We have a requirement to have automation of sending emails with Attachments. For example the ff. scenario:
- User requests for a document which user does not have access.
- Then some approvals happen and once approved
- Once approved, workflow will send the document as an attachment to the user
I don’t think out of the box SharePoint Designer workflow can do this.
My current thinking is we can use Custom Visual Studio workflow to download the document and then send an email as attachments using custom code. However, I am concerned with large files or large number of files. Is there a memory limitation or it might slow down the performance of our server if the workflow email attachment constantly runs?
Or are there any better approaches to this one?
When you send an email via a workflow with managed metadata items they look like TERM1|ifdijfigjdiojgikdjfgidjgildjlgk.
I have tried with the new Microsoft flow and it does exactly the same (before I tried with SharePoint designer workflows).
Is there a way to clean up the code portion in order to show just the Term either in SPD Workflow or Flow? By chance is it exactly the same process? (additional 2 columns with copy=paste and removal of the extra letters with a formula?)
As stated in the title, are there any existing best practices to install Debian on a remote server, without sending clear text passwords over the link?
For example – a lot of dedicated server providers will give their customers direct access to the KVM of the supermicro board. This gives them a lot of choices – for example, I can mount any local ISO image as if it were in the CD drive.
However, installing Debian would be a no-go, because I’ll have to type in the root password during the setup, which an eavesdropper can read too.
My guess would be to create a pre-made installation image, with the SSH public key already installed. You would no longer rely on what’s on the KVM screen, but rather connect to the SSH service immediately. You’d still open yourself up to man in the middle attacks, since someone eavesdropping on the KVM connection could copy the public key and the hostkey, and intercept the connection, but I imagine it would be difficult to do in a timely fashion.
Is there any better way I am missing?
I have created a 2010 workflow for my SharePoint online environment using SharePoint Designer. The workflow is a reusable one which used by 3 different calendars. When an item is created or change the workflow will trigger.
It’s a basic approval workflow.
- An item is created, the admin is notified by email which asks them to approve or reject it
Approvedcreate the item.
- Email user with the outcome.
- Email user
- Workflow Ends.
At the very first step, however, the user that is emailed get’s 12 emails asking them to approve or reject the item that’s been created and I don’t know why.
Have I done something wrong here?
This question already has an answer here:
- What does “familiar” mean in the Sending spell? 1 answer
The Sending spell text says:
You send a short message of twenty-five words or less to a creature with which you are familiar.
What is meant by “Familiar” here? Should caster know this creature’s name? Or should he have seen it once maybe? Or should the have had a conversation with this creature in the past?
I have a flow that send e-mail to multiple users at once. No problem there… but suddenly, I had a problem with one email. That e-mail was invalid /incorrect, and sharepoint kept trying to send it over and over.. Since just one of the emails on the list was broken, all other users received emails several times, but SP was still trying to send it.. I had to stop the flow, cause they received more than 60 e-mails from Sharepoint.
I know that the ideal is NOT HAVING A BROKEN EMAIL there… but since it can happen again, I’m looking for alternatives.
The email is sent to a people picker field with multiple persons, separated with “;”.
If I build a dictionary with the users from this field, and run trough it sending the e-mail for each of then individualy, if it gets a broken e-mail will it stop? or it will keep trying to send the email and run though the dictionary again?
Ps: Sorry about my english.. it will get better, I promise =p
ps2: Is there some way to keep the workflow running when it gets an error?
I have a web application used by users with “little experience”.
The only field that exists on the home page is email. If the user is already registered I request the password, otherwise I send an email to him to finish the registration.
My problem is that users occasionally type the wrong email and are waiting to receive the email to complete the registration.
I started a job to create a “Did you mean” tool, so if he type “email@example.com” I suggest “firstname.lastname@example.org” …
I wanted your opinion on two topics:
1 – Should I open another field for him to re-type the email before sending the link to finalize the registration.
2 – Should I use a host validation API like https://trumail.io/ (afraid to block an email OK).
Or if someone has a similar experience and wants to share the solution that brought greater conversion would help me a lot
Suppose I have one of a pair of sending stones, and I wish to locate the other stone of the pair. Is there any spell or other magic that will allow me to find the stone’s mate? Assume I have never held or seen the stone’s mate.
A limited range solution is potentially acceptable, but longer range or unlimited range solution is preferred (even more so if it works across planes), since I have no way of knowing where the other stone is. However, any solution must locate the specific stone, not just any sending stone (not least because unless I have a bag of holding, the nearest sending stone is always going to be the one in my pocket). If there are any additional limitations to the solution, be sure to note them (e.g. “the stone must not be in the possession of a creature”, “the stone must not be inside a lead box”, etc.). Lastly, casting Wish and wishing to know the stone’s location should obviously work, so there’s no need to mention this option (also, casting Wish in this way carries the very severe limitations of needing a 9th level spell and risking losing access to Wish, so I wouldn’t consider it a great solution). In short: the best solution would have the longest possible range and the fewest possible limitations.
I’m playing around with a self-xss bug that I believe I can escalate with a CSRF attack. However, the exploit relies on sending two identical
Content-Length headers in a single POST request.
POST /authenticate[xss payload] Host: target.net Content-Length: 4 Content-Length: 4 whatever=whatever
It doesn’t matter if the Content-Length is correct or not – there just has to be two identical Content-Length headers.
Sorry if the answer to this is trivial, I hope you can cut an infosec n00b some slack.