Fast Software Audit 1.0.0 _TOP_ Download Youtube
Trish Irelan
Use this free tool to quickly gather installed software details and Windows product keys from remote computers
Simply enter the names of any computers that you want to audit (or import a list of computers from CSV file or Active Directory) and this application will show the software installed on each machine as well as the Windows product key and product ID.
Features
Quick and easy way to see what software is installed on remote computers
Accurate information - the list of software produced should be identical to what you would see in Add/Remove Programs on the remote machine
Specify multiple computers to audit by importing a list of names from a CSV file or by selecting an OU in Active Directory that contains the computers
View results on screen or export results to CSV file, which can then easily be edited in Microsoft Excel
Collect the Windows product key and product ID from each computer
Optionally only attempt to audit computers that respond to a ping test
Note: This application gathers its information from the registry of the remote computers, so the Remote Registry service must be running on any computers that you want to audit. The Remote Registry service is automatically started on Windows XP but is set to manual startup type by default on Windows 7, so you will need to either manually start the service (and change its startup type to Automatic) on the target computers or use Group Policy to change the startup type to Automatic for all computers.
Background & aims: International guidance advocates the avoidance of prolonged preoperative fasting due to its negative impact on perioperative hydration. This study aimed to assess the adherence to these guidelines for fasting in patients undergoing elective and emergency surgery in the East Midlands region of the UK.
Methods: This prospective audit was performed over a two-month period at five National Health Service (NHS) Trusts across the East Midlands region of the UK. Demographic data, admission and operative details, and length of preoperative fasting were collected on adult patients listed for emergency and elective surgery.
Conclusions: Despite international consensus on the duration of preoperative fasting, patients continue to fast from clear fluids and food for prolonged lengths of time. Patients admitted for emergency surgery were more likely to fast for longer than those having elective surgery.
Without fast, accurate, reliable audits, you risk losing access not only to your IBM zSystems data but also to your migrated DFSMS and DFSMShsm data. In the typical mainframe environment, DFSMShsm manages hundreds of thousands to millions of data assets. As the amount of data grows, the role of DFSMShsm becomes increasingly critical. Using FastAudit, you can keep DFSMShsm running smoothly and accurately.
To avoid serious outages, you need a powerful yet easy-to-use audit and maintenance program. Using Mainstar FastAudit, you can keep track of the health of your metadata structures, prioritize the auditing of business-critical data, and improve productivity by customizing and automating error correction. You can determine the CPU cost of reading incomplete and unneeded records, maintain data integrity with a built-in error-verification process, and more.
Developed together with apparel retailers in 2014 to address concerns of worker exploitation being undetected by existing social compliance audits, it aims to provide safe and ethical working conditions across sectors and to allow businesses to operate on a level playing field.
Fast Forward audits are currently open to brands and retailers that have manufacturing, warehousing, goods not for resale and/or service provider supply chains in the UK and who are supplying into the Fast Forward member brands.
As a Full Member Firm of the Association of Professional Social Compliance Auditors (APSCA), the Eurofins Consumer Products Assurance network of companies is one of the few ASPCA member audit firms conducting the Fast Forward audit, making us the natural choice for your third-party Fast Forward audits.
As requested by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the California State Auditor presents this audit report regarding the California High-Speed Rail Authority's (Authority) contracting and cost control practices. This report concludes that the Authority's flawed decision making regarding the start of high-speed rail system construction in the Central Valley and its ongoing poor contract management for a wide range of high-value contracts have contributed to billions of dollars in cost overruns for completing the system.
The objective of this audit was to determine whether DoD Component acquisition officials managed programs for the middle tier of acquisition (MTA) rapid prototyping or rapid fielding in accordance with DoD guidance.
While the safety of end consumers is always a top priority, it is also a business where food safety strategy and documentation can be a major differentiator to establish and expand distribution partnerships. There are increased pressures from buyers who require their own specific third-party audits before making purchasing or partnership decisions, in addition to a growing list of rules and regulations to ensure governmental compliance. Each of those audits have different requirements and documentation that is needed. It is a lot to keep up on for any business, while also ensuring quality production.
F.A.S.T. serves as a value-added food safety executive oversight group for all PSSI partners. The team consists of microbiologists, food safety specialists, GFSI auditors, regulatory compliance experts, who work together with individual sanitation teams across the country.
This article is concerned with the cost and time-effective scheduling of financial auditors with integer linear programming. The schedule optimization considers 13 different constraints, staff scarcity, frequent alterations of the input data with the need to minimize the changes in the generated schedule, and scaling issues. The delivered implementation reduced the time to the first schedule from 3 man-days to 1 h and the schedule update time from 1 man-day to 4 min.
Scheduling is an old optimization problem [5, 11, 18]. However, the difficulty with the optimization is that we have to carefully select what to optimize and which constraints to consider to get a solution for the optimization problem in an acceptable timeframe. Hence, the formulation of the schedule optimization necessarily differs from firm to firm as their needs differ. In this article, we list constraints encountered when optimizing a schedule for an auditing firm, and we illustrate how to formulate them as a multi-commodity network flow problem [9].
An unnamed auditing firm suffers from staff scarcity as the number of clients continues to increase. This has led to severe difficulties in planning activities. The last handmade schedule took 3 man-days to create, and each schedule update took another 1 man-day. It is predicted that the firm will continue to grow, and the situation will become even worse. Hence, the management decided that the firm needs a computer-aided planner, as presented in this article.
The firm employs financial auditors for audit engagements (an audit engagement is an arrangement that the firm has with a client to conduct an audit of the client) during the following year.
An example of a schedule for two auditors and three engagements. Engagements can be divided into phases, for example, interim and final in engagements 1 and 3. The engagement availability window is depicted within black ranges
Paper structure First, we review the audit scheduling literature (Sect. 1). We then justify our choice of the optimization solver because it affects which constraints can be efficiently modeled and how they should be formulated (Sect. 2). In the requirements Sect. 2.2, we list the modeled constraints and provide examples to illustrate their relevance to audit scheduling. In Sect. 3, we describe the data model. The result Sect. 4 then provides an empirical comparison of the optimized schedule versus a handmade schedule, which was created by an experienced scheduler over a 1-month period. Finally, we end the article with a discussion Sect. 5 and concluding remarks in Sect. 6.
Staff scarcity. To cover all the engagements with the limited number of the auditors, the generated schedule must be nearly perfect. For this reason, a pure greedy algorithm is unlikely to provide a valid schedule. This is in agreement with the observation by Drexl and Gruenewald [8].
There is a high count of diverse hard constraints that must be satisfied to obtain a solution acceptable by the auditors. This makes it difficult to design mutation and crossover operators in a genetic algorithm that would maintain the validity of the solution.
We assume that the firm has A auditors, and we want to find a schedule for the auditors for the next D days. The firm has E engagements, where each engagement is divided into consecutive P phases (e.g., interim and final). Each engagement requires auditors at a specific level (e.g., analyst, senior manager). We assume that each auditor is exactly at one level out of all L levels. Because an engagement may require multiple auditors at the same level, we differentiate between them using I indexes.
By introducing aliases, task \(T = (E, P, L, I)\) and sink \(S = (E, P, L, I, D)\), where day d indicates when task t starts (Fig. 2), we can formulate the auditor schedule optimization as a multi-commodity network flow problem (a multi-commodity network is a network with one or more sources and one or more sinks [9, 17]).
If auditor a can be potentially assigned to a sink s, there is an edge \(x_as\) between the nodes. The task of the optimizer is then to decide which of the candidate assignments are selected and which are not:
dd2b598166