Guest User!

You are not Sophos Staff.

Thread Info
  • State Verified Answer
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 39 replies
  • Subscribers 5 subscribers
  • Views 28781 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

SGN Product Enhancement Suggestions

vojta

Might be a good idea to star this list early so it's in early. My wishlist

- Better AD synchronization (automated, configurable schedule, and built into MC)

- "Policy for a slider" - meaning give user the option via policy to control how fast they want to encrypt the HD. Of course if this policy is disable user cannot control that (aka today's status). Giving the users a little power will simplify the deployment of such invasive product

- Better policy stamping on the client. Today you can see "Last Received" but that's misleading as policy might not have been changed for long before that. I would rather see a hashmark or some kind of name where I could match the server policy name with the client (the date should be in the name)

:145


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

    Hi vojta,

    many thanks for your suggestions. I checked your proposals with our architecture team.

    - Better AD synchronization (automated, configurable schedule, and built into MC)

    As I already posted, this is on the roadmap.

    - "Policy for a slider" - meaning give user the option via policy to control how fast they want to encrypt the HD. Of course if this policy is disable user cannot control that (aka today's status). Giving the users a little power will simplify the deployment of such invasive product

    Our implementation uses the idle CPU time. Other tasks which need the CPU have priority. Therefore the slider does not make much sense.

    If you have a different opinion, please tell me why.

    - Better policy stamping on the client. Today you can see "Last Received" but that's misleading as policy might not have been changed for long before that. I would rather see a hashmark or some kind of name where I could match the server policy name with the client (the date should be in the name)

    We hear this suggestion for the first time.

    What shall happen if multiple policies are applied to one client? Obviously, the user would be not able to do sort this information ou´t - it would be too complex to understand.

    Best regards,

    :609
Reply
  • 0

    Hi vojta,

    many thanks for your suggestions. I checked your proposals with our architecture team.

    - Better AD synchronization (automated, configurable schedule, and built into MC)

    As I already posted, this is on the roadmap.

    - "Policy for a slider" - meaning give user the option via policy to control how fast they want to encrypt the HD. Of course if this policy is disable user cannot control that (aka today's status). Giving the users a little power will simplify the deployment of such invasive product

    Our implementation uses the idle CPU time. Other tasks which need the CPU have priority. Therefore the slider does not make much sense.

    If you have a different opinion, please tell me why.

    - Better policy stamping on the client. Today you can see "Last Received" but that's misleading as policy might not have been changed for long before that. I would rather see a hashmark or some kind of name where I could match the server policy name with the client (the date should be in the name)

    We hear this suggestion for the first time.

    What shall happen if multiple policies are applied to one client? Obviously, the user would be not able to do sort this information ou´t - it would be too complex to understand.

    Best regards,

    :609
Children
No Data
Unfiltered HTML