17D_guy

Do you think it's because the number couldn't be confirmed? I've had the bosses who didn't want $200+/-, >$200, etc. Wonder if it's a stupid spin off of that.

Don't know if we need more, but glad to see they're rolling in the other 1/2 the population that gets raped. This is like having to listen to all the Domestic Violence stuff like it only happens to the females and a chick would never beat, scratch, destroy property, lie or otherwise destroy a man's like.

Well at least those people are being returned to the bases.. oh wait. We get to put in tickets, just like the users! Except that the numbers keep changing.

Your Local Comm Sq and CYBERCOM will be closed this Christmas -

Was on JQP's facebook page. Thought it was pretty good - https://taskandpurpose.com/4-reasons-i-am-resigning-my-commission-as-a-naval-officer/

As stated the NMCI contract is awful. The Air Force will not play with the Navy on Cyber if NMCI is involved. They do not take any of it seriously and there's a number of.. problems that have occurred on their networks due to the lack of choke-con. Also, having to pay $450+ to move a workstation around the office is a little steep. I enjoyed this little article - https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2015/04/13/whos-been-cut/25574185/ Mobility pilots.. ouch. But then in my corner, This is on top of the cuts the 33S AFSC faced for.. 5 years? I don't know, I wasn't an O then. There's a significant bathtub in the Cyber force. My Sq CC's almost guaranteed Col, not for outstanding performance or any other leadership metric, but because the attrition rates in the year groups are so high and all the other eligibles are leaving. I like my CC, so that's not a slight--that's straight from her. Also, base comm contracted out isn't bad as long as the contractor is responsive and you pay them. Vandenberg had contracted base comm and it was a great working relationship. One of the best I'd been involved with. Just like the ESD would have been if the contractor was paid and sized accordingly. Everyone's of the opinion, "It's simple geek stuff, how hard could it be?" Then the negotiations start and the cyber support service and infrastructure maintenance is constantly down-valued. Which is why in the other thread I said just because you don't value something, doesn't mean it's not important. Well, if the AF had valued the customer service, support, and requirements inherent with the ESD it would have succeeded. the AF didn't. The AF failed. Then the ESD failed. Where so many other businesses, large ones, have succeeded. Union Pacific has a consolidated help desk. It's 24/7, has 3~5 ring pick up requirements and services all of CONUS. They also pay very well to keep the "easy job" service technicians, focus on training and job advancements for top performers. I can't even get that kind of respect for my Amn on the base, let alone out of the behemoth that is mother-AF. Actually, that's not fair. The base here is really appreciative of the work my guys do. This valuing of "easy jobs" could be applied to all the support career-fields. How much would you guys pay for a full-up, competent finance and MPF? With NCO's who know what they're doing and know their job inside and out... like we used to have. That didn't have to write a request to a central processing agency and wait for a reply to do something? That could execute your DTS and other orders with little to no problems? Well, whatever you think, the AF decided we all could use an additional duty as our own MPF/Finance troop. Don't forget your IAO additional duty as well.

What? It's not that they don't know how to install hard drives. I guess I didn't communicate that well. Many warranties require certified technicians to install equipment. It's not always the case, but those nuances are the reality of the situation. You do have Airmen (both O&E) designing networks for base support that aren't up to industry standards. It's a lack of experience, and the fact that... we can't get people to that level in AD most of the time. It's also a problem with the increasing complexity of today's tech systems. We're having issues with that right now where the base network works, but we're trying to interface with a DISA service.. and we're unable to because of configuration issues. The ANG has a really big advantage here. I've worked with some ANG CCIE's, and the E&I teams used to be all ANG. The ANG can hire, and retain the pro's. I've got to try and build an Amn, that's got all the queep (and more) that we complain about, plus deployments and PCS's after 3~5 years to a base with mostly a different architecture. Also, we're not the Cyber Service. We're the Air Force and we excel at Cyber but lets not act like with the way we're currently arranged we're placing a real focus on the leadership Cyber (support). I can't speak for Cyber (offense). We're not penny pinching on aircraft weapons systems, but every Cyber initiative automatically gets a cut off the top and then the negotiations begin.

It's a long read. But this article goes into good detail about how the Great Firewall of China works. It also details the new state-cyber weapon (coined as the Great Cannon) that was used to take down github.com and greatfire.org https://citizenlab.org/2015/04/chinas-great-cannon/ It is also a good write up of enumeration and discovery on a foreign network and "cyber-minded" thinking that the Cyber-muckety mucks are talking about.

And then there's this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI6vn0HHTmU&feature=youtu.be

That's like the original run aircraft carriers the Navy's moving away from now.

Very much enjoyed your comments Hacker. I get in discussions with people who're loudly right-wing all the time and blame the current Pres for everything. Like this shift happened in just a few years. I've got family that think the net neutrality thing is already a failure because there could be fees/charges/taxes, all gov't regulation is bad, and the companies will find a way to get us all internet "through competition." All of these things take much longer to resolve, and are influenced by more than the dude in the Oval Office. Christ.. it's why they're always talking about legacy.

No. PST's aren't allowed to reside on the fileshare. There's good reason for this. PST's get huge, into the GBs. You really should try to keep them below 2Gb or they start to corrupt. You can keep organizational PST's on the share. Legit org, like a flight's org box or a CSS org box. Plus those legit boxes can get increased size as well. Talk to your CS. Additionally your file share.. clean that shit out fellas and ladies. We're doing scans at the wing king's direction and there's so much duplicated data that's just eating space. I know to you guys it's "free" but imagine if that was paper docs. That space is precious to us for numerous reasons below. 1) Regulations - Your electronic records should be filed in accordance with your file plan. A fair chunk of your emails probably could be filed under this. The CS is required to make sure the ERM drive is big enough to support that. We are not required to maintain the Share Drive. That's right. The ERM drive and Share Drive both run off the same equip. Which leads to more problems - 2) Tech Challenges - Sure, we could connect a 3TB disk via usb to the SAN (Storage Area Network has diagrams). It'll void the storage array warranty (haha, just kidding. ACC didn't pay for it to be continued, but didn't bother to tell us.) The storage stuff isn't as easy as plugging in another hard drive. The APC have had problems because they populated storage arrays with different speed disks (ex. 10K vs 5Krpm) and its causes write/read errors. There are whole certifications around the management of data and data storage products. Just look at the product break down here - EMC Toys So, we have to get vendor approved hard drives, installed by trained professionals (i.e. generally not my Amn) and expand the arrays through their software tools. Now, we can buy more drives. Except that they're usually red/business/special and cost much more than your normal drive. Here's a EMC approved 15K RPM, 1.7TB drive.. for ~$14K. Much like our aircraft I can't pop down to Frys/Best Buy and stick any hard drive in this specialty equipment. 3) Programming Challenges - I don't mean code, I mean money. Your base stuff is old (probably). Almost all of our expansion/new stuff is fought over at end of year. I'm not going to get into how much of my current bases equipment is pushing against the EOL/EOS. Just this year the AF decided to move off of Windows Server 2003. Why? Because MS said they were going to charge millions for continued patches past the July drop dead date. Even this move was couched with "show us if you really need it and we might pay." This is a double impact. I can't get a new array when it starts failing, because Comm/Cyber support equipment doesn't get regular updates from MAJCOM/HQAF. We fight for end of year funds to make sure we can expand services (VoIP) or continue with vendor warranties and/or equip. Imagine if you had to fight for F16 block upgrades at end of year against the new gym/finance offices. Kinda like that. Remember when I said we weren't required to support a shared drive? This is why. If we were, it might get programmed against. 4) Old. Sure I kinda mentioned this before, but think about how well old hard drives work. Touchy, special dedicated hard drives. I've no kidding seen a 50% disk failure rate on a base's share drive array. And the only thing you can do is plunk down more $$$ and hope they work. Once the disks are no longer provided by the vendor all bets are off. Now - I bitch about the APC's and move to consolidate. BUT - this is where things are getting programmed against and regular updates are being applied. The cash isn't flowing to your bases even close to the way it was, but it is flowing to these Orgs. So, that's better. Unfortunately, the service isn't on-par with what can be supplied locally. I'll have another post about consolidation, security and cyber later. It's Friday and my D&D group is starting. Hope this answered your question, I rambled a bit. EDIT - TL;DR - Regulations, Money, old tech and specialized equipment make PST's on the network shares bad. But mostly expensive old specialized equipment. Also, I'm trying to spell out all the acronyms, but if I miss one let me know.

Believe me when I say I understand the workstation requirements that the Ops group is under. As I've said other threads, I've made it a point to get over with the Mission folks to get their bead on things. You guys don't all have workstations. At my location the Training Sq doesn't even have a 5:1 ratio. I've also not given myself the extra space a higher tier user would get, because if the masses are suffering with 90mbs I need to figure it out. Not saying that to brag or anything, but I believe our leadership doesn't understand how little that space really is. Perspective is key when dealing with these things and being out of touch is a serious problem. I don't know why the powers that be decided that little space would be adequate for most of us. 90 Mbs.. is nothing. 1/2 of that is one music album these days or maybe 10 pictures. But the AF decided that was the size, and we're trying to make it work. Perhaps once the APC's have stabilized we'll be able to add more space. I hope so.

Are you happy with the service and availability of your email now? Do you think more space would make it better? Not a /s question. There's a few reasons: 1) Google is a professional service organization that uses your email to sell you shit 2) They have good engineers 3) They don't use the lowest bidder 4) Did I mention the engineers? 5) They throw more money at gmail than the AF throws at the whole Cyber enterprise However, you're looking back a little too fondly. GMail didn't come around until 2004 (invite only), opened wide in 2007 and dropped the beta tag in 2009. We can debate the meaning of "beta" but Google felt it was a product that had to come with a default warning. Also, you access through a web interface and not Outlook. Outlook is chatty and laggy. Your speed connection to the APC determines how fast you're going to access your email. If you're in Osan and your APC is Andrews... you go to Andres. Google can mirror your data around the world. We can't. Google also has overall less regulations that bind it's hands when rolling out services to new customers (say hi to your records custodian for me). AF doesn't have the engineers, doesn't have the cash and frankly doesn't think either of those things are a problem. There have been serious failures with the APC model. I'm not sure I can get into it on here. Lets just say that the AF doesn't commission or enlist data center experts, but thinks that we're going to do it on our own w/ those online Masters. Our data centers are awful. More space won't fix it. You'll probably have less availability. If you guys just made it to General and became a Tier 1 user you'd have unlimited space. What's the problem? Happened here as well. Chapel sent out a 30Mb advert. We had a FSS Family person thing bug my Commander about getting rights to send another flyer to the whole base. I tried to convince the AO that they should host it on SharePoint and send a notice it was there. Nope, "It's small, it won't be that big a deal." O6's get involved. I now have an auto-delete rule and I think those that don't get a 1Mb flyer every week. I'm assuming you're AFNG. Godspeed.

The AF has been looking to "secure" NIPR for a long time. Patches, Detection Systems and all that. However, we've been securing PMO systems by writing little slips of paper that say "We can't patch this and it's a mission system, so fuck off." Inspections of the network took those slips of paper and used them to stop "attackers" from doing bad things to your email. Well, that's not how things actually work. So DISA is now doing full, no-notice CCRI's that include ALL systems on the network. PMO (ex. PEX and Medical), SCADA (CE's environmental systems), NIPR/SIPR and other. The AF has not looked at the network, cyber.. whatever as a whole domain. Sure.. all those servers are patched, but that CE network isn't, and it rides NIPR or is otherwise exposed to the internet. So I don't have to attack the servers.. I turn off the AC/power to the server room and generate an effect. These team is to reach really long arms around the whole domain for the AF and stop looking at it as stove-pipes. This becomes even more serious with the networking capabilities of the 5th Gen fighters.

This is correct and part of the AFNET's intended design. It's called an Area Processing Center. Your email, and soon to be ShareDrives is (probably) no longer hosted at your base, it's happening remotely. https://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/123563/area-processing-center-consolidates-mail-file-sharing.aspx

Amn (Pilot) exits USAF due to QOL concerns - ball slathering, high-fives with drinks and bro-fists Amn (non-Pilot) exits UPT due to QOL concerns - non-hack homo who couldn't cut it in any AFSC/Service Did I get it right? If I have to listen to another Ops person tell me about how hard they work, and how soft us "support" types are and how easy we have it with our "8 hour" days I might actually flick my eyes in a circular direction. Yea, you work 18 hr days, every day (I've been told this). No time in the Sq bar, ever. No naming ceremonies. No change of command parties. No sweet deal TDY's to air shows at Hurlburt or Pensacola or.. you know.. flying in a god damn magical steel tube that weighs thousands of pounds. Meanwhile. I send my Amn taskers about getting some Bullet Background Papers for the new Wing King, figure out how to explain to Ops types the newest cyber-directive that's come down to stop the stupid things they were doing. Another rape. Another DUI. Another Amn who's... probably going to be an active shooter. Data call on hours spent responding to data calls. Ops would like 15 tablets set up in 2 days for <insert DV visit here>. Does anyone here think Missilers had it soft and were a bunch of pussy crybabies? The jobs are different, they require different skills, mindsets and abilities. Just because you don't value it, doesn't mean it's not of value. Like I said in my other post, I'm in deep w/ the Ops Group at my base because that's the mission. I execute the mission I'm given - making sure you fly, fly well, and more importantly - land well. But don't fucking tell me, or GraveDigger, you don't have just as many fuckup, non-hack, wastes of space who contribute 0 to the mission as the MSG side. Don't tell me IFS, UPT, IQT and MQT didn't let some through just because they were on the line and the paperwork to kick them was just a little too difficult to do that day. Don't tell me you have a co-pilot that worries you, or a bag-wearing exec that constantly fucks up your paperwork, or schedulers that'll screw you. In fact, I would argue your pieces of shit are of even greater detriment since peoples lives are on the line. You have your guys that don't show up for days in a row, don't train, do unsafe shit, etc. One of my guys fucks up - no NIPR. One of your guys fucks up - lifetime benefits to some widows and kids with a folded flag to display. Don't tell me the MSG is full of slacker Amn who don't show up until 8, give poor service (because they enjoy pissing people off), and cut out early for "training days" just to make the CAF/MAF dudes pissed. I had to go to down Fridays in the CFP where I'm at. Why? We needed the time for training. Not CBT's, not SABC, fucking skill training. Because the AF separated all the experience (VSP/RIF/PT). Sounds like I'm writing about the same things you guys bitch about with the full-qual IP's getting bounced and keeping the party planner, doesn't it. Most of you fly. Super cool gig! It's awesome. I still run to the window to watch the flight-line. But don't tell me we're not working hard to get that magical vehicle floating, holding up the worst piece of shit you can find while you compare them to the Patch-wearing full-up IP.

AOL Instant Messenger?

Also, if you'll notice at the bottom of this picture it says starting 2016 funding will come from the IMSC vice MAJCOM. https://www.facebook.com/jqpublic/photos/a.467220060016167.100368.467201356684704/875082632563239/?type=1&theater "there will be growing pains" Because having to go to the MAJCOM, to go to the IMSC, to get $$ for your mission related requirements is a "growing pain." Guess we've got to justify all those generals somehow. I don't even want to think what this is going to do for the support side of the house.

So... Spruce Goose 2?

Good question. I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt and assume mission critical isn't the DTS machine before 1630L on a Friday. Depends on your base and the system. If it's a PMO system, it might actually be out of the hands of the local CS to handle (ex. PEX). If it is within their hands they can create a ticket to load a certain subset of these machines to restart at different times. We have a rolling 3 hr window (or we're supposed to) where all the machines are restarted on base during the week. Again, I have feelers (STS - did I do that right?) in the OG for times when they can't restart/patch/network down and we've worked around it. Again, it takes communication and better communication that "we're Ops and we said you can't turn it off." I'm not assuming you're doing that, but I've seen it personally.. and then I restarted their shit. I'm bombed on valium, so I hope that made sense. As always, your CS is probably severely undermanned and poorly trained. This is fishy as.. something fishy. PM me if you'd like and I can do a little research into your phones and support. I'd need like.. number of phones, types of switches.. technical shit. Your whole beginning is so very aircrew. I'm guessing your Unit CS is a element of like.. 30 people? That sucks. Overall the old phones should still be able to interface with the VoIP system without a problem. Unless.. the CS did something stupid and upgraded to a new carrier (ex. CISCO -> Nortel or vice-versa) and then yes, you're fucked. However, if you are a tenant unit and relatively small you might be able to drop some cash for your own solution at your GSU location. I don't know your finances, but $10K might solve the problem if you've got the phones and the switches now. Please see previous statement of Valium and have a nice day. Did I mention that I loved this. It shall be used at work against my 2Lt.

Wow.. imagine if the any survey the AF did had that type of return. What was the last Climate one... 12%?

1) 100% have been Flight Commanders and supervised other people, which is not the case in ops. I expect that the non-selects for O-4 were not cycled through the Mickey Mouse flight command positions (A/B/C Flt vs DOV, DOT, etc) in their ops squadrons; Uh.. ok. 2) Non-ops have spent their entire careers trying to articulate their value to the broader AF. Everyone has an important role to play, but It is more of a stretch that a FSS 1Lt advances the national interests of the US than the officers in the OG. Every CGOM/CGOQ/CGOY/functional awards package requires them to think about and to justify their operational-to-strategic impact that is assumed away by many operators. Begrudging true. 3) Ops bubbas do not get the same credit for deployed experience. Most non-ops folks have deployed to IZ and Afghan, while many (not all) ops frames supported from bases in other countries. Similar to #2 above, ops records--OPRs & citations--often use MDS-specific language and assume that the reader knows both the mission sets as well as the officer's role in that mission. And.... you're an idiot. 4) Ops communities have trouble weeding out folks due to ADSCs. Non-ops career fields have more weed-out options due to the shorter ADSC. See above. 5) Competing for O-4 from a staff billet. Smaller pool of officers for strats/DPs, but their Sr Raters will probably be FO/GOs. What? Never mind, don't answer.

and

From the Cyber folks in the field, or have been in the field - no. But, we're run by AFSPC now. So, who knows, do we have a career Cyber officer in leadership yet? The ESD is being sold in the discussions as a success for "consolidating support" which is.. technically correct. It did consolidate things there. But overall, I think even the MAJCOM's (not AFPSC) are going - "Not worth." vESD couldn't help with local DSN lines. Those are still run out of your CS just like old times. They have 0 ability to work that issue at all. The DSN switch (POTS - Plain Old Telephone Switch) is running the old copper in the ground usually. They're all from the 70's, end of life on support and maintenance and not tied into the network. AF is paying millions for continued support. We're (big AF) attempting to switch to VoIP, but the AF's not doing an enterprise solution. Every base I've been to so far has homegrown their own solution. Just like we did with old networks. It's difficult - my Amn aren't trained as well as they used to be, I've got less of them, and the tech's getting harder and harder to do in tiny shops. That program is a Microsoft product. Run Advertised Programs, right? Consolidated support isn't bad if you do it correctly. If you have the right people and processes it works out fine. Not when some GO is looking to save $$ and thinks that tech is going to replace having an Amn come and fix your print drivers. Google has consolidated support, works for them. Why? It's manned and trained appropriately and isn't looked at as a cost center. The commanders I've had since I commissioned have been very involved with the Ops side of the house. I'd look to your local leadership if you're not seeing, or at least hearing about, a cyber officer once in a while. I'm all over the OG areas I can get into and I take all the calls I get. But.. with the deployment rates I'm sure my number gets lost. But, now the IAO's err.. Cybersecurity Liaison and C4I shops are aware of me. If yours isn't I'd push them to get in touch with the SCO flight commander (Ops Flt) for something that needs working. Speaking of those desk jockeys, we're usually the ones feeling that pain first. This past two weeks we've gotten compliance orders and me and my CC have just stared at them wondering how to break the news to the base about it. We can't without looking like complete incompetent tools. So we look like tools. Then look like even bigger tools when they HHQ changes the due date..3 times. It's been a rough week. For some reason Cyber has.. a triple chain of command? Base CC, MAJCOM/A6, DISA, Network Operations Sq/Center, and finally the 624th/AFCyber. We receive and are required to comply with all these organizations on tasks. Somehow.. the Base CC doesn't know about the MAJCOM taskings. The MAJCOM tracks the 624th taskings, but isn't aware of the separate NOSC taskings. The NOSC gets some of their taskings from the 624th, others are it's own. DISA doesn't give a fuck about anything. Actually as I'm writing this I'm realizing I'm forgetting other orgs.. but I don't care about fixing it. Point made. Anyway, is this split the same on the Ops side?