Search Results

Search found 6 results on 1 pages for 'mra'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • Skype Video not working 13.04 & 13.10?

    - by MrA
    I am trying to fix the issue with the video calls. I can check the video from the option menu, it works fine. But it does not work while calling someone. It shows video disabled. How can i fix this issue? I am using Ubuntu 13.10 and skype version 4.2.0.11 I checked all sites including below links but could not find solution: Skype no video in 13.04 Skype Video Call Not Working Ubuntu 11.10 No video skype found Video doesn't work well in skype http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeaLCzB4qy8

    Read the article

  • How can I block a specific type of DDoS attack?

    - by Mark
    My site is being attacked and is using up all the RAM. I looked at the Apache logs and every malicious hit seems to simply be a POST request on /, which is never required by a normal user. So I thought and wondered if there's any sort of solution or utility that will monitor my Apache logs and block every IP that performs a POST request on the site root. I'm not familiar with DDoS protection and searching didn't seem to give me an answer, so I came here. Thanks. Example logs: 103.3.221.202 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:03 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; CPU OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B206 Safari/7534.48.3" 122.72.80.100 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:03 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_7_4) AppleWebKit/536.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/20.0.1132.47 Safari/536.11" 122.72.28.15 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:04 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)" 210.75.120.5 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:04 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/12.0" 122.96.59.103 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:04 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; fr-fr; Desire_A8181 Build/FRF91) App3leWebKit/53.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1" 122.96.59.103 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:04 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; fr-fr; Desire_A8181 Build/FRF91) App3leWebKit/53.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1" 122.72.124.3 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:04 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux i686; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 122.72.112.148 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:04 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 190.39.210.26 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:04 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.0" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 210.213.245.230 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:04 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.0" 302 485 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)" 101.44.1.25 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B206 Safari/7534.48.3" 101.44.1.28 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 101.44.1.28 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:14 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 103.3.221.202 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:13 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 466 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; CPU OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B206 Safari/7534.48.3" 211.161.152.104 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)" 101.44.1.25 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/536.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/20.0.1132.47 Safari/536.11" 101.44.1.25 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:11 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/536.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/20.0.1132.47 Safari/536.11" 211.161.152.105 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100115 Firefox/3.6" 211.161.152.105 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; MRA 5.8 (build 4157); .NET CLR 2.0.50727; AskTbPTV/5.11.3.15590)" 211.161.152.105 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; MRA 5.8 (build 4157); .NET CLR 2.0.50727; AskTbPTV/5.11.3.15590)" 101.44.1.25 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/536.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/20.0.1132.47 Safari/536.11" 101.44.1.25 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B206 Safari/7534.48.3" 211.161.152.108 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; CPU OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B206 Safari/7534.48.3" 101.44.1.28 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:13 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 211.161.152.106 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:11 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:5.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/5.0.1" 103.3.221.202 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:13 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 466 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; CPU OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B206 Safari/7534.48.3" 101.44.1.28 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:11 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 211.161.152.105 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; MRA 5.8 (build 4157); .NET CLR 2.0.50727; AskTbPTV/5.11.3.15590)" 211.161.152.104 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)" 211.161.152.104 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)" 211.161.152.105 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100115 Firefox/3.6" 101.44.1.25 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:10 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/536.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/20.0.1132.47 Safari/536.11" 122.72.124.2 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:17 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 122.72.124.2 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:11 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 122.72.124.2 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:17 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.1" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1" 210.213.245.230 - - [30/Sep/2012:16:02:12 +0000] "POST / HTTP/1.0" 302 522 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)" iptables -L: Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination - bui@debian:~$ sudo iptables -I INPUT 1 -m string --algo bm --string 'Keep-Alive: 300' -j DROP iptables: No chain/target/match by that name. bui@debian:~$ sudo iptables -A INPUT -m string --algo bm --string 'Keep-Alive: 300' -j DROP iptables: No chain/target/match by that name.

    Read the article

  • How do I replicate Gmail filtering (forwarding mostly)?

    - by projectdp
    I have reached the limits of Gmail forwarding. Before there was no need to verify forwarding addresses. It's a problem for me now because the addresses I want to forward to are not natural inboxes but automated systems with no way to track the verification email contents. I want to set this up for example: mobile - email - facebook-email - flickr-email - tumblr-email - posterous-email How do I do this without Gmail filters? I think I need to use fetchmail to watch my inbox and then autoforward to the above addresses. Is fetchmail the best solution to this issue? Any other MRA's? I'd like to do some more complicated things with the emails in an automated fashion too, how would I go about monitoring the inbox, doing some actions to the email before forwarding, and forward everywhere? prerequisites: a server: fetchmail daemon to poll the account local mailbox script to clean & forward appropriately (python probably) sendmail + ~/.forward file backup email account (Gmail probably) Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm trying to automate my social content distribution.

    Read the article

  • Can anyone explain me the source code of python "import this"?

    - by byterussian
    If you open a Python interpreter, and type "import this", as you know, it prints: The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters Beautiful is better than ugly. Explicit is better than implicit. Simple is better than complex. Complex is better than complicated. Flat is better than nested. Sparse is better than dense. Readability counts. Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules. Although practicality beats purity. Errors should never pass silently. Unless explicitly silenced. In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess. There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it. Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch. Now is better than never. Although never is often better than *right* now. If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea. If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea. Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those! In the python source(Lib/this.py) this text is generated by a curios piece of code: s = """Gur Mra bs Clguba, ol Gvz Crgref Ornhgvshy vf orggre guna htyl. Rkcyvpvg vf orggre guna vzcyvpvg. Fvzcyr vf orggre guna pbzcyrk. Pbzcyrk vf orggre guna pbzcyvpngrq. Syng vf orggre guna arfgrq. Fcnefr vf orggre guna qrafr. Ernqnovyvgl pbhagf. Fcrpvny pnfrf nera'g fcrpvny rabhtu gb oernx gur ehyrf. Nygubhtu cenpgvpnyvgl orngf chevgl. Reebef fubhyq arire cnff fvyragyl. Hayrff rkcyvpvgyl fvyraprq. Va gur snpr bs nzovthvgl, ershfr gur grzcgngvba gb thrff. Gurer fubhyq or bar-- naq cersrenoyl bayl bar --boivbhf jnl gb qb vg. Nygubhtu gung jnl znl abg or boivbhf ng svefg hayrff lbh'er Qhgpu. Abj vf orggre guna arire. Nygubhtu arire vf bsgra orggre guna *evtug* abj. Vs gur vzcyrzragngvba vf uneq gb rkcynva, vg'f n onq vqrn. Vs gur vzcyrzragngvba vf rnfl gb rkcynva, vg znl or n tbbq vqrn. Anzrfcnprf ner bar ubaxvat terng vqrn -- yrg'f qb zber bs gubfr!""" d = {} for c in (65, 97): for i in range(26): d[chr(i+c)] = chr((i+13) % 26 + c) print "".join([d.get(c, c) for c in s])

    Read the article

  • OpenCv Error ( unhandeld exeption) after execute

    - by hamza
    Hi , i m using VS2010 i m trting to make a gray image more bright , the code did compile normaly but no change in the seconde picture , and an error message ( undhadled exeception .. .. ) showed up after that the execute is done showed up here is a peace of my code : int main(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]) { IplImage *img = cvLoadImage("mra.jpg"); if (!img) { printf("Error: Couldn't open the image file.\n"); return 1; } //IplImage* new_image = getlargersize(img); double Min , Max ; Min = Max = 0 ; Max_Min (img , &Min , &Max); cout<<"the max value in the picture is :"<<Min<<" and the minimum value is :"<<Max<<endl ; IplImage* img2 = eclaircir(Min ,Max ,img); cvNamedWindow("Image:", CV_WINDOW_AUTOSIZE); cvNamedWindow("Image2:", CV_WINDOW_AUTOSIZE); cvShowImage("Image2:", img2); cvShowImage("Image:", img); cvWaitKey(0); cvDestroyWindow("Image2:"); cvDestroyWindow("Image:"); cvReleaseImage(&img2); cvReleaseImage(&img); return 0; } void Max_Min(IplImage* temp , double *min , double *max ){ CvScalar pix ; for (int i = 0 ; i < temp->height ; i++){ for (int j = 0 ; j < temp->width ; j++){ pix = cvGet2D(temp , i , j); if ( pix.val[0] >= *max ){ *max = pix.val[0]; } if ( pix.val[0] <= *min){ *min = pix.val[0]; } } } } IplImage* eclaircir (double min , double max , IplImage* image){ double temp = max - min ; CvScalar pix ; for (int i = 0 ; i < image->height ; i++){ for (int j = 0 ; j < image->width ; j++){ pix = cvGet2D(image , i , j); pix.val[0] = ( pix.val[0] - min)*255 ; pix.val[0] = pix.val[0]/temp ; cvSet2D(image , i , j , pix ); } } return image ; } thanks

    Read the article

  • What does it mean when a User-Agent has another User-Agent inside it?

    - by Erx_VB.NExT.Coder
    Basically, sometimes the user-agent will have its normal user-agent displayed, then at the end it will have teh "User-Agent: " tag displayed, and right after it another user-agent is shown. Sometimes, the second user-agent is just appended to the first one without the "User-Agent: " tag. Here are some samples I've seen: The first few contain the "User-Agent: " tag in the middle somewhere, and I've changed its font to make it easier to to see. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; Trident/4.0; GTB6; User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1); SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506) Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; GTB6; MRA 5.10 (build 5339); User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1); .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1); .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729) Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1); .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152) Here are some without the "User-Agent: " tag in the middle, but just two user agents that seem stiched together. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.0; Trident/4.0; Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1); .NET CLR 3.5.30729) Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; GTB6; IPMS/6568080A-04A5AD839A9; TCO_20090713170733; Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1); InfoPath.2) Now, just to add a few notes to this. I understand that the "User-Agent: " tag is normally a header, and what follows a typical "User-Agent: " string sequence is the actual user agent that is sent to servers etc, but normally the "User-Agent: " string should not be part of the actual user agent, that is more like the pre-fix or a tag indicating that what follows will be the actual user agent. Additionally, I may have thought, hey, these are just two user agents pasted together, but on closer inspection, you realize that they are not. On all of these dual user agent listings, if you look at the opening bracket "(" just before the "compatible" keyword, you realize the pair to that bracket ")" is actually at the very end, the end of the second user agent. So, the first user agents closing bracket ")" never occurs before the second user agent begins, it's always right at the end, and therefore, the second user agent is more like one of the features of the first user agent, like: "Trident/4.0" or "GTB6" etc etc... The other thing to note that the second user agent is always MSIE 6.0 (Internet Explorer 6.0), interesting. What I had initially thought was it's some sort of Virtual Machine displaying the browser in use & the browser that is installed, but then I thought, what'd be the point in that? Finally, right now, I am thinking, it's probably soem sort of "Compatibility View" type thing, where even if MSIE 7.0 or 8.0 is installed, when my hypothetical the "Display In Internet Explorer 6.0" mode is turned on, the user agent changes to something like this. That being, IE 8.0 is installed, but is rendering everything as IE 6.0 would. Is there or was there such a feature in Internet Explorer? Am I on to something here? What are your thoughts on this? If you have any other ideas, please feel free to let us know. At the moment, I'm just trying to understand if these are valid User Agents, or if they are invalid. In a list of about 44,000 User Agents, I've seen this type of Dual User Agent about 400 times. I've closely inspected 40 of them, and every single one had MSIE 6.0 as the "second" user agent (and the first user agent a higher version of MSIE, such as 7 or 8). This was true for all except one, where both user agents were MSIE 8.0, here it is: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Win32; GMX); GTB0.0) This occured once in my 40 "close" inspections. I've estimated the 400 in 44,000 by taking a sample of the first 4,400 user agents, and finding 40 of these in the MSIE/Windows user agents, and extrapolated that to estimate 40. There were also similar things occuring for non MSIE user agents where there were two Mozilla's in one user agent, the non MSIE ones would probably add another 30% on top of the ones I've noted. I can show you samples of them if anyone would like. There we have it, this is where I'm at, what do you guys think?

    Read the article

1