I’m looking at getting a safe for valuables and irreplaceables. My main concern is fire, not theft. Nearly all the safes I’ve seen in my initial searches have electronic locks rather than combos or other mechanisms. If there is a serious house fire, would these locks not melt or become unusable? I suppose combination locks have similar risk but it seems less so. Anyone have any guidance? Or direct experience?
My wife had a five-hour layover in PHL on her way home to Texas yesterday. She came home with gifts that made me very happy.
There are three CAPs in our tenant that are managed by Microsoft. One in particular, "Multifactor authentication for per-user multifactor authentication users," has an incomplete list of users. Some that are in the user list are no longer here, and it does not include all active users. Where can I go to manage this list? All controls are greyed out except the on/off/report-only switch.
Growing up in the 70s and 80s, I got most of my comics from a newsstand near our house. For some reason they carried almost exclusively DC. I had the odd issue of Iron Man or something, but my collection for the first few years was nearly all Flash, JLA, Brave and Bold, DCCP, etc. Once I was a little older and could travel farther around town, I found Marvel stuff at the 7-11, and one in particular caught my attention, X-Men 172. While I’d heard of the title, and I’d read an issue or two in an antidiluvian trade paperbacks of the time, this was my first real intro. This would have been in the spring of 1983. I was instantly hooked and started hunting for more issues. There was a used bookstore that had a huge backstock that my mom would take me to once in a while, and I was now earning money from a paper route and mowing lawns. So I was able to start piecing together my X-books.
Sadly I haven’t gotten the Giant-Size 1 yet. Back in the day it was actually in second place behind #94, strange as that sounds. And I still need two issues and to replace a god-awful copy of 111 to complete my run from 94-up (I think my ultimate goal is the complete Claremont run).
Anyway, I spent part of this morning rebagging my collection and realized many of them of them were still in the bags they came in when I bought them. I thought some of you might enjoy the price stickers. These were mostly acquired in 1983-1985, with a few others here and there. Lots of memories coming out today, where and when I was able to fill in a slot in my collection, how much I loved certain issues, and trying to be careful but not maniacal about condition.
There are four or five episodes in the series I keep returning to and S1 E5 is one of the best. I’ve seen it three times in the last week, a great bit of tv showing the progress the BSU is making already in applying their techniques. It highlights both Tench’s pure detective skills along with Holden’s psychomaneuvers. But the key is Officer Ocasek, played by the wonderfully named Alex Morf. He goes from an unwilling and somewhat naive community member who happens to be a cop to the one who finds the angle the Feds overlooked, the sister, Rose. Morf does a great job throughout his appearance, little facial expressions and vocal inflections in the background that show his slow acceptance of the pair’s methods and thought process. He’s the one who suggests they visit Rose, who had been basically ignored since she was a woman, recently pregnant, and just all around outside the scope of interest. Jackie Renee Robinson gives her own amazing performance as the terminally-frazzled new mother, as well as wife and sister of the murderers. She successfully answers or deflects all the questions, though there’s a little edge of performance to her answers, until the baby starts crying, which seems to end the interview. But as they file out, it is Ocasek who turns and brings the hammer down ever so gently, threatening her with her baby to tell what she knows. Just a tight, ten-second bit of dialog that fractures her defenses, which cleave away completely by the next scene. And her interrogation is as compelling as any scene with actual serial killers, describing in detail the aftermath of the violence. Top tier episode all around.
This morning as people started work, we got reports of blocks from various parts of O365, SharePoint, etc. We have a Conditional Access Policy to allow users access to all resources if they are in specified named locations like the US. For the users who fail this check, the Policy Impact graph points to GSA. Users who fail have location info like "IP Address: fd00::61f6:6b24:200:a01:104, Through Global Secure Access: No." No other location info, no other useful info at all, really. The IPv6 addresses listed are all in that same range, varying only in the last octet (e.g. 104, 105, 107). This affects users both in the office and working in different areas across the state, but not all users. We thought GSA was the culprit as users who turned it off were able to log in, but again, some users on GSA were able to get in. And I've not been able to confirm if that IPv6 range is part of GSA.
The issue is still going on. We switched the policy to report-only early on so people could work, but it's still logging users who are failing the check.
Is anyone seeing anything like this with a CA based on the US named locationm or have any ideas what else to check? Or know anything about the status of GSA?