Negative filter in report

[peters 1]

Hi,

I want to report all devices (PCs + NBs) without S/N. How to set the filter?

Or how to report all devices with and without S/N in 1 report (Name, S/N).

Is this possible?

Edited April 3, 2018 by peters
repair mistake...

[Marcos 5,074]

Please clarify what you mean by S/N. Looking at report data, and adding "S/N" doesn't yield any results. Entering "serial" yields only the following ones:

[MartinK 378]

Seems there is no possibility to use negative filter in reporting mechanism. You could theoretically report all devices with identifiers and filter out manually those without SN, but maybe it would be better to use dynamic group with following configuration:

Be aware that only actively connecting devices will be shown in such group. If I recall correctly, once devices evaluate this conditions, it should be even possible to create report in ERA to show devices in such dynamic group.

[peters 1]

On 3. 4. 2018 at 4:01 PM, Marcos said:

Please clarify what you mean by S/N. Looking at report data, and adding "S/N" doesn't yield any results. Entering "serial" yields only the following ones:

Bingo! I tried to find serial number such way too, but none of theese possibilities match what I need.

I want to report device serial number (PC, NB), so it is hidden under device identifiers what leads to strange behaviour. And I haven´t found any option to report ALL PCs and their serial number, if they have one.

Also, there is no way to report devices without S/N. It seems like there is automatic hidden filter (which I don´t want) and PC without S/N are excluded from report instead only empty S/N column.

S/N is common shortcut for serial number.

IncreasingIy I consider this behaviour as a bug or as a bad design.

[peters 1]

On 3. 4. 2018 at 4:39 PM, MartinK said:

Seems there is no possibility to use negative filter in reporting mechanism. You could theoretically report all devices with identifiers and filter out manually those without SN, but maybe it would be better to use dynamic group with following configuration:

Be aware that only actively connecting devices will be shown in such group. If I recall correctly, once devices evaluate this conditions, it should be even possible to create report in ERA to show devices in such dynamic group.

Than you but sorry, it is very frustrating to work with dynamic groups in such a case (need wait until all PCs connect to server etc.). Recently I tried dynamic groups for some other reason and there are bad limitations - I am afraid - by design.

[MichalJ 434]

@peters Can you be please more specific about limitations? What particular functionality you find missing?

Dynamic groups concept has two primary purposes. One is "filtering" (and I do agree, that it´s a bit less flexible compared to running a custom report on top of already reported data). Second is automation, meaning upon meeting DG inclusion conditions, agent can execute action or for example apply a policy. 

Serial number reporting will be improved in the future version of ESET Remote Administrator.

 

 

[peters 1]

2 hours ago, MichalJ said:

@peters Can you be please more specific about limitations? What particular functionality you find missing?

Dynamic groups concept has two primary purposes. One is "filtering" (and I do agree, that it´s a bit less flexible compared to running a custom report on top of already reported data). Second is automation, meaning upon meeting DG inclusion conditions, agent can execute action or for example apply a policy. 

Serial number reporting will be improved in the future version of ESET Remote Administrator.

 

 

Dynamic groups:

If you want to see bad concept of dynamic groups definition, try to change slightly definition of actual dynamic group. Immediatelly this group is empty, no matter how minimal the change is. And now you can wait even days or so (i.e. user ill or holiday) until the last device connects to reach the recent state.

Who has time enough for that silly behaviour? How can one test various modifications when group is always empty and must wait and wait? This is a big obstacle which discourages me from use dyn. groups.

Another limitation: There is not possible to create dyn. group of PCs without agent...

IMHO it is necessary that server execute the first evaluation immediatelly after new definition or modification itself according to data it actually has and then, after agent connection, membership is modified actual way.

But it is not this topic and in addition ESET do not want to hear this..

Reporting possibilities:

I like your screenshot with more operators, but now there are only 3...

When this version is going to be available?

Edited April 6, 2018 by peters

[MichalJ 434]

@peters Why you have said that we do not want to hear this? Actually completely the opposite, we want to hear your feedback. I can assure you, that it is being heard, and also we are analyzing / preparing a change, that would potentially resolve your concerns.

Concerning the availability of V7, we have not set a date in iron, but we will most probably announce it during the RSA in two weeks. Preliminary it´s end of Q2/2018.

 

[peters 1]

On 6. 4. 2018 at 4:04 PM, MichalJ said:

@peters Why you have said that we do not want to hear this? Actually completely the opposite, we want to hear your feedback. I can assure you, that it is being heard, and also we are analyzing / preparing a change, that would potentially resolve your concerns.

Concerning the availability of V7, we have not set a date in iron, but we will most probably announce it during the RSA in two weeks. Preliminary it´s end of Q2/2018.

 

Nice to hear it.

I tried to explain this dynamic groups problem to support and to a presenter some time ago and their answer was "Only agent can evaluate dynamic groups membership and there are no plan to change it"...

I will look forward to positive future changes.

Thanks for info.

Edited April 9, 2018 by peters
repair mistake