Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 62 replies
  • Subscribers 0 subscribers
  • Views 195125 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

SEC 5.2.1 and Sophos for MAC OS X Preview (9.0.3)

QC

Decided to give the Preview of Anti-Virus for Mac OS X, version 9.0.3 a try. Chose an old MacBook (running 10.4) as guinea pig. After assigning the alternate policy updating failed with a rather vacuous Error: Could not update Sophos-Anti-Virus at .... Update failed. No indication of the nature or the error and surprisingly no indication of the update location used. 

Now, the error was not unexpected - 9.0.x requires MAC OS X 10.6 minimum but perhaps a more meaningful message could be issued. Anyway I checked the update location and found that it named ESCOSXL as source folder - obviously indicating the changed requirements (though I can't figure out what the L stands for :smileyhappy:).

Admittedly pre-10.6 versions should be rare by now (I've found two 10.5 installations still in use out of about 100). But the folder name change will affect unmanaged or occasionally off-site clients (yes, Cloud is the answer :smileywink:). I've found no reference though (I'd have expected this in the Release Notes). Even as it is Preview you should be required to discover this important information on your own.

Christian   

:43783


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0

    Hello Bob,

    thanks again for your detailed information. Maybe the user gets complaints but he doesn't give them (if you forgive the pun).

    The standalone installer is no good as we want the endpoints to be managed (at least whenever they are "inside").

    the ability to specify the initial SEC group path

    That's good news and will help quite a lot, and this is also what the Windows version's setup.exe offers. And we'd have similar problems building an appropriate  Windows package without the means to set a policy from the CID and the two-staged approach outlined in How to create a standalone or custom installer package (or by some scripting - but even if the same is possible on a Mac a "mostly Windows" shop often doesn't have the knowledge and/or tools to do it).

    Guess it'll take some time until the Cloud product (whether Sophos hosted or on-premise) can replace the current infrastructure - until then (a way to set) an initial updating policy is desirable.

    Christian 

    :44617
Reply
  • 0

    Hello Bob,

    thanks again for your detailed information. Maybe the user gets complaints but he doesn't give them (if you forgive the pun).

    The standalone installer is no good as we want the endpoints to be managed (at least whenever they are "inside").

    the ability to specify the initial SEC group path

    That's good news and will help quite a lot, and this is also what the Windows version's setup.exe offers. And we'd have similar problems building an appropriate  Windows package without the means to set a policy from the CID and the two-staged approach outlined in How to create a standalone or custom installer package (or by some scripting - but even if the same is possible on a Mac a "mostly Windows" shop often doesn't have the knowledge and/or tools to do it).

    Guess it'll take some time until the Cloud product (whether Sophos hosted or on-premise) can replace the current infrastructure - until then (a way to set) an initial updating policy is desirable.

    Christian 

    :44617
Children
No Data
Unfiltered HTML