Jump to content

kingoftheworld

Members
  • Posts

    154
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by kingoftheworld

  1. It looks like you provided full access to only a select few Static Groups and the license it probably in the top-level (All) access group which this account doesn't have access to. You will either need to provide access to the static group that the license is at, or move the license to a static group that this account has access to.
  2. Any ETA on a fix for this issue? Yesterday, I experienced this popup no less than five times throughout the day without any interacting with the ESET GUI.
  3. Not necessarily related to ERA, but for the enterprise A/V products Description: Consistent handling of update profiles between Windows and macOSDetail: I would think that two products that are essentially branded the same should operate the same between platforms, ESET Endpoint A/V 6.* for Windows and macOS. When configuring update profiles to pull from an internal mirror on a PC, you essentially have to go in an update the the task for the update to use your internal mirror first, then use ESET's servers second. However, when you manually trigger the update now using the GUI, this fails at doesn't know to use a secondary profile and only uses the primary. In my mind, the macOS behavior is ideal method where you specify a primary and secondary server. It attempts the first, if it doesn't connect, it fails to the second. P.S. I am not interested in using the caching proxy that has been recommended me more times than I can remember. I am confused on why these products from a administrative standpoint are so very different. Another example is the ability to password protect the settings on Windows, but a horrible method of using groups/accounts on macOS. I simply want to apply a password before dropping into the settings panel. I am forced to mark all of the settings as Forced on my macOS policy to prevent users from modifying them which is a real pain if I have to have a technician troubleshoot something with an end-user.
  4. @pps @MichalJ It is currently available under the sync task. See screenshot below
  5. This is already an option in the task settings. I believe you can choose the behavior.
  6. I would just do this ASAP well ahead of when you plan to make the change. Any clients that are not on or otherwise don't receive this policy will require manually changing them.
  7. Yes, please sign me up for any beta releases. I am ready to get it installed on my dev server.
  8. When can we expect v7? It has been promised for far too long, and we have many existing problems that are promised to be fixed in this version. I was originally told we should have it available Q1 of 2018, but it doesn't appear to be the case. Should we expect some type of release to be around the RSA conference, or are we still a long ways out?
  9. I have experienced this on my mac as well. I believe I have the stock update policies set as well.
  10. I can confirm that I have a server that is behaving in the same manner. Configured exactly the same as three others, and only one has the alert.
  11. That is correct. However, if you click Download from the menu bar on the left side, then click on "Show Additional Download options", there are different binaries that do not include the Fusioncore PUA. I guess they probably receive some type of revenue for having the bundled one on their home page. You will notice the one on the homepage has "bundled" in the filename as well.
  12. The problem with removing the duplicate seat is exactly as you mentioned. If the device is a laptop and checks in the first time with a wired NIC to activate, then checks in with the wireless NIC later activating a second license, how are you supposed to tell the difference between which one is which? I have stopped removing duplicates because it has generated a service ticket when I incorrectly guessed the wrong one and was showing deactivated messages on the client side.
  13. However, with the mirror configuration, this internal and external access does not work well if the end-user triggers an update from the application menu. This will likely result in an error when the client is unable to reach the mirror server. I wish ESET would standardize this behavior between the PC and macOS versions of the product into a simple try server/config A first, if fail or unable to connect, try B.
  14. Yes, the remote host field should give you the FQDN or IP of the public IP of the device.
  15. Agreed on this part. I am actually almost hesitant to move from 6.5 to 7 until it is a couple major revisions in. But the sooner I get my hands on a beta version to install on my dev server, the sooner I will feel comfortable.
  16. Do you have any information as to the next revision of the server will be released? Or will the next big release be ERA7?
  17. I have found that to be problematic for a couple of reasons. 1. If the machine has just been powered off for an extended period of time. I don't really want to delete the object since that will lose all information about the device. If the machine has been reimaged, I only want to keep the one with the most recent connection. 2. I have found this to be problematic with licensing when selecting the remove option license. For example, I believe when a machine is named "CompName123" and that machine is reimaged with the machine "CompName123", when the delete non-connecting machines task is issued with the remove license. I have not heavily tested, but I believe in a couple of cases it is being removed from both the old and new object. In ERA 6, this is an issue since you have to reissue the activate command to the object rather than in previous versions of the server issuing the license from the server automatically.
  18. One thing I know would be useful to me and my team is a way to quickly purge or remove machines from ESET that are duplicates or even stale machines from ERA 6. We have found that as machines are reimaged, or removed from the domain, their ESET object remains. I understand that ESET doesn't receive any notification as far as when these events happen, but if there was the ability to easily do a clean up within the console, this would be very helpful. My current process for this is to build a machine report to a specific OU, download the CSV into Excel, and do some filters to evaluate duplicates. This is tedious and time consuming to do. Would anyone else find this useful?
  19. If you are good with SQL, you can build the report you are looking for. That is how I built a similar report. It takes a little bit of poking around to understand the structure, but with a few joins, it is possible
  20. If anyone is interested in a work around, I added the URL to the "Exclude from Checking" in the Web Protection section of a policy. It seems have resolved the issue. Will remove this entry once the definitions are updated.
  21. Any ETA on the new mirror tool and ERA server to manage the new endpoint?
×
×
  • Create New...