav in sound forge. The
> result? Corrupted file, and the project I worked for 2 weeks on,
> completely ruined.
>
> Network admins: stay away from our audio!
>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Kayte" <k.revitte@gmail.com> wrote in message ...

> Hm. I always save locally. In fact, my drives are the main audio
> storage. And as for applications, I run a tight ship, I try to keep
> only sound forge on the audio computer, but the network admins keep
> installing aim and microsoft office on it. I have to remove them
> almost every day!

You're kidding, right? I don't see how you can get these things
out of an XP box where someone else has administrative rights
and multiple users exist. 'Aim' doesn't belong on *anything,* and
I think you're kidding about the 'office' thing, because you know it's
the biggest bog-down you can put on an audio box besides AV.


> The problem is, no matter how many times my department explains to
> their department why these computers are different, they think the
> audio computers should look just like the office computers.

Then refer the idiots to any number of internet resources regarding
optimization for audio... did you never show them your SF thread?
At this point (if I were responsible to the clients) I'd be bringing my
own computer to work to do the critical work.


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

If the machine belongs to the company and the machine is on the company's
network then there is no such thing as "untimely access". This virus going
around today shows once again how important it is for businesses to keep
tight control over their hardware or risk killing the entire network,
potentially, and bringing everyone's productivity to a halt. You gotta go
with the lesser evil and the lesser evil sometime sis inconveniencing users
for the good of all.

Now I am assuming here of course that the machine belongs to the company and
that the audio apps installed are unapproved or being used for unapproved
purposes. If that is not the case then I apologize, cause that is a whole
other thing! But even if that is the case, such as is often the case in
corporate marketing departments that insist on using Mac's when everyone
else is on XP, those segments of the network can and should be expected to
be overly scrutinized and segmented onto other networks to protect everyone
else from them, and vice-versa.

And I realize I am sounding like an IT Nazi here but it's really just common
sense in today's climate. Maybe it's just this virus stuff lately that has
me on the edge...

-Ben

"David Morgan (MAMS)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
news:FjJMe.9190$1b5.8013@trnddc05...
>
> "Ben Hanson" <transparency_76@hotmail.com> wrote in message...
>
>> I'll speak for the network admins: keep your non-company applications
>> off of company hardware and you won't have that problem again.
>
>
> The problem (as described) has nothing to do with superfluous
> applications... It had to do with untimely access by administrators
> and failure to properly save a portion of the work prior to interruption.
>
> DM
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Kayte wrote:

> Hm. I always save locally. In fact, my drives are the main audio
> storage. And as for applications, I run a tight ship, I try to keep
> only sound forge on the audio computer, but the network admins keep
> installing aim and microsoft office on it. I have to remove them
> almost every day!
> The problem is, no matter how many times my department explains to
> their department why these computers are different, they think the
> audio computers should look just like the office computers.

In which case the company employs nitwits for net admin. I now
understand your "getting paid by the hour" remark.

--
ha

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Like I said in my last post, if the machine was dedicated for audio purposes
then that is different. My understanding of the original post (which appears
to be wrong) was that the user had a normal company machine and decided to
install audio apps on it for personal use. I understand completely how
important it is to dedicate audio workstations to the task, I have many of
my own that are dedicated to this same task.

Saying virus prevention is left to the end-user is only partly right. While
poor practices on the part of end users result in many virus transmissions,
there are a lot of viruses that spread in other ways. The one going around
right now, for example, requires nothing to spread, except an OS with a
particular flaw unpatched. Many root kits don't even require that much to
spread. That's great that you have never had a virus but it's mostly because
you are lucky and/or your machine(s) are not networked. In a corporate
network environment, your "end user is responsible for security" ideas are
about the fastest way possible outside of visiting porn sites to get
infected.

IS people have to find a balance here and neither side is usually happy with
it. But at the end of the day if it's on my network, it belongs to me. And,
if the user cannot or will not allow me to secure the machine to protect it,
and protect others from it, then that's too bad. If this user's network is
so poorly designed that they cannot safely accomodate the need for a
dedicated audio workstation then their IS guys are idiots, but there are
ways to do it and make all sides happy if you know what you are doing.

And BTW we don't have the virus, because the 4 or 5 layers of defense from
the Internet in to the network are blocking it. It's all about good design!

-Ben

"David Morgan (MAMS)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
news:JfKMe.9872$Xw5.6579@trnddc02...
>
> "Ben Hanson" <transparency_76@hotmail.com> wrote in message...
>
>> If the machine belongs to the company and the machine is on the company's
>> network then there is no such thing as "untimely access".
>
> Then you know little to nothing about dedicated audio workstations and
> why it's almost essential that such CPU and software intensive apps be
> left uninterrupted. Obviously, the pea-brained nerds that took over this
> poster's facility a few weeks ago have no clue, either. ;-)
>
>> This virus going
>> around today shows once again how important it is for businesses to keep
>> tight control over their hardware or risk killing the entire network,
>> potentially, and bringing everyone's productivity to a halt.
>
> Fool end users will bring on the viruses, and they'd hurt only themselves
> if it wasn't for all the network hooplah that's party totally unecessary.
>
>> You gotta go with the lesser evil and the lesser evil sometime is
>> inconveniencing users for the good of all.
>
> I'm sorry about your current experiences with a virus. Obviously, you
> have
> a few daft users or you have systems that are constantly tied to a network
> which is constantly tied to the internet... or all of the above. The
> *user* is
> responsible for virus infections -- teach 'em right from wrong or boot
> 'em...
> or don't allow them to receive data at all.
>
> A dedicated workstation (which this person's machine *was* before some
> desk-jockey networking types took over the company, forced an OS upgrade
> and demanded networking) should never see the light of the internet or be
> forced to have an open network running in the background. Work paid for
> by a consumer has to be *guaranteed*.
>
>> Now I am assuming here of course that the machine belongs to the company
>> and
>> that the audio apps installed are unapproved or being used for unapproved
>> purposes.
>
> Well... obviously, you missed a couple of earlier threads by this poster.
> <g>
> (See paragraph above)
>
>> If that is not the case then I apologize, cause that is a whole
>> other thing! But even if that is the case, such as is often the case in
>> corporate marketing departments that insist on using Mac's when everyone
>> else is on XP, those segments of the network can and should be expected
>> to
>> be overly scrutinized and segmented onto other networks to protect
>> everyone
>> else from them, and vice-versa.
>
> They probably shouldn't be networked *at all* !! But I understand that
> having
> bulk access to the internet is of almighty importance these days, followed
> by
> inter-office sharing of information and external hardware.
>
> Dedicated audio or graphics workstations do NOT need to be on the internet
> or a network for any reason as a part of the general operating routine.
> There
> are alternative methods or times for transferring files.
>
>> And I realize I am sounding like an IT Nazi here but it's really just
>> common
>> sense in today's climate. Maybe it's just this virus stuff lately that
>> has
>> me on the edge...
>
> You *are* an IT Nazi. ;-) You've obviously not grown through
> many
> of the tribulations of audio software conflicts over the years as audio
> has
> migrated to computer.
>
> It's the end user that's responsible for your security concerns, though.
> I do
> not use anti-virus products and never have, nor have I ever had a
> virus....
> and I don't need a systems administrator to control my access because
> they either don't trust me or want access to my PC.
>
> Sorry, but I'll take the side of the audio person long before the
> networking
> person, because I understand how important it is to dedicate usage.
>
> --
> David Morgan (MAMS)
> http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
> Morgan Audio Media Service
> Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
> _______________________________________
> http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
> "Kayte" <k.revitte@gmail.com> wrote in message ...
>
> > Hm. I always save locally. In fact, my drives are the main audio
> > storage. And as for applications, I run a tight ship, I try to keep
> > only sound forge on the audio computer, but the network admins keep
> > installing aim and microsoft office on it. I have to remove them
> > almost every day!
>
> You're kidding, right? I don't see how you can get these things
> out of an XP box where someone else has administrative rights
> and multiple users exist. 'Aim' doesn't belong on *anything,* and
> I think you're kidding about the 'office' thing, because you know it's
> the biggest bog-down you can put on an audio box besides AV.
>
>
> > The problem is, no matter how many times my department explains to
> > their department why these computers are different, they think the
> > audio computers should look just like the office computers.
>
> Then refer the idiots to any number of internet resources regarding
> optimization for audio... did you never show them your SF thread?
> At this point (if I were responsible to the clients) I'd be bringing my
> own computer to work to do the critical work.
>
>
> --
> David Morgan (MAMS)
> http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
> Morgan Audio Media Service
> Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
> _______________________________________
> http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

Today I went up (the network people are 2 floors up from the
programmers, data entry, and "multimedia content" (that's me and the
video guy) people) and explained that I really would like them to stop
installing things on my computer and showed them parts of the SF thread
about how much memory sound forge uses. The woman I talked to was
incredulous that I could do without microsoft word, even though I have
it on my other computer-the one i access the internet on. I explained
that the audio computer was really different from the rest of the
computers in function and that should I need to use word, aim, the
internet, etc, i could do so on the slower office box.
I think I got through. She wouldn't give me 98 back or let me get off
the network, though.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Richard Crowley wrote:
>
> Saving a large file of great instrinsic value over the network is
> just risky behavior and you can expect to get burned if you
> insist on doing such things. Always save to the local hard drive
> and THEN copy the file to the network (and then delete the
> redundant local copy if desired.)

I was not saving it over the network; I was saving to my local drive.
The remote synchronization of my drive caused a corruption in the file.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 8/17/05 3:01 PM, in article
1124305305.115109.221410@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "Kayte"
<k.revitte@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Today I went up (the network people are 2 floors up from the
> programmers, data entry, and "multimedia content" (that's me and the
> video guy) people) and explained that I really would like them to stop
> installing things on my computer and showed them parts of the SF thread
> about how much memory sound forge uses. The woman I talked to was
> incredulous that I could do without microsoft word, even though I have
> it on my other computer-the one i access the internet on. I explained
> that the audio computer was really different from the rest of the
> computers in function and that should I need to use word, aim, the
> internet, etc, i could do so on the slower office box.
> I think I got through. She wouldn't give me 98 back or let me get off
> the network, though.

Chiming in on David's side here and the question:
Have you written up a report on how much time and lost productivity this has
cost you every time it happens including lost work, redoing lost work and
restoring the machine to workable state? Maybe that would get through to the
bean counters.

As to network access, isn;t there a plug back there you can pull?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 2005-08-17 mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com said:
>At this point (if I were responsible to the clients) I'd be
>bringing my own computer to work to do the critical work.
I never saw the earlier SF thread you referred to a couple of times
during this one, but have to agree with you here.
Having said that however it seems to me that if his work entails audio
production the netadmins should be understanding that the audio box
should be just that an audio box. I've avoided networking machines
around here because my boxes are all pretty much one trick ponies. My
lady's windows box does desktop publishing and our bookkeeping chores.
tHis box does dos based internet and keeps some databases for me
relating to ham radio and other record keeping chores for those
activities. My other box runs midi stuff and that's it.
A fourth box is in the works which will eventually run some flavor of
linux and then become a dedicated internet box. I might network it
witrh my other machines for purposes of access from the radio room or
from my other desk, but the wife's windows box will not be anywhere
upon this network. THis will mean I'll still have to sneaker net
drafts of doccuments that need desktop publishing type work to her
machine. My braille printer however will be accessible from anywhere
else on its network.
iF audio output needs to be accessible on the network I'd suggest that
the op finish his chore, burn a cd and mount the files on a drive
visible to the network and isolate the audio machine from it.THe
network folks should be made to understand the realities of the
situation here.



Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



"Applying computer technology is as simple as
finding the right wrench to pound in the correct screw."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote ...
> Sorry, but I'll take the side of the audio person long before the
> networking person, because I understand how important it is to
> dedicate usage.

I agree to a point. I take the side of people who use their
computers inteligently (which means saving locally and using
the network only to copy).

People who save big, valuable files over the network are just
asking for trouble. Especially in an environment already known
for its agressive and unpredictable network/computer support gang.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ben Hanson wrote:

> < ...snip.. >
>
> And I realize I am sounding like an IT Nazi here but it's really just common
> sense in today's climate. Maybe it's just this virus stuff lately that has
> me on the edge...
>
> -Ben

Hmmm, don't know how radical that sounds. Some time ago
I attended a network security seminar where they explained
in detail how the network is only as secure as it's weakest link.
Things have only gotten tighter since then.
We did differentiate between lab and office computers; where
lab computers had limited network access and the lab owners
needed to be their own sys-admins.
[YMMV]

Later...

Ron Capik
--

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 15:29:08 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote:

> Kayte wrote:
>
>> I was not saving it over the network; I was saving to my local drive.
>> The remote synchronization of my drive caused a corruption in the file.
>
> That seems like a problem with the network software. Is this a XP 2003
> Server-based system?

Sounds more like a problem with policy. Client to server sync-ups should
happen on logon. If the need to happen any other time (emergencies do
happen), there should be plenty of notice & a reasonable estimate of when
& how long should be provided.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Richard Crowley wrote:

> "Ron Capik" <r.capik@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:4303B9C6.BF4DF09F@worldnet.att.net...
> > Ben Hanson wrote:
> >
> >> < ...snip.. >
> >>
> >> And I realize I am sounding like an IT Nazi here but it's really just
> >> common
> >> sense in today's climate. Maybe it's just this virus stuff lately that
> >> has
> >> me on the edge...
> >>
> >> -Ben
> >
> > Hmmm, don't know how radical that sounds. Some time ago
> > I attended a network security seminar where they explained
> > in detail how the network is only as secure as it's weakest link.
> > Things have only gotten tighter since then.
> > We did differentiate between lab and office computers; where
> > lab computers had limited network access and the lab owners
> > needed to be their own sys-admins.
>
> Putting a computer without full, current protection on the
> internet is like throwing a beefsteak into a pool of piranha.
> The latest report I saw was that it took only 10 minutes for
> an unprotected computer to become infected after being
> connected to the internet. Computers with out of date or
> incomplete protection just take a little longer. Maybe if
> Trojan made computer protection and advertised it on TV?

Our network was all behind a major firewall. Nobody had
direct internet access. The network we had access to
was a sub-domain of the corporate LAN.
[YMMV]

Ron Capik
--

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote:

> "Kayte" <k.revitte@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>
> > I really feel there is no need for my audio box to be
> > on the network at all...
>
> Well, you know how I feel.
>
> > Today I went up (the network people are 2 floors up from the
> > programmers, data entry, and "multimedia content" (that's me and the
> > video guy) people) and explained that I really would like them to stop
>
> Maybe it's just a little more communication then... and in doing
> so, perhaps taking the advice offered by "SSJVCmag" in the
> documenting of the time lost by this change and it's subsequent
> troubles.
>
> > and showed them parts of the SF thread
> > about how much memory sound forge uses.
>
> It's not that it uses so much memory, it's moreover that it is simply
> "operation intensive". Once the software is churning numbers, it
> stands to reason that it shouldn't be interrupted by *anything*, let
> alone the silly background processes of the new OS and the
> superfluous software others would have you install.
>
> Best of luck again,
>
> DM

Document the time lost to this, and then submit a bill for all the
time you wasted duplicating the work, and send that through your
internal accounting system against the IT department. If you have
a boss that doesn't want to do this, then remind him/her of the
criminal laws around falsification of time cards/billing records.
( hint: It's usually near fraud in your local legal code. )
Tell the absolute truth and the full story if anyone questions the
invoice.

--Dale

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 17/08/05 22:59, in article de08fi$ut9$1@news01.intel.com, "Richard
Crowley" <richard.7.crowley@intel.com> wrote:

(...)
> People who save big, valuable files over the network are just
> asking for trouble. Especially in an environment already known
> for its agressive and unpredictable network/computer support gang.


Speaking of agressive network support: anyone remember BOFH?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/ [...] the_fight/


--
Joe Kotroczo kotroczo@mac.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Richard Crowley" <richard.7.crowley@intel.com> wrote in message
newsdvtc5$pjn$1@news01.intel.com...
>
> If you don't have an IT Nazi looking out for you, the computer
> has no business being connected to a network which is connected
> to the Internet. Thats just life in today's world whether we like it
> or not.

Sure, but you need a *competent* IT Nazi. Destroying the work of the
enterprise's staff is incompetent. And if the IT staff don't understand
that, I'm sure the Chief Executive will explain it to them, when he hands
them their dismissal notices.

Tim (who has been supporting computer systems for over 30 years ...)