SP 2016 Enterprise – Article page not displaying all content

I have an article page with the body only layout. The only fields are the Title and Page Content fields. The Page Content field was only displaying a document library web part.

I edited the page to add some rich text content before the web part.

When I preview the page, it shows the rich text content and the web-part. When I save or check in the page, the rich text content is not displayed. Edit the page, all the content is visible.

I don’t see anything odd in the HTML/source. This is not happening on every article page in the site collection, only a few.

Removing all content and re-adding it does not resolve the problem. When removing all content, I validate that there is no HTML/source remaining.

At this point, when there is only rich text content in the Page Content field, the rich text content does not display when saved or checked in.

How can I fix this article page?

Unlike what is mentioned on many articles, using SystemUpdate() is able to our enterprise wiki pages without creating new versions

I am working on an enterprise wiki site collection inside sharepoint on-premises 2013, and i want to update a field named “PageNumber”, without affecting the modified, modifedby & version number, so i wrote this powershell script and i run it inside a test wiki site:-

$  site = get-SPWeb http://**/site/customerwiki/ #specify the list name  $  list = $  site.Lists["Customer KB"]  $  listitems = $  list.Items   foreach ($  listitem in $  listitems)  {      write-host $  listitem["ID"] "processed"     $  listitem["PageNumber"] = $  listitem["Initial"]+$  listitem["ID"];     $  listitem.SystemUpdate()     write-host $  listitem["Name"] "has been updated."   }  

where the wiki pages got updated without creating new version or update the modified-by or modified date.. now i am asking this question as i found many articles which mentioned that suing SystemUpdate() will create new versions such as this link:- How to Update SharePoint List Items without Creating New Versions

so can anyone advice on this?

How can I explain our system admins that AV can’t protect our enterprise machines from malware that come from USBninja?

Was hoping to get your support to help to explain to our system admins how come the AV can’t protect our enterprise from attacks that can be generated from USBninja. How can I explain our system admins that AV can’t protect our enterprise machines from malware that come from USBninja?

Enterprise Standard for Linux server Penetration Testing

Is there any enterprise or global standard like “OWASP” which can be followed while doing penetration testing on Linux servers. I want to know is there any most common/important vulnerabilities that must be covered while doing Linux server penetration testing ? As OWASP has top 10 vulnerability list that can be followed while doing Application vulnerability testing.

How to mitigate the new malicious USB cable USBHarpoon (NOT BadUSB) threat in an enterprise?

In this case the victims may think they are using a generic USB cable, but the PC will recognize the cable as a Human Interface Device, much like it would a mouse or keyboard, giving the attacker just enough permissions to wreak havoc inside the system. This is different from all the other variation as this threat much tricker to address with awareness practices.



Windows Virtual desktop app in Azure enterprise applications deleted

I’m trying out the new Windows Virtual Desktop (preview) and I’ve been having some trouble. Thought I’d start again form scratch and managed to delete the Windows Virtual Desktop application under Enterprise applications in Azure AD.I thought it was just to add again but now it is gone.

Does anyone know how to re-add it?


WPA2 Enterprise: no risks for preconfigured clients when it comes to Rogue APs?

We are using, as default, PEAP and MS-CHAPv2 as inner authentication.

I was concerned with security risks when it comes to rogue APs but a colleague told me that there are no risks for preconfigured clients.

He told me there are risks only for clients with WiFi not preconfigured, because most users would trust a fake certificate. Instead, for preconfigured clients, all supplicants would drop or reject the connection and the user wouldn’t be allowed to trust a fake certificate. But why’s that? Maybe because the supplicants check if there is already a certificate installed for that SSID?

Also, supplicants have always have been this safe regarding this matter? Or patches have been applied during time? If the latter is the case, how would I know when the patches have been applied and in which OS versions? It would be helpful because, for instance, I could suggest for Apple mobile devices to use only from iOS 7 and above (I just took a guess, I don’t know if it’s the correct version).