During my studies of Windows PowerShell, I’ve come across a great number of excellent resources for experienced admins and newbies alike. The following is a compilation of sites, book recommendations, and tools to help out anyone wanting to start working with this ridiculously powerful scripting language. Windows PowerShell comes as an optional feature in modern versions of Windows desktop operating systems such as Vista and Windows 7, and is generally installed by default on Windows Server 2008 and 2008 R2. PowerShell v3 comes as part of the core operating system for Windows 8 and Windows 2012, in the form of features you install from the “turn Windows features on and off” menu. If you’re running an older version of Windows, such as XP or Server 2003, you can download PowerShell here, and get some handy PowerShell Active Directory management tools for Windows Server 2008 and earlier here.
The starred (*) items are strongly recommended for beginners or anyone new to PowerShell.
When getting more advanced with any scripting or programming language, it’s always a good idea to get familiar with regular expressions to help get the most out of your scripts. Currently, Mastering Regular Expressions, 3rd Edition is one of the top-rated books out there on the subject. It doesn’t have code-examples specific to PowerShell, but hopefully future editions will. Here a great site for free tutorials of regular expressions to help you get started: Regular-Expressions.info
In the IT industry, there’s a lot of talk about how good a “security professional” is versus a “hacker”. Considering the companies that were compromised this year alone – Sony, RSA, Valve, just to name a few – the whole industry is looking at security a whole lot more seriously these days.
This brings me to a thread on TechExams.net from a few years ago that discusses what it takes to be an industry-recognized security professional. Something to note here, this forum assumes that certifications are earned through rigorous study and hands-on experience, not through memorizing stolen test-questions or cramming a book just enough to pass the test. That being said, this particular conversation discusses the much-lauded CISSP certification, which requires professional experience and a degree, in addition to a test, in order to obtain.
Keatron, who teaches courses in network security, had the following advice for another forum-member asking how to get into security:
I’ve had many people sit my CEH class and realize they should have had Security+ level knowledge under their belts first. I by have it, I actually mean have it, not just pass the test.
I would say probably Sec+ (even if you do it self study).
Then MCSA:Sec
Then CEH
Then SSCP
At this point I’d suggest getting some Cisco in there. And you must start with CCNA, Then work the CCSP route (will not be easy, but worth it).
By this time you should be very ready to start preparing for the CISSP.
Again, keep in mind that the assumption here is that a professional would be working as he or she earns these certs, and actually learning the material in a practical way over the course of the two or three years it would take to study for all these tests.
So, the response we get from UnixGuy, another member of the forum who is interested in security-work:
Hmmm, isn’t this tooo long a way to earn a CISSP ??
And here is the big payoff, Keatron’s reasoning for all those other skills and experience:
For UnixGuy, think of it this way. Let’s say you have 6 different certifications that all deal with 6 different areas of Information Security. Think of these as your 6 cans of Coke. Now think of the CISSP as the little plastic stuff that holds a six pack of coke together. Take your 6 cans of coke (your experience and other certs) and the little plastic stuff (your CISSP), add those together and you have a solid six pack that’s held together well. For example, you might have a job as a firewall administrator. You might perform this job well for 6 or 7 years. However, you could be an expert firewall administrator, and not know squat about application security. In reality, the CISSP helps a security professional take all their years of experience, and certifications and FINALLY tie them all together and see clear relationships between it all. But there’s the old saying “garbage in, garbage out”. So in other words, if you are a person with only 1 can of coke (mimimal experience and minimal exposure to certifications), then the little plastic thing (CISSP) wont really do you much good, because you don’t have any cans (experience and certs) to tie together. The CISSP is often described as a mile wide and an inch deep. But it should be understood that you don’t go a mile deep because theoretically, you’ve already been 20 miles deep in several of the domains. I always stress experience first, then certs. However, sometimes you need the cert, to be awarded the opportunity to get the experience. But I often recommend people in the security field get vendor specific certs related to operating systems or network equipment they may be responsbile for securing. You can’t possibly secure a large building if you don’t know where all the doors and windows are. Additionally you need to know how to open and close these doors and windows. Same goes for systems and networks. Here’s a few examples;
How can one possibly understand group policy if they’ve never implemented or least labbed it out in preperation for MCSE? How could you know that group policies only apply to computers that are a member of the domain, OU, or site that group policy was applied to if you haven’t done it, or again labbed it out. Not to mention you have to remember to give groups read and apply group policy permissions to the group policy object if it is to have any effect at all. If one doesn’t understand these basics, then how could they possibly even start to secure a Windows based network? How does Kerberos work (in Windows world). What’s sent in clear text and what’s encrypted? How feasible is it for an attacker to forge a ticket and fool another device or computer in the realm to believing it’s legit? If you’ve never implemented a Pix or an ASA then how could you know what it’s default inspection rules for the FTP protocol is? We’re taught that FTP uses ports 20 and 21 only. But is that actually accurate? Is is true that FTP actually uses dynamically allocated ports to actually do the data transfer part of an FTP session? How does the ASA default inspection rules allow for this? And if you know the answer to that, then what security concerns does this behavior and allowance or disallowance by ASA introduce or expose your organization to? Have you observed it’s behavior via ethereal or some other analyzer or sniffer? What about the bazillion other protocols you’re forced to allow into your network? Are you sure DNS only uses port 53? TCP or UDP? Both? When you perform a query for a resource on the web, does the response to query come back in on UDP port 53? What about zone transfers? Is that via port 53 as well? TCP or UDP? Are these zone transfers in cleartext? If they are, what can you implement to encrypt these zone transfers? How does Checkpoint Firewall solutions deal with this behavior? (And saying it just works doesn’t count). Are the ways in which it deals with this behavior introducing unique security considerations? Isn’t it true that the biggest problems with firewall, IDS, and other mechanisms is that they act and behave in a very predictable manner? How does NTFS file systems store data and files? What about NFS? FAT? What about ZFS? So how do ZFS and EXT2 differ in how they store and catergorize data? From a confidentiality perspective, which is more feasible? If you haven’t worked with these file systems you might not know the answers. However, getting certifications can expose you to this very information and least give you some level of knowlegde in those areas.
This list could go on and on. And obviously a CISSP that thinks they only utilize port 21 when they go to an FTP site and download files probably could have benefited from getting little more experience (or getting more cans) before getting the plastic peice (CISSP) to pull it all together. Because pulling it all together with too few cans causes us to have huge “knowledge gaps” and therefore renders us less effective in our roles as information security professionals.
So UnixGuy, the above is some of the major reasons I suggest a path to the CISSP that’s probably a little longer than what you normally hear. Thanks for reading. And I hope it helps.
Keatron.
I agree with every word of it. You cannot secure a network, a server, a website, or even a stand-alone PC, if you don’t know how those things work in the first place. Security is a second-tier skillset, you have to learn how it works before you can learn how to protect it. ”Security” isn’t some additional field that was invented for us to work in, it’s a term for the in-depth knowledge we gain as we work and learn about these systems that helps prevent exploits and hacks from being executed. UnixGuy’s question is a common one, and he’s not stupid or self-entitled for thinking that the road is too long. Unfortunately, I think that security isn’t taken seriously enough as a whole by this industry, (and many others,) and the result is that most of us don’t know how much work and effort goes into becoming an expert on that level.
Given, even experts make mistakes and sometimes the black-hats (bad guys) are sometimes smarter than the white hats (good guys), but that’s all the more reason to study, train, and prepare yourself if you want to be a CISSP, for example. Some people think the road is too long. . . I think that the road isn’t often long enough. It’s a big, bad world out there full of threats and people who want to steal our information. The more you know, the fewer times you’ll get caught with your pants down.
So, I’m studying for a new cert. . . Yup, Exchange is going to be my “special friend” for the next month or two while I study for the MCTS certification test on it. I’ve gotten started on some training material, like beginning the CBT Nuggets video series and labbing out a couple of Windows Server 2008 R2 boxes in VMWare Player. I’m also going to try to get my hands on the Inside Out book and possibly the Sybex book. I haven’t decided if I want to do the exam for the full MCITP: Enterprise Messaging Administrator 2010, we’ll have to see how crazy I feel.
So far, I’ve done a bare-bones install of Exchange 2010 three times, (once almost without any screw-ups,) in a lab environment consisting of a domain controller and a member server both running Windows Server 2008 R2. Baby steps, baby steps.
** Update: finally found this video on YouTube. **
Reading through it, I began to realize that some of the assumptions I’d made about education in my part of the world is pretty much true. For the most part, people find science and mathematics harder to understand and study than they do subjects like history, English, and others that fall under the umbrella of liberal arts. The question I had to ask myself is why. Why do so many people have such a hard time with one area of focus, but not others? Is it because the college coursework for English majors is less complicated and demanding than what engineering and science majors have to deal with? After spending long hours in study-sessions with Hanif Houston, a recent graduate of UC Berkeley’s English undergradute department, I’d say this isn’t true. His workload consisted of sometimes reading an entire novel per week, analyzing it, and writing several lengthy papers at once. My workload consisted of dozens of math problems, physics questions, and code-writing projects each week; all of these together often times didn’t amount to the amount of time and effort Hanif spent dissecting Shakespeare or building arguments for why Philip Roth’s sarcasm should be bottled and sold as a remedy-cure for common stupidity.
Given, I’m still a lower-division computer science and electrical engineering major, while the comparison is to upper-division English studies. Nonetheless, the CNN article describes people dropping out of their first or second years as science majors to pursue liberal arts degrees instead, taking a path of less resistance. So why is it really, then, that people decide that liberal arts are a path of less resistance to a degree? The obvious answer I can give here is that math and science classes in the public K-12 school system aren’t nearly adequate enough to prepare students for college-level work, but that’s not really the only problem. After all, courses in history, English, art, music, and the like are just as lacking in high school and below. So, perhaps there’s a bigger issue to look at. . . maybe it goes back further and deeper than our educational system.
Growing up, I never quite realized how often I heard the same set of mantras: “I don’t care about the science, as long as it works,” “I’m no good at math,” “when am I ever going to use this stuff?”, and of course, “if you spend all your time studying [math, sciences, or other 'nerdy' subjects], you’ll have no life and never get laid.”
The issue here is that all these things are so damned passive, we don’t realize we think this way. When I used to think of professional writers, for example, I used to imagine the people I saw in movies, like Jack Nicholson in As Good as It Gets, playing Melvin Udall, living in an expensive New York apartment and writing books at his leisure. Or I’d picture Michael Douglas in Wonder Boys fighting writer’s block, Sean Connery in Finding Forrester as a reclusive shut-in, coming out of seclusion to help a young writer earn his professor’s respect. All of these guys had two things in common: they didn’t seem to actually work all that hard for their money, and there’s never a time we see them struggling to earn that money. Easy living, right? Just write books, cash your checks, and have all the time in the world to deal with life’s other little problems. How hard could that be?
Scientists, on the other hand, get a different image in pop-culture. Up until recently, physicists, chemists, mathematicians, biologists, and all flavors of engineers have been portrayed either as quirky side-characters, or as eccentric, awkward head-cases that are either used as foils for more charismatic characters, or as “ugly ducklings” that need to be brought out of their shells by friends or a love interest. (See Q from the James Bond movies, the protagonist of the Nutty Professor movies, Doctor Emmet Brown from the Back to the Future series, etc.) The cases where a scientist is considered a sex symbol, a true main character, are the cases where they are more occupied with flashy action sequences than they are with their area of expertise, (see Doctor Jones from Indiana Jones, Doctor Gordon Freeman in the Half-Life video game series, and Doctor Ian Malcom in Jurassic Park.) This is also true for those “lonely nuclear/astro physicists” played by attractive blondes in James Bond movies. The issue here is, simply put, real science isn’t sexy. Most of those nerdy engineers and scientists used as side-kicks and comic relief in movies aren’t what the majority of people want to be.
I say most, however, because there is an exception to the nerdy scientist image. When the movie, video game, book, or television show in question is attempting to make the science, itself, sexy is when we see the geeky scientists become the charismatic protagonist. One good example of this is Dana Scully from The X-Files, as well as Peter Venkman from Ghostbusters and Hawkeye Pierce from M*A*S*H. Often times, with the notable exception of the latter, the main characters are made to look a lot more sexy by virtue of the fact that the science is either questionably feasable, or dumbed-down in order to make for more exciting action or drama. These are people we want to be, for sure, but for the same reason we want to be those writers from a few paragraphs back: their lives consist of other concerns, outside their jobs, that make their existence a lot more fun than our own. Scully performs autopsies on camera, Dr. Venkman actually does perform experiments in psychology, and Hawkeye spends a lot of time in surgery. These scenes, however, aren’t the main focus of the story, they’re merely vehicles for the characters to further conflict between other characters, set mood, or used as a backdrop for later sequences to play out. (Hawkeye also spends a lot of time drinking in his tent and arguing with higher-ranking army officers about the patients he’s worked on in the OR.)
So what’s the payoff for having read this far? My point is that we either paint math and sciences as too dull, too boring, or too difficult. It’s okay to rationalize your C grade in algebra because no one will fault you for saying it’s not your strong point or that you’ll never get any use out of the quadratic formula in your adult life. On the other side of the coin, we sometimes make technical fields seem easy and fun like they are for Indy and Doc Brown, and people are blown away by how much work they have to do in college to achieve a fraction of the progress these characters make and are disillusioned. This isn’t all too different from martial arts movies, signing up for karate classes, then dropping out after a few weeks because you got your ass kicked in a fight after school. The real world isn’t the movies, and usually the jobs we have to do aren’t exciting or sexy at all, so we pick the perceived easier path in order to avoid that work. Between that slap or reality and the stigma of working in “nerdy” fields of study, in my opinon, it’s no wonder people either switch from, or outright avoid, sciences and engineering in school.
How do we rectify this kind of attitude? I suppose we can try to instill in our kids that hard work is a part of life, and if you pursue your intersts you’ll probably end up having a lot of fun as well as studying your butt off. Regardless of the field, reality needs to be observed and people need to start getting genuinely excited and interested in their pursuits. Being an English major isn’t easy, and physics isn’t as hard as you’ve been lead to believe. And honestly, at the end of the day, both writers and scientists are equally geeky in their own right; so are FBI agents, firefighters, and medical doctors.
The following is a post I made on TechExams.net, an IT certification messageboard, in response to a young man that had been turned down for a position recently and complained that he felt IT was too elitist because of it.
In the words of the great Ben Croshaw: “Allow me to hold your head under the putrescent waters of knowledge.”
Is the IT industry elitist? In a word: yes. It’s one of the few industries where the words “entry level” actually mean you should have several years of experience before applying. It’s an industry where there is always someone younger, someone smarter, someone willing to work longer hours out to take your job and steal your promotion. It’s an industry notorious for its demand that we update our skills faster and faster with each passing year, and that’s simply to stay current with the job(s) we already work in.
However, there are some pretty good reasons.
The first reason is that, in IT, the spectrum of responsibility you are expected to carry can range from simply making sure a few office-workers can connect to the internet and download their email, to keeping system-critical servers and equipment working for hospitals and banks. We need to stay sharp, we need to keep ourselves up to date, and we need to grow with technology or we can’t do our jobs and maintain that technology. That, of course, brings me to another reason.
Technology changes, the needs of businesses and users change, and we have to change with them. There is no way to do business today the way we did in the 80′s, the 90′s, or even the way we did in 2005. If you want to complain because you’re just now learning what a server is, and most companies want someone who understands virtualization, that’s nobody’s problem but yours. One of the points that Ayn Rand once made is one I whole-heartedly agree with: a person is not hired for a job to his or her best, they’re hired to do what is necessary to complete that job. This industry requires a VAST amount of knowledge on our part, a great deal of flexibility, and a practical understanding of how to use that knowledge to keep the world running. On to the next point.
As Sabalo mentioned, there are lots of people who get into IT thinking it’s easy money, then complain when they find out it’s harder than they thought. Oddly, no one expects to be a doctor, physicist, astronaut, firefighter, or engineer without a lot of work beforehand, and this industry is no different. And, honestly, it’s not for everyone. Not everyone “has the right stuff”, and some people even spend anywhere from two to eight years in school before they figure out that IT isn’t for them. (This is also true for those other professions I mentioned, as well as many others, like computer science.) You keep working, you keep learning, and then you figure out if this is the path for you or if your best simply isn’t good enough and another path is a better choice.
It sounds like you’re fresh out of college, so you’ve got plenty of time to decide what to do with your life. You were told you weren’t a good fit for the job(s) you applied for, so right now you’ve got a choice:
A.) Blame the hiring manager(s) that turned you down for being unfair not realizing your genius.
B.) Figure out why they didn’t want to hire you, and work on those things.
Maybe you need more experience? Volunteer your time. Maybe you need more certs? Study and earn them. Maybe you need to work on your interviewing skills? Talk to professionals, (like the ones on this board,) and ask them for help. Maybe your communication skills are rusty? Take some writing and speech courses. There are lots of things we all need to improve on, don’t expect to be the exception to the rule.
If all this sounds a little harsh, it’s because it is. IT is a competitive industry, and it doesn’t suffer fools. It’s better to know what you’re getting into and try to live up to that, than it is to get thumped on the head a few times and grow bitter because of it. We’ve all been new to IT, and most of us are here to offer help. . . but only if you can accept that you just might need it.
It’s been a while since I last posted, so I thought I’d blog about a freebie from Microsoft as my triumphant return to the IT Humidor.
Coming up this month will be the launch of Office 2010, Visual Studio 2010, SQL Server 2008 R2, and SharePoint 2010. To kick things off, Microsoft is holding launch-events in various parts of the country. Be a part of the launch of Microsoft’s new products, (and take home free copies of the software,) by signing up for an event in your area. For those of you who can’t make it to a live event, there will also be a live keynote by Stephen Elop, President of Microsoft’s business division on the launch of the new software suites.
There are two paths for each event, IT Pro and Developer:
For IT Professionals, focuses more closely on Office 2010 and SharePoint 2010
For developers, focusing on Visual Studio 2010 and SQL Server 2008 R2.
The events are free to sign up for, but space fills up fast.
I came across this blog the other day and I definitely felt the need to share. Keith Combs has put together a set of great videos on making Linux play nice on a Windows Server 2008 network by managing Linux workstations through AD.
Check out Keith’s blog for the full description of the following videos:
Microsoft just announced that Visual Studio 2010 Beta 1 is available to evaluate. Channel 9 also has some great tutorials and discussions, including this one which involves the download and installation of the beta.
You can find some great resources on the page linked to above, as well as from this blog. It follows the objectives outlined by CompTIA’s Server+ site.
The following is the current information linked from JDMurray’s entry on the TechExams.net blog.
A group of members here at TechExams.net are a little excited about the new beta exam for the revised CompTIA Server+ certification for 2009. OK, we’re excited at the prospect of picking up yet-another-certification for free while helping CompTIA test-run its latest revision of the Server+ exam. I already have the Server+ cert from way back in 2003, but my opinion is apparently as valuable a non-cert holder, so I was granted an opportunity by CompTIA to participate as well.
The objectives for the 2009 Server+ exam certainly show quite an improvement over the exam I took. I remember the big areas I had to study-up on were tape backup strategies, the numerous levels of RAID, and the various types of SCSI technology. The revised Server+ exam adds objectives about networks and networking devices, file systems, motherboards and components, electronic media storage systems, and virtualization. There are also sections on physical security, disaster recover, and troubleshooting. The new Server+ is a lot like the A+ and Network+ certs combined, but from the server room tech’s point of view.
Anyway, I don’t want to review the new Server+ exam before I actually take it. Instead, this article presents a study reference for the Server+ exam for those people who are participating in the beta test, and for those who will take the exam after it is formally released. The following (long) listing is derived from the 2009 Server+ objectives and contains links to external Web sites (mostly Wikipedia) that provide information about each objective. Remember that CompTIA exams are entry-level, so it’s not necessary to become an expert on each objective, but please do try and learn a few new things along the way.
1.0 System Hardware
1.1 Differentiate between system board types, features, components and their purposes.
o Update server and proxy server
o Filtering server
o Monitoring server
o Dedicated
o Distributed
o Peer to peer
• Remote access server
• Virtualized services
• NTP server
• Explain the different between a workstation, desktop and a server
• Server shut down and start up sequence (one server vs. multiple servers vs. attached components)
2.5 Summarize server virtualization concepts, features and considerations
4.1 Write, utilize and maintain documentation, diagrams and procedures
• Follow pre-installation plan when building or upgrading servers
• Labeling
• Diagram server racks and environment topologies
• Hardware and software upgrade, installation, configuration , server role and repair logs
• Document server baseline (before and after service)
• Original hardware configuration, service tags, asset management and warranty
• Vendor specific documentation
4.2 Given a scenario, explain the purpose of the following industry best practices
• Follow vendor specific server best practices
o Documentation
o Tools
o Websites
• Explore ramifications before implementing change – determine organizational impact
• Communicate with stakeholders before taking action and upon completion of action
• Comply with all local laws / regulations, industry and corporate regulations
• Purpose of Service Level Agreement (SLAs)
• Follow change control procedures
• Equipment disposal
4.3 Determine an appropriate physical environment for the server location
• Check for adequate and dedicated power, proper amperage and voltage
o UPS systems (check load, document service, periodic testing)
o UPS specifications (run time, max load, bypass procedures, server communication and shut down, proper monitoring)
• Server cooling considerations – HVAC
o Adequate cooling in room
o Adequate cooling in server rack
o Temperature and humidity monitors
4.4 Implement and configure different methods of server access
• KVM (local and IP based)
• Direct connect
• Remote management
o Remote control
o Administration
o Software deployment
o Dedicated management port
o Cold site
o Hot site
o Warm site
o Distance requirements
5.3 Explain data retention and destruction concepts
• Awareness of potential legal requirements
• Awareness of potential company policy requirements
• Differentiate between archiving and backup
5.4 Given a scenario, carry out the following basic steps of a disaster recovery plan
• Disaster recovery testing process
• Follow emergency procedures (people first)
• Use appropriate fire suppressants
• Follow escalation procedures for emergencies
• Classification of systems (prioritization during recovery)
6.0 Troubleshooting
6.1 Explain troubleshooting theory and methodologies
o Question users/stakeholders and identify changes to the server / environment
o Collect additional documentation / logs
o If possible, replicate the problem as appropriate
o If possible, perform backups before making changes
• Establish a theory of probable cause (question the obvious)
o Determine whether there is a common element of symptom causing multiple problems
• Test the theory to determine cause
o Once theory is confirmed determine next steps to resolve problem
o If theory is not confirmed re-establish new theory or escalate
• Establish a plan of action to resolve the problem and notify impacted users
• Implement the solution or escalate as appropriate
o Make one change at a time and test/confirm the change has resolved the problem
o If the problem is not resolved, reverse the change if appropriate and implement new change
• Verify full system functionality and if applicable implement preventative measures
• Performa a root cause analysis
• Document findings, actions and outcomes throughout the process
6.2 Given a scenario, effectively troubleshoot hardware problems, selecting the appropriate tools and methods
o Third party components or incompatible components
o Incompatible or incorrect BIOS
o Cooling failure
o Mismatched components
o Backplane failure
• Environmental issues
o Dust
o Humidity
o Temperature
o Power surge / failure
• Hardware tools
o Power supply tester (multimeter)
o System board tester
o Compressed air
o ESD equipment
6.3 Given a scenario, effectively troubleshoot software problems, selecting the appropriate tools and methods
• Common problems
o User unable to logon
o User cannot access resources
o Memory leak
o BSOD / stop
o OS boot failure
o Driver issues
o Runaway process
o Cannot mount drive
o Cannot write to system log
o Slow OS performance
o Patch update failure
o Service failure
o Hangs no shut down
o Users cannot print
• Cause of common problems
o Malware
o Unauthorized software
o Software firewall
o User Account Control (UAC/SUDO)
o Improper permissions
o Corrupted files
o Lack of hard drive space
o Lack of system resources
o Virtual memory (misconfigured, corrupt)
o Fragmentation
o Encryption
o Print server drivers/services
o Print spooler
• Software tools
o System logs
o Monitoring tools (resource monitor, performance monitor)
o Defragmentation tools
6.4 Given a scenario, effectively diagnose network problems, selecting the appropriate tools and methods
• Common problems
o Internet connectivity failure
o Email failure
o Resource unavailable
o DHCP server mis-configured
o Non-functional or unreachable
o Destination host unreachable
o Unknown host
o Default gateway mis-configured
o Failure of service provider
o Can reach by IP not by host name
• Causes of common problems
o Improper IP configuration
o VLAN configuration
o Port security
o Improper subnetting
o Component failure
o Incorrect OS route tables
o Bad cables
o Firewall (mis-configuration, hardware failure, software failure)
o Mis-configured NIC, routing / switch issues
o DNS and/or DHCP failure
o Mis-configured hosts file
6.5 Given a scenario, effectively troubleshoot storage problems, selecting the appropriate tools and methods
• Common problems
o Slow file access
o OS not found
o Data not available
o Unsuccessful backup
o Error lights
o Unable to mount the device
o Drive not available
o Cannot access logical drive
o Data corruption
o Slow I/O performance
o Restore failure
o Cache failure
o Multiple drive failure
• Causes of common problems
o Media failure
o Drive failure
o Controller failure
o HBA failure
o Loose connectors
o Cable problems
o Mis-configuration
o Improper termination
o Corrupt boot sector
o Corrupt file system table
o Array rebuild
o Improper disk partition
o Bad sectors
o Cache battery failure
o Cache turned off
o Insufficient space
o Improper RAID configuration
o Mis-matched drives
o Backplane failure
• Storage tools
o Partitioning tools
o Disk management
o RAID array management
o Array management
o System logs
o Net use / mount command
o Monitoring tools
TechNet Plus, (download only, not the kind where they ship you DVDs,) from Microsoft usually runs $349 to sign up for a year, then $249 per year after that. A friend of mine shot me an email today for a $100 dicount on a subscription. I’m not sure if it’s part of a special event or it’s simply a discount code for the sake of signing up new customers, but it’s a great opportunity to save some money and pick up just about every piece of software Microsoft makes. Keep in mind, this not only includes the software that is out now, but any new software that’s eligible for TechNet, as well as updates to things like Office or Windows, (think Office 2010 and Windows 7). Sadly, developer-tools like Visual Studio are not included in TechNet since they are considered to be under the MSDN umbrella. This is good for a new subscription only, not renewals.
Select Microsoft TechNet Plus Direct Subscription, enter the promo code TW7OBA in the field that reads If you have a Promotion Code, please enter it here and then hit the button to go to the next page. Enjoy!
During my studies of Windows PowerShell, I’ve come across a great number of excellent resources for experienced admins and newbies alike. The following is a compilation of sites, book recommendations, and tools to help out anyone wanting to start working with this ridiculously powerful scripting language. Windows PowerShell comes as an optional feature in modern versions of Windows desktop operating systems such as Vista and Windows 7, and is generally installed by default on Windows Server 2008 and 2008 R2. PowerShell v3 comes as part of the core operating system for Windows 8 and Windows 2012, in the form of features you install from the “turn Windows features on and off” menu. If you’re running an older version of Windows, such as XP or Server 2003, you can download PowerShell here, and get some handy PowerShell Active Directory management tools for Windows Server 2008 and earlier here.
.jpg "TechNet Plus Direct")
