CommPulse

Hi everyone, I'm currently learning Linux System Administration and building a RHEL-based Linux Application Server from scratch as part of my internship. One of the requirements is to implement a basic health check for the server. I'm trying to understand what experienced Linux administrators usually check before considering a server "healthy". So far, my checklist includes: CPU utilization / Load average Memory usage / Swap Disk usage and inode usage Filesystem & mount points Network interfaces IP / Gateway / DNS Internet connectivity Critical services (sshd, chronyd, firewalld, etc.) Time synchronization (NTP) SELinux status Firewall status System logs (journalctl) Package updates / Subscription status Questions: What are the minimum health checks every Linux server should have? What additional checks do you perform in production environments? Are there any important metrics or best practices that beginners usually overlook? Thanks! submitted by /u/Eds05 [link] [comments]

Here's to another year of: - Being expected to diagnose problems via the sentence "it doesn't work." - Being blamed for issues caused by software you've never heard of. - Somehow knowing exactly what a user clicked, despite them insisting they "didn't do anything." - Explaining, yet again, that rebooting wasn't an insult, it was the solution. May your backups restore, your RAID stay green, and your first Friday night drink arrive before the first "quick question" Teams message. submitted by /u/BonezAU_ [link] [comments]

Anyone ever get deep into their IT career and you realize, damn I really made a career and a lot of money out of genuinely liking to fuck around with computers? Secondly, the fact that I have common sense has gotten me pretty far in this field. I don’t know if I could do any corp job besides IT. As much as I don’t like some things about it, it is pretty sweet. Especially when you are the one running the show at your company and no one else knows IT so no one can tell you shit. submitted by /u/saltyschnauzer27 [link] [comments]

Who here is going to allow cross tenant recall? Just wondering Edit: This is specially for cross tenant message recall, not Copilot recall. It goes live in Aug/Sep https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/exchange/cross-tenant-message-recall-in-exchange-online/4535800 submitted by /u/anonymousITCoward [link] [comments]

Goal: The Data Encryption Key (DEK) should never be stored in our database—not even wrapped/encrypted. If someone gains read-only access to the DB, they shouldn't be able to decrypt the passwords. Current design: Admin uploads a CSV. A background worker generates a random 32-byte DEK for that upload request. Generate one-time passwords for each row. Encrypt each password with the DEK (AES-256-GCM) and store only the ciphertext in the DB. Store the DEK in Google Secret Manager as a new Secret Version . Store only the Secret Version reference (e.g. dek_secret_version ) in the DB. When the CSV is downloaded: Fetch the DEK from Secret Manager using the stored version. Decrypt the passwords. Generate and return the CSV. Destroy the Secret Version (crypto-shredding). Clear the encrypted password and version reference from the DB. We're considering using one Secret with many Versions , where each version represents a different upload request's DEK, rather than creating a new Secret for every upload. My questions are: Has anyone used Secret Manager this way (many versions representing independent DEKs rather than secret rotation)? Are there any quotas, performance issues, or operational pitfalls with having a large number of versions under a single Secret? Would you recommend a different GCP-native approach that still satisfies the requirement that the DEK is never persisted in the database , even in wrapped/encrypted form? Any concerns with the crypto-shredding workflow (destroying the Secret Version after a successful download or expiration)? I'd love to hear from anyone who's built something similar or has experience operating Secret Manager at scale. submitted by /u/Maximum-Scene2017 [link] [comments]

I’ve realized that even after I finish work, my brain keeps thinking about it. I replay conversations, think about problems I didn’t solve, plan tomorrow’s tasks, or imagine different scenarios. Sometimes it feels like I’m still working hours after I’ve logged off. I’m curious: how do you mentally switch off? Do you have any routines, hobbies, or habits that help you leave work at work? Or did it simply get easier with experience? I’d love to hear what actually works for you. submitted by /u/Natural_Pool_5493 [link] [comments]

I would never use them, but in taking over a project, I was trying to gain access to what was once a Dotster account used for managing DNS on some domains. Seeing that Network Solutions acquired Dotster, I assume the account would be held with them. Tried calling them, like I have all the other service providers I needed to gain access to, and work on account recovery. Every phone number they publish on their website just plays a recorded message that loops (seemingly infinitely), "Sorry, and error occurred. Please try your call again." Is this a temporary outage, or do they just like to post numbers on their website that don't work? submitted by /u/exitof99 [link] [comments]

Hello, We have an apps server that is a remote desktop server for a few old apps. They want to use licensing monthly from MS, they don't want to buy the licenses. I've set up the RDP services but I'm not sure what to select in the last part for activate e.g open license, select license, enterprise... submitted by /u/Deep-Egg-6167 [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/MadDawgThaKing [link] [comments]

Network mapping boto3 SDK calls to their required IAM permissions, pagination contracts, async-waiter annotations, and declared error types. 3,800+ methods across 50 AWS services, each one has the exact IAM actions it needs (from iann0036/iam-dataset), the pagination contract (from botocore's paginators-1.json), waiter configs, and 18,000+ gotchas extracted from Stack Overflow and GitHub issues covering edge cases the docs don't mention. It also has a write-back loop: when an agent hits a trap that isn't in the DB, it registers the fix and the next agent sees it. Available as an MCP server, https://stigmer.network/ if you're building agents that work with AWS. Free, open, no accounts. submitted by /u/Enough-Piano-2362 [link] [comments]

Under no circumstances does this mean you can post hateful, harmful, or distasteful content - most of us are still at work, let's keep it safe enough so none of us get fired. Do not post exam dumps, ads, or paid services. All "free posts" must have some sort of relationship to Azure. Relationship to Azure can be loose; however, it must be clear. It is okay to be meta with the posts and memes are allowed. If you make a meme with a Good Guy Greg hat on it, that's totally fine. This will not be allowed any other day of the week. submitted by /u/AutoModerator [link] [comments]

We've been using Varonis for several years, but as we've added more SaaS applications and AI tools, we're starting to evaluate Varonis alternatives. It's less about replacing it because it's bad and more about finding something that's easier to manage across a broader environment. Curious what others ended up choosing and what made the switch worthwhile. submitted by /u/TurboKestrel45 [link] [comments]

I havent been touch gcp in years and yesterday i got an email from gcp about indicated abuse on one of my late project (which i never access it anymore). They request me to remove or appeal from suspending that project but because since 2025 i havent activate MFA verification gcp are also want me to do that also. So both appeal and mfa page are open repeatedly leave me to stuck on accessing the console. Here is the video detail https://streamable.com/mbp5ku submitted by /u/Opening_Lime_156 [link] [comments]

Any folks waiting to see if they get accepted to the ABW Grant? Wanting to connect and stay updated. submitted by /u/abevera [link] [comments]

https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2026/07/aws-transit-gateway-policy-based-routing/ "With PBR, forwarding decisions can be based on a combination of packet attributes including source and destination IP addresses, ports, and protocol rather than destination IP address alone" This feature was earlier confined to CloudWAN, and we could not adopt CloudWAN for various reasons. We had requested AWS for several years, to offer a similar capability with TGW. And they delivered. This will offer a huge advantage for us, and could for you also, if you use TGW (especially across regions) and have complex routing requirements for north/south vs east/west traffic separation and such. submitted by /u/KayeYess [link] [comments]

I am trying to hunt down sporadic cpu spikes on a Windows server and I need a tool that will allow me to set a threshold whereby it will trigger and capture cpu telemetries with details on what process spiked it. Looking for something relatively simple and lightweight. Looked at some free tools on Microsoft store but not really sure if any of those are what I am looking for. I know about performance monitor and resource monitor and event viewer, ect but those things either are too shallow or require drilling and filtering while searching for a needle in a haystack. I would ideally like it to be a free Microsoft owned tool, but I am not above presenting leadership with something to buy that I can deploy to all systems. What say ye? submitted by /u/blackout-loud [link] [comments]

Hey everyone, I’ve been working as a sysadmin since 2016, and I’ve always struggled with infrastructure documentation. While many companies aim for dedicated IPAM or DCIM solutions, those require serious manpower and budget to acquire and operate. The reality for many of us is that our infrastructure state is still fragmented across Excel sheets, Word documents, SharePoint, or photos from a whiteboard. It's tedious to maintain and impossible to query effectively. Also, before making changes (like deploying new printers at a remote location, or complex VLAN routings), verifying if it conflicts with existing setups, like firewall rules and Zero-Trust Tunneling, is a manual headache. So I started a project I call IaD (Infrastructure as Documentation). The core idea is simple: Write down your entire IT infrastructure in structured, plain text Markdown. No databases, no complex software required. Why? Because it bridges the gap between those classical, static documents and modern AI-assisted infrastructure management. Here is how it works and why I built it this way: Universally Readable (AI-Ready): Because it’s all just Markdown, you can feed the entire repository into a (local) AI (e.g., via local Model Context Protocol tools). Intelligent Validation: Instead of just having a static wiki, I can now ask the AI to do an architecture review. If I want to deploy a new container network, the AI checks my IaD repository and warns me if my planned changes collide with existing firewall rules or routings. 100% Decoupled & Offline: It doesn't need API access or running agents on your live subsystems to gather data. You maintain the state in Markdown, making it highly secure and fully offline-capable. It acts as a single point of query. I just published this as an open-source framework/concept (AGPLv3 / Commercial License). It's built for environments where you want a transparent, resilient knowledge base that you, your colleagues, and an AI can instantly understand. You can find the repository and how to get started here: https://github.com/Livedeath2k/InfrastructureAsDocumentation Has anyone else tried using local LLMs against their infrastructure documentation for proactive error catching? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this approach and if you see potential pitfalls I might have missed! submitted by /u/Livedeath2k [link] [comments]

Hello everyone, i’m preparing for the Google TAM (Cloud Consultin) role and got my RRK1 interview, has anyone have insight on how technical the interview will be? Any advise? submitted by /u/Substantial_Bad_461 [link] [comments]

Hi all, I'm trying to determine the best approach for this scenario. Our Azure environment uses a hub-and-spoke topology with vWAN. Within each spoke, routing between subnets is allowed (controlled via NSG), but any north/south traffic leaving or entering the VNet is routed through the hub and inspected by Azure Firewall Premium. At the moment, we only have one internet-facing web application in Azure. It's exposed via Azure Firewall, with an external (non-Microsoft) WAF in front of it. The firewall only allows inbound traffic from the WAF's IP addresses. We have several upcoming projects that will require additional public-facing applications. I don't really want to keep adding public IPs to Azure Firewall, as it doesn't seem particularly scalable or cost-effective over the long term. The WAF has limit that it only forward to port 80/443 so cannot use differnt ports on existing IP addresses (so i informed by security team). The first project is an application hosted in Azure Container Apps and managed by a third party. This made me wonder whether I actually lose anything by not routing inbound traffic through Azure Firewall, given that a trusted WAF is already protecting the application. For example: Client > WAF > Azure Container App (External Ingress) The Container App environment would still communicate with other components in the VNet, with access controlled by NSGs. If it needs to communicate with systems outside the spoke, that traffic would still be routed through the hub and inspected by Azure Firewall. Coming from a traditional infrastructure background, I'm used to ensuring that all inbound traffic passes through a firewall perimeter. However, from what I've read, routing traffic directly from a WAF to Azure Container Apps appears to align with Microsoft's reference architectures to sone degree. The alternative would be to deploy an Application Gateway behind the WAF and then route traffic through Azure Firewall before it reaches the Container App: Client > WAF > Application Gateway > Azure Firewall > Azure Container App (Internal Ingress) This ensures all inbound traffic is inspected by Azure Firewall before reaching the application, but I'm struggling to identify what additional security or operational benefits this provides when a capable WAF is already performing the inbound inspection. (other than that’s how we did it back on-prem). Am I overlooking anything, or is there a compelling reason to keep Azure Firewall in the inbound path in this scenario? Thanks submitted by /u/DH171 [link] [comments]

I've been building an email security browser extension that scans emails and assigns a threat score. The extension is working well, and I've tested it. I'm at the point where I'm wondering whether it's worth continuing to build it and pitch it to B2B clients, or if there's a better direction I should take. Would love some honest opinions from people who manage IT or security. Is this something companies would actually pay for, or is the market already too crowded? submitted by /u/mrwhossetheboss [link] [comments]