Specifically MVNOs would be stupid to do this since they are leasing from primary network operators (Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile) and have to play be the rules of the contract with those companies.
Plus in OPs case Visible is owned by Verizon and Xfinity runs on Verizons network. It’s not Xfinity’s interest to piss off Verizon who could kick them off their network. That would result in less negotiating power with other networks and result in higher costs for them.
I hate to say it but company data is most definitely on personal computers.
This is why stuff like adaptive MFA and DLP are a thing. What most people don’t know is if DLP is properly implemented the IT team/department have records of who, when, where, and what device were used to not just access/download data/files.
The problem is a lot of companies don’t properly implement DLP because it’s not a turn key solution. You need to properly classify your data first and that requires essentially a company wide audit with buy-in from all levels of management. After the classifications you can then implement restrictions and compensating controls.
Back in the day you could just block USB/network transfer, but if you have data accessible outside of a corporate network you then need to implement conditional access/adaptive MFA where only registered devices are permitted to access certain systems.
When they rolled out the beta Microsoft said it wouldn’t be, but they could always change their mind with the general release. Excerpt from a previous Verge article about the beta rollout (https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/12/24128640/microsoft-windows-11-start-menu-ads-app-recommendations):
“This will appear only for Windows Insiders in the Beta Channel in the US and will not apply to commercial devices (devices managed by organizations),” says Microsoft in a blog post.
Unfortunately, this article doesn’t actually quote Microsoft saying it’s rolling out to ALL machines. That bit in the article is from the author.
Google is removing the VPN and free shipping (which was only available on some photo orders) to make way for more “in demand features”?
I could understand if this was coming from a smaller company with more limited resources and staff, but that’s not Google by any means.
They really don’t care about the poor reputation the general public has of them regarding shutting down services on a whim.
What’s worse though is they don’t seem to realize that, with the exception of Android and maybe Google Docs, their services/products are easily replaced by competitor offerings.
In my opinion it’s a good thing if Google gets knocked of their high horse and allow competition to flourish in their place.
It [Apple] argued that there is no iMessage version for other operating systems and devices because Apple can’t guarantee user security on those devices
What a load, Apple can’t guarantee security on their own devices!
Unfortunately they are already in the market and making a mess: https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/21/crowdstrike_linux_crashes_restoration_tools/