• @Mereo@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    222
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    What the hell?!?!?! This is a server OS! It needs to be as light as possible and for the sake of server stability and security, admins carefully choose the installed apps. Microsoft can’t just install new applications on a whim.

    This is fuged up.

    • @Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1573 months ago

      People in this thread seem to be missing this point.

      This is windows server, not windows 11. The consequences is not “I’ll have an annoying taskbar icon on my home computer”, this is enterprise level interference that could affect large systems and thousands of users.

      Linux Mint isn’t an alternative to windows server.

      • @TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        323 months ago

        Yep. I no longer have to administer Windows servers (everything I do is serverless these days) but I did for many years.

        Adding anything to a server without vetting it against policies is a huge no no. Back when I was doing it, a big part of our monthly update deployment was updating the test environment first so we knew we weren’t about to break a bunch of shit for us and our customers. Not just “does this brick Windows server”, but “do our applications still function” (usually yes, but the answer was no on several occasions over shit smaller than this).

        I don’t know what adding copilot does. Is it going to accidentally break some custom application by accident because it’s tied directly into the system? Is it going to report shit that I’ve already opted out of due to our data policies and possibly fuck up our audit compliance because of government regulations (defense, medical, and energy sectors have huge responsibilities in that area, just don’t ask how I know)? How does it interact with our in-house developed software?

        Fuck, I dunno. That sounds like a nightmare for infrastructure and ops, several managers, government regulators, and a payday for legal.

      • @fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        163 months ago

        For sure, if you need paid support (which if you aren’t a tech giant, a fledgling startup, or a system with no need for uptime metrics, you probally do) the you have:

        • SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (aka SLES and only still Libre option in this category unfortunately)
        • Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
        • Ubuntu are

        if don’t need paid support then Debian, OpenSuse, Rocky, or Fedora are all good picks.

      • @AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        23 months ago

        Almost any Unix can be an alternative for Windows Server. Never understood why it was used, other than tech illiteracy of lowly tech workers who only knew MS stack.

        • @herrvogel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          43 months ago

          The usual answer to that is “active directory”. It’s not uncommon to have one windows server alongside other Linux servers because of AD.

          • @TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            23 months ago

            In addition, with all Microsoft’s faults they had a hell of a small business package for years. In a lot of small businesses, the current CIO came up during those times and dictates policy.

            Plus there are a lot of VARs and MSPs who push MS due to favorable terms and kickbacks. Small and medium sized businesses who outsource IT go with whatever they’re told because they don’t have the expertise, time, or desire to explore alternatives.

            Plus there’s a load of self hosted software for certain industries that only works on Windows servers.

      • @XTL@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        63 months ago

        There is a truly baffling amount of people who imagine that Microsoft has suddenly turned into a good company.

    • BolexForSoup
      link
      fedilink
      63
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      No enterprise is going to want to deal with that and realistically they’re the only ones with the pockets to fight that battle.

      • Jo Miran
        link
        fedilink
        523 months ago

        If introducing Copilot to server degrades service enough to trigger an SLA downstream, you can absolutely bet lawyers will get involved.

        • @Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          373 months ago

          Or if CoPilot starts exfiltrating data to Microsoft so their server farms can ‘analyze’ it.

          I’m not heavily involved in the space, but I’m given to understand that MS isn’t very clear about what happens to your data or how it gets used or shared.

          Perhaps Microsoft will be smart enough not to allow the general public to query trade secrets or government data that’s been pulled via unwanted copilot integration.
          But maybe the ongoing Russian hack of Microsoft will make it irrelevant, because the servers can be accessed directly.
          Or perhaps at some distant time, Microsoft will roll out features or technologies developed using an internal version of CoPilot that has access to all data - including proprietary information from competitors.

          And that’s not even counting what ISP’s will do if they find a way to analyze copilot traffic, or what state actors will do if they can set up MitM attacks for Copilot.

          Honestly, I sort of fear the repercussions, but I look forward to the lawsuits.

          • @taladar@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            4
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I thought the Microsoft technologies designed to allow anyone to access your servers were called Exchange and Active Directory.

            • @Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              83 months ago

              Exchange allows users to access data and Microsoft services and it comes with good documentation and a whole slew of controls for org admins.

              Active Directory provides authentication services, and it is mostly for your internal users (so they can access org services, including Exchange), but it’s very common to allow guests and to federate under certain circumstances, so your AD talks to their AD and external guests can authenticate and use resources that have been shared with them.
              It is also well-documented with tight control in the hands of administrators.

              Copilot is a black box. Their terms of service are vague. Microsoft’s responsible AI website comprises of marketing speak, no details, and the standards guide on the site is mostly questions that amount to “TBD”. Administrative ability to control data sharing is non-existent, not yet developed, or minimal.
              We don’t know the scope of data gathered, the retention and handling policies, or where that data/any models built from that data are going to wind up.
              My read is that they’re waiting to be sued or legislated before they impose any limits on themselves.