Draconian IT departments

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

The IT department here has decided to block lots of sites to free up bandwidth for "genuine business use". I can't look at any sites about cookery or sport, web based e-mail, or public web host-y things like Geocities (denying me the opportunity to enjoy FatNick's latest composition...bah!).

So, are the IT departments where you work heavy-handed when it comes to internet access? Or does an "anything goes" policy prevail? The staff here are divided between those who regard it as a sensible move and those who think it's the first step towards chaining us to our desks and tattooing barcodes on our foreheads.

― MarkH, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Of course some of you may be in IT departments yourselves and spend your days muttering "Users! Eurgh! Scum! Keep them in check!"

(or something like that)

New IT Answers!

― MarkH, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I work in an IT department. We're incredibly slack about keeping the users in check regarding internet access and stuff like that, mainly because we've better things to worry about.

However, we do spend all our time moaning about users. Users are all cockfarmers.

― DV, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ditto on DV. we're looking at getting something to block, but WE DON'T WANT IT! it's purely an HR driven thing. we really think it's pointless. hopefully they'll start blocking personal phone calls too. and then the crackdown on the post room -- all those gas bills having postage pais by uncle rupert, the poor guy.

The only thing we WOULD like to block is people frequenting WAREZ sites cos we don't want that stuff on the machines we have legal responsibility for. But you don't block sites like that, you detect their use and then give the users a SMACK.

The infrastructure guys have a window open with ALL the company HTTP requests scrolling down. some funny stuff there i can tell you. ho ho.

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

DEAR GOD I am now paranoid, especially considering some of the newsgroups I have been scouring ahem.

― Sarah, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Here (Uni) they seem to have completely unrestricted access (I hgaven't tried looking at porn yet). For fuck sake, they even had Morpheus installed a few weeks ago, though that seems to have disappeared now.

― Graham, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Cuz of my job I can look at anything I like. That's legal obviously. But I can't FTP annoyingly, not that there is a single credible business reason for me to be able to FTP and I have spent a year trying to think of one.

― Tom, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Surely there must be some need to transfer large (ie > 4MB) documents between offices in this new merged company of yours? Your IT department should be made aware that FTP is much more efficient and reliable than shoddy old email pronto.

― RickyT, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

i am in charge of our office firewall... i have the power!

― michael, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

some ile thread suggestions:

"what's your fave port number"

"Port 21 -- classic or dud?"

:o)

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

We can do pretty much anything on the internet content-wise (don't know what the official corporate policy is but who reads that?) but the sometimes old plug ins we have installed (and the fact that we're on Macs) mean that some things don't work very well.

What we can't do is install any software/run any executable files on our machines. Which is sometimes a pain, but seems eminently sensible from an IT dept's point of view. I don't understand why all companies don't adopt this policy. Is it technically difficult?

― Nick, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Not difficult at all, at least on any NT or unix derived systems. Bloody aggravating though if you're a techie and can't install patches when they are released and instead have to wait for IT to do it for you.

― RickyT, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Well I agree - but obviously IT dept is immune to such restrictions and they tend to assume they have a monopoly on techiness in the company.

― NIck, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If it's so easy, then why don't they do it? I mean surely the problems caused (inc. security risk in the case of file sharing sofware) by people installing their own stuff willy nilly outweigh the business benefits of people like Ricky T improving their efficiency through download of the latest patches?

― Nick, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Because they are fools and/or the pay off between extra security and efficiency isn't worth it and/or the IT department is undermanned and can't afford the time to go round installing new versions of everything on all the companies machines and/or the firm is largely technical folks (ie a software house) who won't put up with it and/or the management won't let them do it because it stops them playing games on their boxen. In your sort of environment I reckon only the first and last are likely to be the real reasons.

― RickyT, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

hee, you said "boxen". u r king ile geek.

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

what is this "boxen"? Box in the plural so that it matches ox/oxen?

― MarkH, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yes. Kill me now.

― RickyT, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

rm -r RickyT

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

more Alan

― Sam, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

mv /bin/top /bin/statscock

― Graham, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If they're wasting their time tracking me, that explains why computer service requests take so long to get done.

― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Haha well I *am* our IT department, so I can do what the bally hell I want to. Which means most days are spent surfing scat websites obviously.

― Steve.n., Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

is that the Cleo Lane FAQ site?

― Alan Trewartha, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

WHY CAN'T I EVER SEE THE WORD DRACONIAN WITHOUT THINKING OF DRACULA?

― Nick, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

This is irrelevant and ungracious, but I'd just like to express my loathing for "boxen" and other geek pluralisations. GRRR. (Ah, see the bitterness of the failed geek.)

Yay for shell accounts and ssh/scp and screen. Because obviously the fact that the vast amounts of bandwidth I'm hogging are being filled with encrypted stuff means they won't get at all suspicious/annoyed. Well, at least it means that when I bitch/argue/hunt for huge downloads on irc or spend all day reading newsgroups nobody can read all of it. I hope.

I get the feeling all of ILE's IT dept types are coming round to strangle me with ethernet cables.

― Rebecca, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

the LIBRARIANS look over your SHOULDERS
and some totally senseless sites were blocked i recall

― Maria, Wednesday, 28 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.