←back to thread

433 points zdw | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
stackskipton ◴[] No.45660335[source]
As usual with all these types of posts, people go "HA HA, MICRO$OFT SUCKS" without understanding business practices that keep them afloat.

Don't use Exchange? Cool, what should we use instead? Does it support 15 people all the way up to 150000 people? I used to run Exchange cluster for 70k people, is there other mail software out there complete with non-shared disk redundancy? Where the users connect to single endpoint and software figures it out from there?

Sharepoint with another 2 RCEs. Not shocked, the software is terrible. However, it's only software that will stand up under load and let us shard it easily. All open-source software is one of those, runs fine in Homelab, likely falls down under load. Few Open Source Developers want to work on this stuff which I get because it's tedious work interfacing with computer illiterate end users. I'd rather chug sewage then do this work for free.

Finally, it's somewhat backwards compatible. Most businesses are filled with ancient software that no one has worked on in 20 years. That Excel document with Macros from 1997. With some registry changes degrading security posture, still works. I doubt you will find Office software with level of backwards compatibility unless they are using Microsoft Office level of compatibility.

Microsoft has real gordian knot here and few solutions besides "Backwards compatibility is OVER. Upgrade to modern or GTFO". Meanwhile, I get hit up by $ThreeJobsAgo over some Exchange Web Services solution I slapped together for them in Python they wanted me to upgrade to GraphAPI since Microsoft turned off Exchange Web Services in Office365.

replies(13): >>45660418 #>>45660587 #>>45660597 #>>45660667 #>>45660671 #>>45660681 #>>45660723 #>>45660777 #>>45660784 #>>45661246 #>>45663047 #>>45663124 #>>45665208 #
vlovich123 ◴[] No.45660681[source]
You can use hosted versions of Google Workplace or Office365 if you can’t figure out how to secure software (places like this typically can’t clearly). Additionally it enforces a separation of concerns where a compromise of your email server doesn’t lead to a compromise of the plant itself (again - clearly IT didn’t know how to partition the network into different parts).
replies(1): >>45660915 #
stackskipton ◴[] No.45660915[source]
Sure, this business should have converted to either of those and let someone else take over administration since they were clearly negligent. This is stuff that FedRAMP or it's replacement was supposed to fix but didn't.
replies(1): >>45660970 #
1. vlovich123 ◴[] No.45660970[source]
FedRAMP is only for hosted software for the federal government afaik, not on-prem and not private companies (nuclear reactors afaik are operated by grids/private operators and the federal gov is responsible for auditing and regulating)