CommPulse

Hello, I am currently working on transitioning our computers from an on-Prem AD environment into a Intune MDM joined, cloud-only environment, along with moving our users from a password+MFA login, to a completely passwordless login. For this we have decided that we would like to use Yubico security keys for authenticating into users' microsoft accounts, and WhfB for easily logging into their computers. Unfortunately, I have found that the use of WHfB on Intune MDM joined devices automatically adds a login.microsoft.com passkey into windows hello, which is always offered first during passwordless sign-in. I cannot find a way to block this behaviour or modify which passkey storage windows offers first. While WHfB passkeys are still very safe compared to passwords, we are (I think quite rightly) concerned that if the end users are not prompted to use their Yubikeys during perioodic reauthentication, they will forget how to use them, and if they set a unique pin on them that they don't reguarly use, then when the need to use their yubikey does actually arise, for instance when they get their next computer or phone, they won't remember it. This also makes periodic reauthentication feel somewhat pointless as the users will just press on their fingerprint scanner and be done with it. I have found exactly one way to change this behaviour, and that is by defining an Entra Authentication strength containing only yubikey AAGUIDs and forcing my intune testing user to adhere to that authentication strength with a conditional access policy, while this does block the ability to use the WHfB microsoft passkey to sign in, the end user experience is very bad, if a users sees this, they won't think that they can't use windows hello to login, they'll think that windows hello is not working correctly. In the gif below, you can see that windows hello offers itself first but silently fails and prompts the user to enter their pin, without any sort of error message. Processing img cabnfg8pqjgh1... (I realise that I specifically selected a windows hello key in the gif, but the behavious is identical when I initially load the login page or if I select log in methods>passkey, windows hello will always offer itself first, even if it cannot function correctly in this case). For personal use, https://github.com/Aldaviva/AuthenticatorChooser solves this issue, and while i am grateful for the fix, random scripts from github aren't really appropriate when configuring important security settings, Is there anything we can here or do we have to wait for MS? submitted by /u/soulfulsysadmin [link] [comments]

It's no secret that AWS lags behind the market when it comes to Identity, and it's products being integrated with one another. However in regulated industries it's almost a non-starter because some of us require the use of federated credentials, which is scoped machine authentication. The only thing in AWS that presents an oidc identity is a specific eks deployment, does anyone know what's AWS is roadmap for machine authentication? Thanks. submitted by /u/jorel43 [link] [comments]

On Jul 9th I created an order on @MAXKO_Hosting for a VPS in the Croatia location. I followed through with the payment on Jul 11th. Invoice confirmation and server creation emails (Click to expand) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Invoice is paid Date: 2026-07-11 22:43 From: MAXKO [email protected] To: myemail Reply-To: MAXKO Hosting [email protected] We appreciate your business and thank you for choosing MAXKO Hosting. Your invoice is paid and processed. Invoice ID: X Invoice Amount: 196.80 EUR If you have any questions regarding this invoice or any other billing related issue, please feel free to contact the billing department by creating a new ticket from your Client Panel COPYRIGHT (c) 2008 - 2026 MAXKO Hosting [1] -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Your VPS is ready! Date: 2026-07-11 22:43 From: MAXKO [email protected] To: myemail Reply-To: MAXKO Hosting [email protected] SERVER READY FOR USE Your order with MAXKO Hosting has been processed successfully. The server is now active and ready for use. SERVER ACCESS DETAILS SERVER NAME: Virtual Private Server IPv4 ADDRESS: X IPv6 ADDRESS: X USERNAME: root PASSWORD: X Please change your initial password after the first login for security reasons. COPYRIGHT (c) 2008 - 2026 MAXKO Hosting [1] Shortly after the VPS was created and I ran yabs and got these results YABS (Click to expand) # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## # # Yet-Another-Bench-Script # # v2026-07-03 # # https://github.com/masonr/yet-another-bench-script # # ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## # Wed Jul 22 05:36:42 AM UTC 2026 Basic System Information: --------------------------------- Uptime : 3 days, 19 hours, 44 minutes Processor : QEMU Virtual CPU version 2.5+ CPU cores : 4 @ 2097.572 MHz AES-NI : ❌ Disabled VM-x/AMD-V : ❌ Disabled RAM : 7.8 GiB Swap : 8.5 GiB Disk : 48.6 GiB Distro : Ubuntu 24.04 LTS Kernel : 6.8.0-136-generic VM Type : KVM IPv4/IPv6 : ✔ Online / ✔ Online IPv6 Network Information: --------------------------------- ISP : MAXKO d.o.o. ASN : AS211619 MAXKO d.o.o. Host : MAXKO d.o.o Location : Sisak, Sisak-Moslavina County (03) Country : Croatia fio Disk Speed Tests (Mixed R/W 50/50) (Partition /dev/vda2): --------------------------------- Block Size | 4k (IOPS) | 64k (IOPS) ------ | --- ---- | ---- ---- Read | 88.39 MB/s (21.5k) | 1.09 GB/s (16.6k) Write | 88.62 MB/s (21.6k) | 1.09 GB/s (16.7k) Total | 177.01 MB/s (43.2k) | 2.18 GB/s (33.3k) | | Block Size | 512k (IOPS) | 1m (IOPS) ------ | --- ---- | ---- ---- Read | 4.30 GB/s (8.2k) | 5.82 GB/s (5.5k) Write | 4.53 GB/s (8.6k) | 6.20 GB/s (5.9k) Total | 8.83 GB/s (16.8k) | 12.03 GB/s (11.4k) iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv4): --------------------------------- Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed | Ping ----- | ----- | ---- | ---- | ---- Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 246 Mbits/sec | 493 Mbits/sec | 33.8 ms Eranium | Amsterdam, NL (100G) | 326 Mbits/sec | 604 Mbits/sec | 24.9 ms Uztelecom | Tashkent, UZ (10G) | 136 Mbits/sec | busy | 109 ms Leaseweb | Singapore, SG (10G) | 86.0 Mbits/sec | 327 Mbits/sec | 174 ms Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 46.2 Mbits/sec | 462 Mbits/sec | 181 ms Leaseweb | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 100 Mbits/sec | 419 Mbits/sec | 102 ms Edgoo | Sao Paulo, BR (1G) | 85.3 Mbits/sec | 414 Mbits/sec | 206 ms iperf3 Network Speed Tests (IPv6): --------------------------------- Provider | Location (Link) | Send Speed | Recv Speed | Ping ----- | ----- | ---- | ---- | ---- Clouvider | London, UK (10G) | 224 Mbits/sec | 471 Mbits/sec | 31.0 ms Eranium | Amsterdam, NL (100G) | 266 Mbits/sec | 538 Mbits/sec | 22.6 ms Uztelecom | Tashkent, UZ (10G) | 136 Mbits/sec | 353 Mbits/sec | 108 ms Leaseweb | Singapore, SG (10G) | 82.9 Mbits/sec | 359 Mbits/sec | -- Clouvider | Los Angeles, CA, US (10G) | 123 Mbits/sec | 434 Mbits/sec | 160 ms Leaseweb | NYC, NY, US (10G) | 137 Mbits/sec | 422 Mbits/sec | 103 ms Edgoo | Sao Paulo, BR (1G) | 81.5 Mbits/sec | 356 Mbits/sec | 207 ms Geekbench 6 Benchmark Test: --------------------------------- Test | Value | Single Core | 337 Multi Core | 877 Full Test | https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/18786540 YABS completed in 27 min 26 sec I created a ticket regarding bad performance, over the following day I read up on the cancellation service (discovered that the policy is 3 days after payment, as linked below) and decided to create a ticket requesting refund instead of hoping to get upgraded to a better cpu share. (I know the performance ticket was created on a saturday and they say their support is 24/7 with 48h response time but to this day I haven't received a response to my bad performance ticket, even though because of bad internet at the time I accidentally created 2 identical tickets and saw one was closed due to being a duplicate 1-2 days later while the one that remained open didn't get an answer) Email & ticket I wrote (Click to expand) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Support ticket #3135 created Date: 2026-07-13 15:10 From: MAXKO [email protected] To: myemail Reply-To: MAXKO Hosting [email protected] SUPPORT TICKET CREATED Your support request has been received and ticket #3135 has been created. Subject: Refund request Hello, I want to refund this transaction and terminate the vps order from order number X. The order was created on the 9th but was paid on saturday 11th at 23:00 and that's when service was established The time between Jul. 11, 2026, 23:00:00 AM and Jul. 13, 2026, 3:08:40 PM is: 1 day, 16 hours, 8 minutes, and 40 seconds Reason for cancellation is EXTREMELY poor CPU performance Our support team is available 24/7 and will get back to you as soon as possible. COPYRIGHT (c) 2008 - 2026 MAXKO Hosting [1] Link to Maxko cancellation policy Support reply to my Refund ticket (Click to expand) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New reply on ticket Date: 2026-07-13 19:12 From: MAXKO [email protected] To: myemail Reply-To: MAXKO Hosting [email protected] TICKET UPDATE There is a new reply on support ticket #3135. Hello, Thank you for contacting us. Your order was for a dedicated server, which has a standard deployment time of up to 24 hours. We also offer a Priority/Fast Installation option during checkout for customers who require faster deployment, but this option was not selected for your order. Additionally, your order was placed on 9 July, which was immediately before the weekend. Despite this, our team completed the installation during the weekend, and your server was delivered on 11 July. Regarding your refund request, we are unable to approve it. The deployment time was within the service conditions, and the server specifications were exactly as selected during the ordering process. If you are experiencing CPU performance issues, please let us know the workload or application you are running. We would be happy to recommend a more suitable dedicated server or another location that better fits your requirements. Depending on the hardware, there may be a small price difference. We are committed to helping you find the best solution for your needs. Best Regards, Mahmoud Hamdy You can view or respond to this message directly from your panel at MAXKO Hosting [1]. COPYRIGHT (c) 2008 - 2026 MAXKO Hosting [2] After seeing this lie-ridden email I responded to the ticket and wrote an email explaining that the order wasn't for a dedi but for a VPS, which is covered by Cancellation policy and I explained again the order was created on the 9th but wasn't paid for until 11th and that the service wasn't established before payment was completed. I received no reply and they disabled my user account on their website shortly after, while the VPS remained online (I had no way of accessing the VPS controls dashboard from this point on) After this happened I received a response in LET DMS (on July 17th) from Maxko hosting to my message (that was sent on July 2nd) where I inquired about the VPS that I ended up ordering on 9th (without getting a reply on LET) Maxko Hosting LET DM July 17th - translated from Croatian (Click to expand) Hello, Apologies for the delayed response; we are no longer active on the forum. Would you be purchasing as an individual or a company? We need to know so we can prepare a quote. My response to their DM July 22nd - Translated from Croatian (Click to expand) Hello, I purchased a private VPS hosted in Croatia, but I am dissatisfied with the performance (to say I am dissatisfied is an understatement, considering the price). I requested a refund within three days of payment and service activation, but your representative, Mahmoud Hamdy, fabricated lies to reject the refund request. Specifically, the order was placed on July 9th, but payment was not made until the evening of July 11th; the service was activated after that, at which point I ran a YABS benchmark and submitted a complaint regarding performance complaint to which you have still not responded. I submitted the refund request on July 13th—one day and approximately 16 hours after payment. Mahmoud Hamdy claimed that I had placed an order for a dedicated server on July 9th and that your team spent until July 11th setting it up, which is absolutely untrue. First, the order was for a VPS, not a dedicated server. Second, why would you set up a dedicated server two days before payment was even made? Our account on the website has been closed and the money has not been refunded, yet the VPS remains online... I ask for some professionalism so that I do not have to post about this on forums. Order number: X. Maxko Hosting 2nd LET DM July 22nd - translated from Croatian (Click to expand) Greeting, A few days ago we added additional nodes to the Croatian location. I suggest that we migrate the VPS to a new node and if the performance is satisfactory, we extend the service for free for a month, otherwise we return the paid amount. If you agree with the offer, please provide the VPS IP. LP (short for Kind Greetings), MAXKO Team My response to their 2nd DM July 23rd - translated from Croatian (Click to expand) Hello, Thank you for the offer, but in the meantime, I have already purchased another VPS and completed the migration, so the migration to a new node is unnescessary. Please issue a refund for the amount paid and let me know when it will be processed. The order number is X, as previously mentioned. Best regards. To this day I haven't received a reply to my DM, email or ticket, nor have I received a refund and the VPS is still online.

The Trump administration has found itself at the centre of another embarrassing controversy after a U.S. State Department presentation at the AIDS 2026 conference displayed an AI-generated map that mislabelled every country in Africa. The slide, shown during a global health presentation in Brazil, sparked widespread mockery online after attendees shared screenshots. In this Firstpost Live episode, we analyse the State Department's responsibility, saying the slide was hastily edited before the event. The incident has also raised fresh questions about government reliance on artificial intelligence, quality control, and whether the world's most powerful country is becoming too casual with facts. Josh Barnes tells you more. Moderator please change this to Offtopic Thanks!

Hi all! Since Windows Server licensing is extremly expensive and since I have until now not seen a properly licensed SMB out in the wild: Do you actually license accordingly? Meaning: Do you actually buy all the neccessary CALs, stick to VM maximums etc.? Or for short: Would you survive an audit? It's pretty tempting for small and medium businesses especially to weigh up the risk of an audit with the laughably expensive price for Windows Server licensing imo. What's your opinion? submitted by /u/Enough_Cauliflower69 [link] [comments]

Are there any companies offering freebies for SysAdmin Day? submitted by /u/jamesgamble [link] [comments]

Solo dev here, building a multi-tenant B2B SaaS on Azure (.NET + Postgres, Container Apps). One thing about my setup: I keep tenancy and authorization in my own Postgres — the identity provider is just a thin token issuer, my DB stays the source of truth for tenants/orgs/roles. Every External ID vs WorkOS/Zitadel/etc comparison I find is all about enterprise SSO, SAML, SCIM. But I don't need any of that yet (definitely later, just not now). So my real question, SSO aside: for the basic B2B stuff — orgs, memberships, roles, invites, tenant onboarding — does External ID already do the job, or is that exactly where the dedicated vendors (WorkOS, Zitadel, Clerk, etc.) hand you ready-made "organization" primitives that External ID doesn't have? And here's my doubt: if I already own the org/membership model in my own DB, doesn't a vendor's built-in "organization" just become a second source of truth I have to keep in sync? So unless I'm actually using SSO/SCIM, does the vendor advantage mostly disappear? Last thing: I'm planning to build a few SaaS products on the same auth layer — does that change the answer? For context, so far External ID has felt a bit mechanical/clunky to me rather than smooth — just a first impression, curious if others who've actually shipped with it feel the same. Basically trying to figure out if there's a real reason to go WorkOS/Zitadel/etc over External ID when you're not doing SSO and you keep authz in your own DB. Thanks! submitted by /u/Electronic-Map-6959 [link] [comments]

I'm trying to confirm I'm calculating the hourly commitment correctly for an AWS RDS Savings Plan. I have a single db.r8i.2xlarge RDS instance (Windows + SQL Server) that runs 24/7. On-Demand pricing: Instance: $1.20/hr Windows license: $0.184/hr SQL Server license: $0.48/hr Total: $1.864/hr With the Savings Plan, only the instance price is discounted: Instance: $0.96/hr Windows license: $0.184/hr SQL Server license: $0.48/hr Total discounted spend: $1.624/hr Based on that, I assumed my hourly Savings Plan commitment should be $1.624/hour. However, when I ran the AWS Purchase Analyzer, it recommended an hourly commitment of $0.96/hour, with estimated savings of $175.02/month (20%). I understand that the Savings Plan discount only applies to the compute (instance) portion and not the Windows or SQL Server licensing. What I'm unsure about is how that translates into the hourly commitment. Should the commitment be based only on the discounted compute cost ($0.96/hr), or the total hourly spend after the discount ($1.624/hr)? Has anyone purchased an RDS Savings Plan for SQL Server instances and can confirm which is correct? submitted by /u/ivanavich [link] [comments]

I want a large hdd server approx 40tb with 10gbps 330tb Bandwidth must be dmca ignored budget under 150 euro

Hi all, I've been researching a golden image and seems that Autopilot is best way forward for a company with many global locations. I don't quite understand the costs though. I can see that if you have certain Microsoft 365 licences then it's basically free. But only a small number of our users have these licences. Most of the time we would be setting up a new laptop and the end user would not be using 365. I was hoping we would have something like $X per month for autopilot licences and we could do as many computers as we wanted or $Y per device. Any input appreciated. Thank you submitted by /u/CheeseFace83 [link] [comments]

Hello, I’m recently observing a trend in my organization. Some of the devices (supposedly after updates) are unable to boot and being stuck in Windows Recovery Environment. Clicking continue just make devices to boot to the same screen. Following options were tested and didn’t help: Troubleshoot -> Advanced options: - Startup repair - Uninstall quality/feature updates - Starting in safe mode - DISM and sfc scan Is there any way to fix it remotely without OS reinstallation? How to check which updates were recently pushed to the device using Intune? submitted by /u/Ok_Mycologist_696 [link] [comments]

Hey everyone, I'm having a persistent issue with a specific Windows client connecting to our WSUS environment. The machine appears in the WSUS console with a yellow warning triangle and the status "No report generated yet" , even though it is able to query the WSUS server for updates. System Info: OS: Windows 11 Pro Domain: Internal Active Directory environment The Problem When running an update scan via PowerShell ( $Searcher.Search("IsInstalled=0") ), the client actually contacts the WSUS server successfully and receives update objects ( ResultCode = 3 ). However, the client fails to send its telemetry / status report back to the WSUS server. The yellow triangle in the WSUS console won't go away, and the "Last Report" timestamp never updates. Looking into WindowsUpdate.log (generated via Get-WindowsUpdateLog ), I found the following errors: Plaintext ComApi *FAILED* [80244010] wuapicore.dll ProtocolTalker *FAILED* [80072F76] ECP: DownloadCabFile: failed to get CDN Country for error reporting Error 0x80244010 ( WU_E_PT_EXCEEDED_MAX_SERVER_TRIPS ) indicates that the client is exceeding the maximum allowable server round trips during the scan/reporting phase. Steps Already Taken (Troubleshooting Done): WSUS Reset & Local Cache Clearing: Stopped wuauserv and bits . Deleted SusClientId and SusClientIdValidation registry keys. Purged C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution . Re-registered via wuauclt /resetauthorization /detectnow and usoclient StartScan . GPO / Registry Check: Confirmed UseWUServer = 1 . Verified both WUServer and WUStatusServer point to the correct internal WSUS URL. WSUS Server / IIS Checks: Verified IIS AppPool ( WusPool ): Private Memory Limit is already set to 0 (unlimited). Forced Scan & Reporting via COM API: Executed $AutoUpdate.DetectNow() via PowerShell. The search succeeds, but the reporting step hangs/fails silently. Next Planned Action / Question: It seems the WSUS database is sending too many superseded/declined update metadata entries to the client, causing the client to hit the 200-request limit ( 80244010 ). I am planning to run Get-WsusServer | Invoke-WsusServerCleanup -DeclineSupersededUpdates -DeclineExpiredUpdates -CleanupObsoleteUpdates on the WSUS server to purge superseded updates. Has anyone encountered this specific behavior where Search() succeeds but reporting completely halts due to trip limits? Are there any other client-side registry adjustments or IIS tweaks I should consider before running the cleanup? Thanks in advance! submitted by /u/After_Emergency_4788 [link] [comments]

Hi everyone! I’m looking for a log collector/management setup for a few of my Linux servers. I’ve spent some time searching Google, but I haven't found anything that feels particularly "user-friendly" yet. Most solutions either require editing huge, complex config files or feel way too over-engineered for my needs. I need a good way to handle long-term log retention. Maybe you could suggest a solution? submitted by /u/jkvint [link] [comments]

There is a great deal of user-generated content out there, from scripts and software to tutorials and videos, but we've generally tried to keep that off of the front page due to the volume and as a result of community feedback. There's also a great deal of content out there that violates our advertising/promotion rule, from scripts and software to tutorials and videos. We have received a number of requests for exemptions to the rule, and rather than allowing the front page to get consumed, we thought we'd try a weekly thread that allows for that kind of content. We don't have a catchy name for it yet, so please let us know if you have any ideas! In this thread, feel free to show us your pet project, YouTube videos, blog posts, or whatever else you may have and share it with the community. Commercial advertisements, affiliate links, or links that appear to be monetization-grabs will still be removed. submitted by /u/AutoModerator [link] [comments]

I've spent the last few weeks asking people who run AI automations what they won't let an agent do. One answer keeps coming back in a form I can't stop thinking about. Someone running automations for clients described their process like this: start with a manual audit of 100% of what the AI handles. Once you feel confident, drop to a 20% random audit. After a few weeks with no errors, only audit when something breaks. That's a completely reasonable process. It's also the process where, if a quiet failure started on week four, you would probably never know. The thing that struck me across every conversation is that the line people draw isn't risky vs. safe. It's verifiable vs. not. People happily automate high-stakes work when the result is checkable, and refuse low-stakes work when it isn't. One person put it as "anything of importance that cannot be easily verified." And almost nobody trusts the agent's own report of what it did. Everyone had independently built some version of the same workaround: log at the tool layer instead of the agent layer, compare the result against approved source data, keep everything read-only by default, record what was requested separately from what actually executed. So the questions I'm stuck on: If you've scaled back checking on an automation, did you ever go back and verify a sample? What did you find? Has an automation ever reported success while doing the wrong thing, and how long before anyone noticed? What would you need to see to trust a check more than you trust your own spot audit? For context: this started as a university research project and has pushed me toward building something in this area, so I'd rather be upfront about that. No link, nothing to sign up for; I'm trying to find out whether "silently wrong, discovered late" is a real recurring problem or something people have already solved well enough. Concrete stories are far more useful to me than agreement. submitted by /u/Recent-Ball543 [link] [comments]

I just stumbled onto a problem I can't wrap my head around. I work for a company that dabbles in ITSec and manages firewalls for several customers. One of this customers just called me because some remote users can't connect to their main site. I looked at one of those systems and found a weird situation. The PC is fully online and can access the web but can't even ping the customers firewall even though it should. I did a PCAP filtering for her IP I find nothing. There is no connection at all. But when I do a tracert to the same IP everything looks fine and I see incoming ICMP traffic from their IP on the firewall. What's going on here? From my site (same ISP as the customer and the remote user) I can connect to their firewall and the remote worker can reach my firewall. Any idea? submitted by /u/boris-becks [link] [comments]

A few weeks ago we created a new aws account and moved it under an organisation with our existing - 5 year old - aws account. Both accounts (including the 5 year old one) have now been marked as unverified, so not only can we not use the new account, but we're effectively locked out out of our production account! We have support tickets open on both accounts that have sat unassigned for over a week in order to try and get the accounts verified. Has anybody run into similar issues? What is going on at aws!? submitted by /u/Electric_Pistachio [link] [comments]

All emails in organization have been logged out. When they log in with their credentials, there's an 'Invalid Login' prompt. On the CPanel, the accounts have been restricted and resetting passwords doesn't solve the issue. What could be the problem? submitted by /u/Objective-Object828 [link] [comments]

I work in operations at a large regional bank. My title is entry-level ops — same title as coworkers who open mail and process bill payments. The official job posting for my role says it exists to serve "as a back-up, or on rotation with, our technical support/operations analyst." I *am* that analyst. Nobody backs me up. My desk has absorbed: - Identity/access administration across four platforms including a mainframe (I direct the IAM team on what access to grant) - Application and systems administration for our core platform stack - Automation development — one process went from ~3 weeks manual to ~30 minutes - Designing the reporting cycles leadership presents quarterly - Production incident response — last week I started at 6:45am (shift starts at 8), pulled in the vendor and two internal IT teams, ran the bridge call, restored service by 9:40 - Writing the helpdesk's troubleshooting procedures — and their escalations route to me *through the IT ticketing queue*, on a team I'm not classified under **The money:** My employer's posted range for my title tops out ~$0.75/hr above what I make, and that range explicitly covers "all levels of the role" nationwide. Government labor stats for my metro put the occupational categories my work falls under at roughly 40–55% above what I earn. I make below the average of *every* job category in my metro. **What's happened when I raise it:** - Told to be "more specific" — then told that role doesn't exist here - My manager said last fall we'd both move to the technical org. I did prep work. It got shelved. He moved in March. I didn't. - I documented everything against the company's own job architecture, showing the work lands a full band higher. Result: "we value you enormously, but this job doesn't exist in our section." They admitted they *could* adjust pay and create a title. No owner, no date, no commitment. - In that meeting my manager claimed he gave me a role document in week one. I'd never seen it. He sent it after — a six-week onboarding training schedule that surfaced only after I submitted my documentation. **Where I'm at:** This has taken a real toll. I have a diagnosed condition that's gotten worse under the stress, and my doctor is ready to certify me for FMLA. I'm planning to take it, then some already-approved PTO. I'm also actively job hunting. I'll be honest that my feelings about the leave are mixed. It's genuinely medically needed — I'm running on empty. But part of me is also aware that a lot of critical work sits only with me, and things will get uncomfortable while I'm out. I don't love that I feel some satisfaction about that, and I don't want to make a decision about my health for the wrong reasons. **Asking:** Any internal play I'm missing, or is "they'd have fixed it by now" the right read after two years? Anyone actually win a misclassification fight? What made the difference? Has anyone taken medical leave in the middle of something like this? How did it land, and did it change anything? Advice on translating hybrid ops/IT experience onto a resume for analyst or developer roles? Honest takes welcome, including "you already know the answer." submitted by /u/Delicious-Spell1356 [link] [comments]

We manage the devices with Intune, but work with Google Apps. We have SSO to Google with Entra ID provisioning. I inherited this setup. This leads to problems in various scenarios. One of the problems is iOS BYOD devices. If you're fully immersed in the Microsoft ecosystem, MAM/Protection Policies are unavailable. Is there any way to use iOS BYOD in this scenario? What other options are there? On android we are using the work profile. submitted by /u/Sad_Mastodon_1815 [link] [comments]