Sr. Content Developer at Microsoft, working remotely in PA, TechBash conference organizer, former Microsoft MVP, Husband, Dad and Geek.
163974 stories
·
33 followers

SE Radio 744: Danilo Krummrich on Rust in the Linux Kernel

1 Share

Danilo Krummrich, a software engineer at Red Hat, speaks with host Gregory M. Kapfhammer about the using the Rust programming language in the Linux kernel. After introducing the Nova project, which leverages Rust for building NVIDIA GPU drivers, they explore the benefits associated with Rust, such as GPU driver memory safety. The conversation also examines topics like best practices for implementing self-referential structures with Rust and the pin-init crate. Danilo also describes practical performance considerations and lessons learned from building and maintaining the Nova project.





Download audio: https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/seradio/744-danilo-krummrich-rust-linux-kernel.mp3?dest-id=23379
Read the whole story
alvinashcraft
31 minutes ago
reply
Pennsylvania, USA
Share this story
Delete

Patrick Stewart has died at age 86

1 Share
A photo of Patrick Stewart

Patrick Stewart, best known for his roles in Star Trek and X-Men, has died at age 86. A message posted to Stewart's Instagram account says the actor died in his Los Angeles home on Wednesday "following a brief and poignant journey with Alzheimer's Disease and Lewy Body Dementia."

Born in 1940 in Mirfield, Yorkshire, England, Stewart began his acting career in theater. He eventually landed the role of Captain Jean-Luc Picard in Star Trek: The Next Generation, which ran from 1987 to 1994. Stewart returned as the Star Trek captain in subsequent films, including Star Trek: Generations (1994), Star Trek: First Contact (1996), Star Trek: Insurrec …

Read the full story at The Verge.

Read the whole story
alvinashcraft
1 hour ago
reply
Pennsylvania, USA
Share this story
Delete

GM to pay $220 million to resolve claims it sold driving habits data

1 Share
A photo of the GM logo

General Motors has agreed to pay $220 million to settle claims that it illegally sold driver and location information to data brokers, as reported earlier by Reuters. The agreement, which resolves a complaint from a coalition of 36 US attorneys general, requires GM to limit the driving data it collects and obtain "express consent" from drivers before collecting their information.

The allegations surround GM's now-discontinued Smart Driver program, which collected data about driving habits, including acceleration, braking, and trip length. GM allegedly passed this information to data brokers, enabling insurance companies to purchase the data …

Read the full story at The Verge.

Read the whole story
alvinashcraft
1 hour ago
reply
Pennsylvania, USA
Share this story
Delete

Get agent sessions off your machine

1 Share
From: warpdotdev
Duration: 1:34
Views: 20

Try Warp Factories: warp.dev/get-started

DevEx Engineering Lead Ben Holmes shows how conversations are stored in Warp Factories. This puts every agent conversation in one place, with an inbox, a runs panel, spend dashboards and quality scores that feed self-improvement.

Read the whole story
alvinashcraft
1 hour ago
reply
Pennsylvania, USA
Share this story
Delete

Mistral Large 4 in Microsoft Foundry: Build sovereign AI within a consistent platform experience

1 Share

What's launching

Leading AI delivers more than model quality. For governments, critical infrastructure operators, financial institutions, healthcare organizations, and global enterprises, requirements for data control, deployment location, security, resilience, latency, and operational continuity are also crucial. Today, Mistral Large 4 (Le Chonk) reaches general availability from Mistral. As the first cloud provider to bring Mistral Large 4 latest in public preview to customers, Microsoft is making Mistral’s latest open-weight model available through Microsoft Foundry in the coming days. This gives customers access to Mistral's European-built model portfolio for reasoning, coding, cybersecurity, and agentic applications, with multilingual and multimodal support built in. Microsoft Foundry provides the consistent platform layer for evaluation, governance, and operations across all of these workloads.

Also becoming generally available in Microsoft Foundry is Mistral OCR 4 (latest), moving from public preview to GA on the same day Microsoft makes available Mistral Large 4 latest in Public Preview. OCR 4 (latest) extends the Mistral portfolio in Foundry for document AI scenarios leveraging the latest OCR 4.1 weights internally, giving developers a purpose-built option for extracting and structuring information from documents alongside Mistral Large 4 latest for reasoning, coding, multimodal, and agentic applications.

“Mistral Large 4 represents exactly the kind of innovation enterprises want access to, with the openness and control they increasingly require. By bringing it to Blackbox through Microsoft Foundry, we are giving customers more choice without asking them to compromise on trust.”

Robert Rizk, Co-Founder and CEO Blackbox AI

*Blackbox AI, offering a secure E2EE AI inference and coding platform for enterprises, is among the early interested adopters deploying Mistral Large 4 through Microsoft Foundry.

European model choice for sovereign AI 

According to Mistral, Mistral Large 4 is Mistral’s largest and most capable Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) model to date, meaning only a subset of the model's parameters activate for each input, improving efficiency. The model was trained in Mistral’s datacenters in Europe, with 1 trillion parameters and 52 billion active parameters. Its open weights add another important dimension for organizations pursuing sovereign AI: greater control over where the model runs, how it is operated and adapted, and the infrastructure and data boundaries around it.

That matters because sovereignty is not a single deployment claim. It is a continuum of control across data, models, infrastructure, operations, and connectivity. Microsoft and Mistral are working together to expand access to Mistral models across Microsoft platforms and deployment environments, giving organizations more options as they design AI architectures around sovereignty, security, resilience, and operational requirements. In Microsoft Foundry, Mistral Large 4 adds a European-built, open-weight model to the choices organizations can evaluate as they design AI architectures around those requirements. Mistral Large 4 will be available in Sweden Central region for Global Standard and EU DataZone deployment, providing options for teams with data residency requirements.

Capabilities that matter for builders 

  • Cybersecurity reasoning and automation. Synthesize threat intelligence, security telemetry, vulnerability context, secure-coding guidance, and response procedures. High-impact actions should remain behind explicit permissions, approvals, and analyst review.
  • Reasoning, coding, and tool use. Analyze complex instructions, generate and explain code, produce structured outputs, and coordinate approved tools across multi-step workflows. According to Mistral, Mistral Large 4 is a leading agentic coding model, reaching the highest open weights score on Cognition's private FrontierCode 2.0 benchmark, with 19.7%.
  • Long-context and multimodal understanding. Work across large documents, repositories, policies, histories, and supported visual inputs for grounded research, document analysis, and operational support. 
  • Multilingual experiences. With native fluency in more than 160 languages, teams can use Mistral Large 4 to build localized applications and cross-border workflows while evaluating quality on the languages and specialized terminology that matter to the organization.  

Why build with Mistral Large 4 in Microsoft Foundry

Platform consistency across models and environments

Microsoft Foundry helps teams avoid separate architectures for every model or environment. Developers can discover and compare models, evaluate them on representative data, deploy through consistent interfaces, and connect models to enterprise data and tools. Azure identity, network isolation, policy, secrets management, content safety, monitoring, logging, and governance provide controls around endpoints and applications. For sensitive agents, teams can apply least-privilege tool access, explicit action boundaries, human approval, and observable execution. 

Security and governance for sensitive workloads

This combination is especially relevant to public sector, critical infrastructure, manufacturing, industrial operations, healthcare, and financial services. These organizations need advanced AI, but adoption depends on regional alignment, regulatory compliance, operational resilience, and clear accountability. European model choice combined with Microsoft security, compliance, governance, and operational support provides a practical path from experimentation to production. 

For cybersecurity workloads, the operating model matters as much as model quality. Teams should define what data the model can access, which tools it may call, which actions require approval, how evidence is logged, and when the system must defer to an analyst. These controls turn model capability into a reviewable, auditable workflow rather than an autonomous black box. 

Get started 

Start by selecting the Mistral Large 4 model card in Model Catalog | Microsoft Foundry once live. Deploy the model in your Foundry project and test it with representative prompts, tools, and evaluation datasets. Compare quality, safety, latency, and cost against the requirements of your application before scaling to production.

Useful resources 

Read the whole story
alvinashcraft
1 hour ago
reply
Pennsylvania, USA
Share this story
Delete

New Conditional Access policy plans in Microsoft Entra

1 Share

Add a rule for each requirement, like phishing-resistant MFA or compliant devices, and keep the shared scope in one place.

Build a plan around a user group, like headquarters staff, or a shared condition, like high agent risk, and start from templates. Merge existing policies into a plan with the migration tool. It pulls shared conditions up to the plan and turns each policy into a rule. Your current policies stay enforced until you cut over.

Etan Basseri, Principal Product Manager, Microsoft Entra, shares how plans and rules fit together in the Microsoft Entra admin center.

Define your access controls once.

Enforce it consistently across every rule with Conditional Access policy plans. See how it works.

Add a rule, keep your scope.

Set HQ users and break-glass exclusions once in a Conditional Access policy plan, then add rules for phishing-resistant MFA and compliant devices. Watch here.

Simplify existing Conditional Access policies.

Bring those with a shared naming prefix into one policy plan. Migration automatically identifies shared conditions and converts each policy into a rule. Try it now.

👥 Who it’s for:

Identity and security admins who manage Conditional Access in Microsoft Entra, and architects planning how to organize or migrate large policy sets, including access controls for AI agents.

⏱️ Chapters:

00:00 Conditional Access policy plans in Microsoft Entra

00:48 Track policies beyond naming prefixes

01:29 How shared conditions and rules work

02:41 Create a policy plan for HQ users

03:43 Add a phishing-resistant MFA rule

04:43 Add a compliant device rule

05:51 Block high-risk AI agents in one plan

06:56 Migrate existing policies into a plan

08:11 Keep policies enforced until cutover

 

What are Conditional Access policy plans? They organize access controls around an objective, either a persona like employees, external guests or administrators, or a security goal like requiring compliant devices or securing agent activity. Plan-level attributes cover identities, resources and applications, user actions and authentication context, plus shared conditions like risk levels, devices, network locations and client app types. Each rule layers its own conditions and grant or session controls on top. Plans live in a new Policy plans view, next to your existing policy list under Conditional Access.

The headquarters plan in the demo includes the HQ All Users group and excludes a break-glass group to prevent lockouts. Its first rule requires phishing-resistant MFA through authentication strength and starts in report-only mode. A second rule requires devices marked as compliant. Neither rule repeats the included or excluded groups.

The agent plan, built from a template, sets high agent risk as its shared condition. Separate rules block high-risk agent users and high-risk autonomous agents acting with their own agent-specific permissions.

How do you move existing policies over? Filter your policy list, for example by a branch office naming prefix, select the policies and merge them into one plan. The preview shows which resources become shared conditions and how each policy maps to a rule, with its identities, locations, grant and session settings. After you enforce the new plan, turn off or delete the original policies.

đź”— Related links:

Check out https://aka.ms/ConditionalAccessPolicyPlans

Unfamiliar with Microsoft Mechanics?

Microsoft’s Official Video Series for IT

— Subscribe https://www.youtube.com/c/MicrosoftMechanicsSeries

— Microsoft Tech Community: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/microsoft-mechanics-blog/bg-p/MicrosoftMechanicsBlog

— Podcast: https://microsoftmechanics.libsyn.com/podcast

Join us on social:

— https://twitter.com/MSFTMechanics

— https://www.linkedin.com/company/microsoft-mechanics/

— https://www.instagram.com/msftmechanics/

— https://www.tiktok.com/@msftmechanics


Video Transcript:

-Conditional Access is Microsoft’s Zero Trust policy engine. What it protects has expanded, and now we’re evolving the management experience to match. Today, it continuously assesses real-time signals across users, AI agents, applications, endpoints, networks, and resources to enforce Zero Trust. Based on an identity and its context, it makes adaptive access decisions, determining whether to require additional controls in order to allow or restrict access, or block the request to specified resources altogether. And to help you manage those access controls more effectively at scale, we are introducing Conditional Access policy plans. I’ll show you what these are, how they expand what you can do, and how they work with your existing Conditional Access policies.

-So, what are policy plans, and how do they help? Well, until now, you’ve probably been managing who gets access to what across your organization as one flat list of policies. What started off as a small list of controls, including multifactor authentication, device compliance requirements, along with the scoping and exclusions within policies to make everything work, has now expanded to fine-grained, risk-based policies, identity-driven network controls through Global Secure Access, dedicated conditions for agent identities, and much more.

-Over time, it’s become harder to understand how policies relate to one another, who owns them, and how changes might affect access decisions. There’s no grouping and no structure in that list, so the only way to keep track of what covers what might be creative naming prefixes or other solutions. This is where Conditional Access policy plans come in. It’s a new policy framework for Conditional Access, where you organize access controls around an objective, instead of managing them one policy at a time. A policy plan objective might be based on a specific persona, like employees, external guests, or administrators, or a security goal, like securing agent activity or requiring compliant devices.

-At the plan level, you can define the common attributes for that objective once. This includes identities, resources including applications, user actions, and authentication context, as well as shared conditions like risk levels, devices, network locations, and client app types. Each plan then holds one or more rules, and every rule inherits those shared attributes automatically. A rule adds the specifics needed to meet the objective, its own conditions, and its own grant or session controls. So, a variation of your objective becomes a rule, instead of another standalone policy to manage. It’s a new framework where each policy plan has its own name, description, owner, and tags.

-So, it’s clear what each plan is for, who owns it, and what will change if you edit it later. That’s what keeps policy sprawl down as you scale. Importantly, your existing Conditional Access policies will continue to work, and won’t be affected as you roll out policy plans. Let me show you this in action, starting with a new policy plan, in this case, with the objective of securing access for people working from our company headquarters. In the Microsoft Entra admin center, under Conditional Access, there’s a new “Policy plans” view sitting alongside the list of policies you have today. I’ll create a new plan to manage headquarters users.

-First, I’ll give it a name, type in a description that will be useful for anyone to know what this plan is about, then I’ll add a tag, “HQ,” for easier filtering, and you can see that my name is auto-filled as the owner of this plan. Below that is where, based on the policy plan security objective, you can select the appropriate shared identities, resources, or conditions. Because this plan’s objective is to specify requirements for people in the headquarters location, I’ll only need to use shared identities here.

-I’ll go into users and groups for my inclusions, and by filtering to HQ, I’ll see the matching groups. I’ll select the “HQ All Users” group. I also want to add an exclusion here to avoid unexpected lockouts. So, following the same steps, I’ll pick a group to exclude and choose “Break Glass HQ.” That means these groups will be inherited as assignments by any rule within this policy plan. When you create a new plan, the process guides you through creation of its first rule. If you’ve ever written a Conditional Access policy, this will look familiar. I’ll create a rule to require phishing-resistant authentication for headquarters users. I just need to give my rule a name and optionally add a description that can be referred to later.

-For the rule’s state, I’ll leave this as report-only for now, but I could toggle it to on from here. Notice that I don’t need to define the assignments and conditions again for the included and excluded groups. However, I do need to assign resources. So, I’ll do that here, in this case, by selecting “All resources,” and then confirm. Now, for under these conditions, I’ll leave “All client app types,” and I can go straight into Grant and session controls in this case. I’ll choose to grant, but require authentication strength, and choose “Phishing-resistant MFA,” and confirm that control. That way, all headquarters users are required to meet this authentication strength for all resources they are trying to access. Now, I just need to review and create my policy plan and initial rule. And from there, I can add more rules to this plan. So, I’ll create a rule to require compliant devices from our HQ users.

-Previously, each rule would have meant creating a separate policy and reconfiguring the same shared identities and exclusions. Again, this would apply to shared resources and conditions based on your plan and its security objective. Now, I just need to enter a name. I’ll call this “Require Compliant Device,” and then in the description, I’ll write what this rule does. Again, under Accessing these resources, I want to assign all resources to this rule. So, I’ll change the resource assignment like last time, from “None” to “All resources,” and confirm. From under these conditions, I’ll leave all client apps.

-For this rule, I’ll add a control to grant again, and in this case, require device to be marked as compliant. I can do the same to add risk-based rules or others to my plan. Now, I just need to save it, and that’s it. So, instead of managing multiple policies with the same scope, shared assignments are defined once, and individual access requirements are implemented as rules. From here, I can keep going to create other plans for specific objectives, and I’ve already created a few. And you can see we have some for different identities, specific resources like important ERP apps, or conditions like the policy plans listed based on risk. I just showed you how to create a plan based on a user group in our specific HQ location.

-So, now let’s look at one based on a security objective, securing agent access, where it’s now a lot simpler to apply Conditional Access to agentic activity. You can see that this plan is using shared conditions for all client app types, and where agent risk is determined to be high. And below that, there are individual rules defined to block high-risk agent users and block high-risk autonomous agents. This will help ensure that access protections cover agents acting with their own agent-specific permissions. Without a policy plan, each of these scenarios would require its own standalone policy, repeating many of the same conditions. I’ll open this rule for the high-risk autonomous agents, and you’ll see that it includes the inherited conditions of the plan, and adds an assignment for all agent identities. And under controls, it’s set to block when those conditions are met.

-So, now, instead of spreading agent access controls across multiple policies, they’re organized in a single plan, making them easier to understand, manage, and update as requirements evolve. The good news is that you don’t need to build these policy plans from scratch. In fact, the agent policy plan I just showed you was created by using a template.

-Next, let’s move on to your existing Conditional Access policies, and I’ll show you how to quickly migrate what you already have in place into policy plans. The first plan we created for users at the company headquarters runs in parallel with existing policies for our various branch offices. Each have dedicated Global Secure Access security profiles. As you can see, this environment has dozens of Conditional Access policies already running, and I filtered my list down to branch office policies, because the only thing connecting these policies together was the naming prefix. I’ll use the “Migrate to Conditional Access Policy plans” option and get started. That will keep my filtered list of policies and allow me to select the ones I want to migrate. In this case, I’ll use the top “Select all” control to save a few clicks, then choose “Merge 5 policies into a plan.” And now I can see a preview of my plan before I create it. I’ll give this policy plan a name, “Branch Office Access.”

-Under the covers, the process looks for anything that my selected policies have in common, and defines those as shared conditions, as you can see with the two resources here. Below that, each of my previous policies are translated into rules, where you can see identities, resources, locations, grant, and session configurations for each. Then, to confirm, I just need to click “Create policy plan.” And just like that, my five policies have been migrated into one plan, with a set of shared conditions and unique rules. My original policies are still there and untouched. Each are also still enforced based on their policy state.

-Once you’re ready, you’re in control of managing the cutover to the new plan by enforcing it. From there, you turn off or delete the previous policies. And as you add new branch locations, those just become new rules in your plan. So, that’s how we’re evolving the framework for managing Conditional Access, moving from individual policies to security objectives that can be defined once and enforced consistently across your environment.

-Check out aka.ms/conditionalaccesspolicyplans to learn more. Keep watching Microsoft Mechanics for the latest tech updates, and thanks for watching.

 

Read the whole story
alvinashcraft
1 hour ago
reply
Pennsylvania, USA
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories