Chris Humby

My feedback

  1. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Smoothwall Filter (On Premise) » Authentication  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Chris Humby shared this idea  · 
  2. 304 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    25 comments  ·  Smoothwall Filter (On Premise) » Reporting  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    started  ·  Chris Humby responded

    Hi,

    This is one of our most voted ideas and we used the feedback to help build our Safeguarding reports in Framlingham and Glamis releases. Aim was to provide something that;

    • Simple and easy to understand so it can be delivered and used directly by Safeguarding officers, HR and other non-IT personnel with minimal understanding of web technology.
    • Highlighted the breaches and intent with specific colour coded breach levels and relevant information highlighting the user intent.
    • Report broken down in to headers on a per user basis.
    • Ability to delegate, email or print reports directly to the relevant department, minimising IT departments overheads with this work.

    We know many customers are using these reports already and have received much positive feedback.

    However, I can see from previous comments there’s still room for improvement and you have some smart ideas on how to take this further. I’m…

    Chris Humby commented  · 

    From past comments I can see following points raised:

    - Safeguarding reports aren't simple enough? We did strip out much technical detail already but could remove more or make it clearer?

    - False positives are an issue? Is this an issue with some sites being mis-categorised as safeguarding breaches?

  3. 97 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Marcel, I agree. I like the idea of address objects being central place to administer addressing across all modules/nodes.

    We've also got a separate request for import functionality here too: https://smoothwall.uservoice.com/forums/145832-smoothwall-utm-swg/suggestions/16114861-bulk-import-of-ip-addresses

    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Do the address objects help with this at all? So in the original example you could create an object called "Boiler Monitoring" or "Mr Briggs Laptop" if you wanted and use those in the firewall?

    I know address objects can't be used everywhere yet but we're gradually add support across the UI for them.

  4. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Hi, It's not really gone away, we've merged the firewall rules together into the same place so you don't have to manage two different tables of rules.

    You should be able to achieve the same by setting up blocking firewall rules and you could apply this to an address object called "IP Block". From then on you only need to add new IPs to that object and they're blocked.

    Does this help at all?

  5. 39 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    10 comments  ·  Smoothwall Filter (On Premise)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Interesting idea, are you already using LetsEncrypt services? Are they OK with commercial use of there certs?

  6. 57 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  Chris Humby responded

    We’re planning a small bug-fix update to IDex Agent soon.

    If there’s time I’d like to include this feature request too. For now this would likely be an additional configuration field where a list of usernames to exclude can be specified.

    Would this fulfil your requirements? Please add your comments to the discussion on uservoice.

    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Hi Marcel, Thanks for the feedback, I can see how that would make managing the excluded users easier within AD. I think this would require extra routines within the IDex Agent in order to check the group membership too since we only see the usernames from the audit log.

    Chris Humby commented  · 

    I think we should be able to get the option added to the graphical installer. Centralised configuration of agent isn't planned yet but something we're thinking about.

    Regards including whole OUs, do you find that there are a lot of accounts that need to be excluded from IDex Agent?

    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Hi Ian, James,

    Thanks for the feedback.

    To keep it simple and reduce traffic / load into IDex directory we were planning to put it into an IDex Agent additional registry option for now. That way IDex Agent doesn't even need to forward on data for those excluded users.

    I believe for multiple servers you should be able to update the registry settings using group policy. Would that make things easier for you Ian?

    Chris Humby supported this idea  · 
    Chris Humby shared this idea  · 
  7. 121 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Unfortunately we couldn't fit this into our firewall update included in the Inverness release. It's still very much on our radar though and we'll try to fit it into a future firewall project.

  8. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Smoothwall Filter (On Premise)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Hi Victor,

    You can already schedule a reboot overnight on a one off basis.

    Is there a reason you need to reboot the Smoothwall every night?

    Regards,
    Chris

  9. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Smoothwall Filter (On Premise)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Hi Eddie,

    Could you clarify this idea? Which page do you mean, the user activity page?

    Regards,
    Chris

  10. 14 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Chris Humby shared this idea  · 
  11. 20 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Chris Humby supported this idea  · 
    Chris Humby shared this idea  · 
  12. 15 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Chris Humby commented  · 

    Thanks for the additional feedback.

    There's nothing on the road map at the moment to refresh the existing Guardian exceptions but I can see how that would be useful.

    We'll leave this idea open pending the next point we review Guardian / Web Filtering interface.

Feedback and Knowledge Base