Thread: Mail for Exchange (MfE). Blame me here, pls
View Single Post
vitaly_repin's Avatar
vitaly_repin is offline vitaly_repin
2009-11-30 , 09:01
Posts: 320 | Thanked: 763 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Espoo, FInland
#153
Originally Posted by fouro View Post
So as far as I understand, if the device isn't provisionable and your employer wants you to lock your phone to be able to sync with MfE (aka requiring the provisionalbe device), you're out of luck - no MfE for you?
Currently, yes. With one minor addition - your employer has to explicitly state (in MS Exchange Server configuration) that non-provisioning devices are NOT supported.

And it was delibrate decision to leave it out.. because you don't like it personally?
No. I am not the guy who makes the decisions about the features which have to be in the product. I can give ideas for them, of course. And usually they are heard. But I am not allowed to make business decisions of such kind, as you can guess.

Or you're just not willing to make it issue because you don't like it personally, unless we find some other way to tell Nokia that it's important?
1. I am not willing to make it (full provisioning support) because it will mean end of deal for me as an end-user - I will not use the MfE with my corporate account anymore. And it will decrease my productivity.
2. I will do it if I would be commanded to do it. This is my job to execute business decisions at the end of the day. My personal feelings shall stay aside. But don't expect me to support the idea of creating the software which I will not be able to use. Fair enough?

One might imagine that if your employer requires this setting, it's because it's corporate policy to require that the device is locked if you sync it with MfE (at least this is how it is where I work). This kind of is logical: I doubt that many corporations would like that stolen/forgotten handset gives easy access to mail. If you don't like it and don't want to go along with the policies, then you don't have to sync your device.
This is logical and I have never told that I do not understand the companies which request this. I don't like this feature so much that this is a deal breaker for me as an end-user, this is what I have told. If I have no ability to turn full provisioning off, I will not use the Mfe. That's all. And again, this have no influence on my responsibility on delivery the feature. If I am commanded to do it, I will do it.

Another point. Simple enabling of autolock in the device in fact provides wrong feeling for the employer that the data which is stored in the device is secure and can not be read by 3-party. This is simply not truth. Expert still can (and quite easily) access the data which is stored in the flash. This is not a problem unless the flash is not encrypted.

Am I missing some basic understanding about how MfE works, aka this support for provisionable devices just some extra feature that shouldn't be there? If not, the it would be completely reasonable to expect that it would work as advertised.
The only technical comment I have is that this is not a small workload to fully support provisioning.
Last edited by vitaly_repin; 2009-11-30 at 09:16. Reason: Added paragraph about wrong understanding of security
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to vitaly_repin For This Useful Post: