Search Results

Search found 22139 results on 886 pages for 'security testing'.

Page 111/886 | < Previous Page | 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118  | Next Page >

  • How to Secure a Data Role by Multiple Business Units

    - by Elie Wazen
    In this post we will see how a Role can be data secured by multiple Business Units (BUs).  Separate Data Roles are generally created for each BU if a corresponding data template generates roles on the basis of the BU dimension. The advantage of creating a policy with a rule that includes multiple BUs is that while mapping these roles in HCM Role Provisioning Rules, fewer number of entires need to be made. This could facilitate maintenance for enterprises with a large number of Business Units. Note: The example below applies as well if the securing entity is Inventory Organization. Let us take for example the case of a user provisioned with the "Accounts Payable Manager - Vision Operations" Data Role in Fusion Applications. This user will be able to access Invoices in Vision Operations but will not be able to see Invoices in Vision Germany. Figure 1. A User with a Data Role restricting them to Data from BU: Vision Operations With the role granted above, this is what the user will see when they attempt to select Business Units while searching for AP Invoices. Figure 2.The List Of Values of Business Units is limited to single one. This is the effect of the Data Role granted to that user as can be seen in Figure 1 In order to create a data role that secures by multiple BUs,  we need to start by creating a condition that groups those Business Units we want to include in that data role. This is accomplished by creating a new condition against the BU View .  That Condition will later be used to create a data policy for our newly created Role.  The BU View is a Database resource and  is accessed from APM as seen in the search below Figure 3.Viewing a Database Resource in APM The next step is create a new condition,  in which we define a sql predicate that includes 2 BUs ( The ids below refer to Vision Operations and Vision Germany).  At this point we have simply created a standalone condition.  We have not used this condition yet, and security is therefore not affected. Figure 4. Custom Role that inherits the Purchase Order Overview Duty We are now ready to create our Data Policy.  in APM, we search for our newly Created Role and Navigate to “Find Global Policies”.  we query the Role we want to secure and navigate to view its global policies. Figure 5. The Job Role we plan on securing We can see that the role was not defined with a Data Policy . So will create one that uses the condition we created earlier.   Figure 6. Creating a New Data Policy In the General Information tab, we have to specify the DB Resource that the Security Policy applies to:  In our case this is the BU View Figure 7. Data Policy Definition - Selection of the DB Resource we will secure by In the Rules Tab, we  make the rule applicable to multiple values of the DB Resource we selected in the previous tab.  This is where we associate the condition we created against the BU view to this data policy by entering the Condition name in the Condition field Figure 8. Data Policy Rule The last step of Defining the Data Policy, consists of  explicitly selecting  the Actions that are goverened by this Data Policy.  In this case for example we select the Actions displayed below in the right pane. Once the record is saved , we are ready to use our newly secured Data Role. Figure 9. Data Policy Actions We can now see a new Data Policy associated with our Role.  Figure 10. Role is now secured by a Data Policy We now Assign that new Role to the User.  Of course this does not have to be done in OIM and can be done using a Provisioning Rule in HCM. Figure 11. Role assigned to the User who previously was granted the Vision Ops secured role. Once that user accesses the Invoices Workarea this is what they see: In the image below the LOV of Business Unit returns the two values defined in our data policy namely: Vision Operations and Vision Germany Figure 12. The List Of Values of Business Units now includes the two we included in our data policy. This is the effect of the data role granted to that user as can be seen in Figure 11

    Read the article

  • Microsoft SDET position

    - by Mark
    I was curious about MS's SDET position. I've heard a lot of people speak negatively and positively about this position. I was wondering if any current or previous SDETs could comment on a couple of issues. 1) Is career development in any way hurt by this position within and outside of MS? 1.5) Is it harder to get hired as a developer at another company after being an SDET? 2) Within MS culture, how is the SDET position viewed with respect to PM or SDE? Is it respected or looked down upon? 3) If you worked as an SDET, did you like it?

    Read the article

  • Programming Practice/Test Contest?

    - by Emmanuel
    My situation: I'm on a programming team, and this year, we want to weed out the weak link by making a competition to get the best coder from our group of candidates. Focus is on IEEExtreme-like contests. What I've done: I've been trying already for 2 weeks to get a practice or test site, like UVa or codechef. The plan after I find one: Send them (the candidates) a list of direct links to the problems (making them the "contest's problem list) get them to email me their correct answers' code at the time the judge says they have solved it and accept the fastest one into the team. Issues: We had practiced on UVa already (on programming challenges too), so our former teammate (which will be in the candidate group) already has an advantage if we used it. Codechef has all it's answers public, and since it shows the latest ones it will be extremely hard to verify if the answer was copied. And I've found other sites, like SPOJ, but they share at least some problems with codechef, making them inherit the issue of Codechef So, what alternatives do you think there are? Any site that may work? Any place to get all stuff to set up a Mooshak or similar contest (as in the stuff to get the problems, instructions to set up the server itself are easy to google)? Any other idea?

    Read the article

  • Oracle UPK and IBM Rational Quality Manager

    - by marc.santosusso
    Did you know that you can import UPK topics into IBM Rational Quality Manager (RQM) as Test Scripts? Attached below is a ZIP of files which contains a customized style (for all supported languages) for creating spreadsheets that are compatible with IBM Rational Quality Manager, a sample IBM Rational Quality Manager mapping file, and a best practice document. UPK_Best_Practices_-_IBM_Rational_Quality_Manager_Integration.zip Extract the files and open the best practice document (PDF file) file to get started. Please note that the IBM Rational Quality Manager publishing style (the ODARC file) include with the above download was created using the customization instructions found within the UPK documentation. That said, it is not currently an "official" feature of the product, but rather an example of what can be created through style customization. Stay tuned for more details. We hope that you find this to be useful and welcome your feedback!

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to learn how to develop secure applications

    - by Kenneth
    I would like to get into computer security in my career. What are the best ways to learn how to program securely? It seems to me that besides textbooks and taking classes in the subject that perhaps learning how to "hack" would be one of the best ways to learn. My reason for thinking this is the thought that the best way to learn how to prevent someone from doing what you don't want them to is to learn what they're capable of doing. If this is the case, then this poses another question: How would you go about learning to hack in an ethical manner? I definitely don't want to break laws or cause harm in my quest. Thanks for the input!

    Read the article

  • Learning a new language using broken unit tests

    - by Brian MacKay
    I was listening to a dot net rocks the other day where they mentioned, almost in passing, a really intriguing tool for learning new languages -- I think they were specifically talking about F#. It's a solution you open up and there are a bunch of broken unit tests. Fixing them walks you through the steps of learning the language. I want to check it out, but I was driving in my car and I have no idea what the name of the project is or which dot net rocks episode it was. Google hasn't helped much. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • How do I make code bound to an ORM testable?

    - by RPK
    In Test Driven Development, how do I make code bound to an ORM testable? I am using a Micro-ORM (PetaPoco) and I have several methods that interact with the database like: AddCustomer UpdateRecord etc. I want to know how to write a test for these methods. I searched YouTube for videos on writing a test for DAL, but I didn't find any. I want to know which method or class is testable and how to write a test before writing the code itself.

    Read the article

  • HTTPS Everywhere Extension Updates to Version 3.0, Adds Protection for 1,500 More Websites

    - by Asian Angel
    If one of your security goals is to encrypt your communication with websites as much as possible, then you will definitely be pleased with the latest update to the HTTPS Everywhere extension for Firefox and Chrome. This latest release adds encryption protection for an additional 1,500 websites to help make your browsing experience more secure than ever. Images shown above courtesy of EFF. You can learn more about this latest release along with installing the extension for Firefox and/or Chrome directly from the blog post linked below… HTTPS Everywhere 3.0 protects 1,500 more sites [via Softpedia] HTG Explains: What is the Windows Page File and Should You Disable It? How To Get a Better Wireless Signal and Reduce Wireless Network Interference How To Troubleshoot Internet Connection Problems

    Read the article

  • Is there any way to test how will the site perform under load

    - by Pankaj Upadhyay
    I have made an Asp.net MVC website and hosted it on a shared hosting provider. Since my website surrounds a very generic idea, it might have number of concurrent users sometime in future. So, I was thinking of a way to test my website for on-load performance. Like how will the site perform when 100 or 1000 users are online at the same time and surfing the website. This will also make me understand whether my LINQ queries are well written or not.

    Read the article

  • Is it OK to have multiple asserts in a single unit test?

    - by Restuta
    I think that there are some cases when multiple assertions are needed (e.g. Guard Assertion), but in general I try to avoid this. What is your opinion? Please provide a real word examples when multiple asserts are really needed. Thanks! Edit In the comment to this great post Roy Osherove pointed to the OAPT project that is designed to run each assert in a single test. This is written on projects home page: Proper unit tests should fail for exactly one reason, that’s why you should be using one assert per unit test. And also Roy wrote in comments: My guideline is usually that you test one logical CONCEPT per test. you can have multiple asserts on the same object. they will usually be the same concept being tested.

    Read the article

  • The use of Test-Driven Development in Non-Greenfield Projects?

    - by JHarley1
    So here is a question for you, having read some great answers to questions such as "Test-Driven Development - Convince Me". So my question is: "Can Test-Driven Development be used effectively on non-Greenfield projects?" To specify: I would really like to know if people have had experience in using TDD in projects where there was already non-TDD elements present? And the problems that they then faced.

    Read the article

  • Test case as a function or test case as a class

    - by GodMan
    I am having a design problem in test automation:- Requirements - Need to test different servers (using unix console and not GUI) through automation framework. Tests which I'm going to run - Unit, System, Integration Question: While designing a test case, I am thinking that a Test Case should be a part of a test suite (test suite is a class), just as we have in Python's pyunit framework. But, should we keep test cases as functions for a scalable automation framework or should be keep test cases as separate classes(each having their own setup, run and teardown methods) ? From automation perspective, Is the idea of having a test case as a class more scalable, maintainable or as a function?

    Read the article

  • Javascript: Safely upload a client data file

    - by Jeffrey Sweeney
    I'm (still) working on a template-based XML editing program. It's a GUI-based XML editor that only allows users to add certain tags and attributes based off the requirements. You can see the current version here for an idea. Now, I'd like to allow users to upload their own data templates, but I'm concerned about potential XSS hacks. Currently, the template file is in Javascript object literal notation, which unsurprisingly is a security nightmare if the user can upload their own. I was thinking of using XML instead, but is there an even better alternative?

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – ?Finding Out What Changed in a Deleted Database – Notes from the Field #041

    - by Pinal Dave
    [Note from Pinal]: This is a 41th episode of Notes from the Field series. The real world is full of challenges. When we are reading theory or book, we sometimes do not realize how real world reacts works and that is why we have the series notes from the field, which is extremely popular with developers and DBA. Let us talk about interesting problem of how to figure out what has changed in the DELETED database. Well, you think I am just throwing the words but in reality this kind of problems are making our DBA’s life interesting and in this blog post we have amazing story from Brian Kelley about the same subject. In this episode of the Notes from the Field series database expert Brian Kelley explains a how to find out what has changed in deleted database. Read the experience of Brian in his own words. Sometimes, one of the hardest questions to answer is, “What changed?” A similar question is, “Did anything change other than what we expected to change?” The First Place to Check – Schema Changes History Report: Pinal has recently written on the Schema Changes History report and its requirement for the Default Trace to be enabled. This is always the first place I look when I am trying to answer these questions. There are a couple of obvious limitations with the Schema Changes History report. First, while it reports what changed, when it changed, and who changed it, other than the base DDL operation (CREATE, ALTER, DELETE), it does not present what the changes actually were. This is not something covered by the default trace. Second, the default trace has a fixed size. When it hits that size, the changes begin to overwrite. As a result, if you wait too long, especially on a busy database server, you may find your changes rolled off. But the Database Has Been Deleted! Pinal cited another issue, and that’s the inability to run the Schema Changes History report if the database has been dropped. Thankfully, all is not lost. One thing to remember is that the Schema Changes History report is ultimately driven by the Default Trace. As you may have guess, it’s a trace, like any other database trace. And the Default Trace does write to disk. The trace files are written to the defined LOG directory for that SQL Server instance and have a prefix of log_: Therefore, you can read the trace files like any other. Tip: Copy the files to a working directory. Otherwise, you may occasionally receive a file in use error. With the Default Trace files, if you ask the question early enough, you can see the information for a deleted database just the same as any other database. Testing with a Deleted Database: Here’s a short script that will create a database, create a schema, create an object, and then drop the database. Without the database, you can’t do a standard Schema Changes History report. CREATE DATABASE DeleteMe; GO USE DeleteMe; GO CREATE SCHEMA Test AUTHORIZATION dbo; GO CREATE TABLE Test.Foo (FooID INT); GO USE MASTER; GO DROP DATABASE DeleteMe; GO This sets up the perfect situation where we can’t retrieve the information using the Schema Changes History report but where it’s still available. Finding the Information: I’ve sorted the columns so I can see the Event Subclass, the Start Time, the Database Name, the Object Name, and the Object Type at the front, but otherwise, I’m just looking at the trace files using SQL Profiler. As you can see, the information is definitely there: Therefore, even in the case of a dropped/deleted database, you can still determine who did what and when. You can even determine who dropped the database (loginame is captured). The key is to get the default trace files in a timely manner in order to extract the information. If you want to get started with performance tuning and database security with the help of experts, read more over at Fix Your SQL Server. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com)Filed under: Notes from the Field, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Security, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL

    Read the article

  • How does TDD address interaction between objects?

    - by Gigi
    TDD proponents claim that it results in better design and decoupled objects. I can understand that writing tests first enforces the use of things like dependency injection, resulting in loosely coupled objects. However, TDD is based on unit tests - which test individual methods and not the integration between objects. And yet, TDD expects design to evolve from the tests themselves. So how can TDD possibly result in a better design at the integration (i.e. inter-object) level when the granularity it addresses is finer than that (individual methods)?

    Read the article

  • How to test the render speed of my solution in a web browser?

    - by Cuartico
    Ok, I need to test the speed of my solution in a web browser, but I have some problems, there are 2 versions of the web solution, the original one that is on server A and the "fixed" version that is on server B. I have VS2010 Ultimate, so I can make a web and load test on solution B, but I can't load the A solution on my IDE. I was trying to use fiddle2 and jmeter, but they only gave me the times of the request and response of the browsers with the server, I also want the time it takes to the browser to render the whole page. Maybe I'm misusing some of this tools... I don't know if this could be usefull but: Solution A is on VB 6.0 Solution B is on VB.Net Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • TDD vs. Productivity

    - by Nairou
    In my current project (a game, in C++), I decided that I would use Test Driven Development 100% during development. In terms of code quality, this has been great. My code has never been so well designed or so bug-free. I don't cringe when viewing code I wrote a year ago at the start of the project, and I have gained a much better sense for how to structure things, not only to be more easily testable, but to be simpler to implement and use. However... it has been a year since I started the project. Granted, I can only work on it in my spare time, but TDD is still slowing me down considerably compared to what I'm used to. I read that the slower development speed gets better over time, and I definitely do think up tests a lot more easily than I used to, but I've been at it for a year now and I'm still working at a snail's pace. Each time I think about the next step that needs work, I have to stop every time and think about how I would write a test for it, to allow me to write the actual code. I'll sometimes get stuck for hours, knowing exactly what code I want to write, but not knowing how to break it down finely enough to fully cover it with tests. Other times, I'll quickly think up a dozen tests, and spend an hour writing tests to cover a tiny piece of real code that would have otherwise taken a few minutes to write. Or, after finishing the 50th test to cover a particular entity in the game and all aspects of it's creation and usage, I look at my to-do list and see the next entity to be coded, and cringe in horror at the thought of writing another 50 similar tests to get it implemented. It's gotten to the point that, looking over the progress of the last year, I'm considering abandoning TDD for the sake of "getting the damn project finished". However, giving up the code quality that came with it is not something I'm looking forward to. I'm afraid that if I stop writing tests, then I'll slip out of the habit of making the code so modular and testable. Am I perhaps doing something wrong to still be so slow at this? Are there alternatives that speed up productivity without completely losing the benefits? TAD? Less test coverage? How do other people survive TDD without killing all productivity and motivation?

    Read the article

  • Is there an established or defined best practice for source control branching between development and production builds?

    - by Matthew Patrick Cashatt
    Thanks for looking. I struggled in how to phrase my question, so let me give an example in hopes of making more clear what I am after: I currently work on a dev team responsible for maintaining and adding features to a web application. We have a development server and we use source control (TFS). Each day everyone checks in their code and when the code (running on the dev server) passes our QA/QC program, it goes to production. Recently, however, we had a bug in production which required an immediate production fix. The problem was that several of us developers had code checked in that was not ready for production so we had to either quickly complete and QA the code, or roll back everything, undo pending changes, etc. In other words, it was a mess. This made me wonder: Is there an established design pattern that prevents this type of scenario. It seems like there must be some "textbook" answer to this, but I am unsure what that would be. Perhaps a development branch of the code and a "release-ready" or production branch of the code?

    Read the article

  • Colleague unwilling to use unit tests "as it's more to code"

    - by m.edmondson
    A colleague is unwilling to use unit tests and instead opting for a quick test, pass it to the users, and if all is well it is published live. Needless to say some bugs do get through. I mentioned we should think about using unit tests - but she was all against it once it was realised more code would have to be written. This leaves me in the position of modifying something and not being sure the output is the same, especially as her code is spaghetti and I try to refactor it when I get a chance. So whats the best way forward for me?

    Read the article

  • How can I improve my error checking and handling?

    - by Google
    Lately I have been struggling to understand what the right amount of checking is and what the proper methods are. I have a few questions regarding this: What is the proper way to check for errors (bad input, bad states, etc)? Is it better to explicitly check for errors, or use functions like asserts which can be optimized out of your final code? I feel like explicitly checking clutters a program with a lot of extra code which shouldn't be executed in most situations anyway-- and not to mention most errors end up with an abort/exit failure. Why clutter a function with explicit checks just to abort? I have looked for asserts versus explicit checking of errors and found little to truly explain when to do either. Most say 'use asserts to check for logic errors and use explicit checks to check for other failures.' This doesn't seem to get us very far though. Would we say this is feasible: Malloc returning null, check explictly API user inserting odd input for functions, use asserts Would this make me any better at error checking? What else can I do? I really want to improve and write better, 'professional' code.

    Read the article

  • How can I unit test a class which requires a web service call?

    - by Chris Cooper
    I'm trying to test a class which calls some Hadoop web services. The code is pretty much of the form: method() { ...use Jersey client to create WebResource... ...make request... ...do something with response... } e.g. there is a create directory method, a create folder method etc. Given that the code is dealing with an external web service that I don't have control over, how can I unit test this? I could try and mock the web service client/responses but that breaks the guideline I've seen a lot recently: "Don't mock objects you don't own". I could set up a dummy web service implementation - would that still constitute a "unit test" or would it then be an integration test? Is it just not possible to unit test at this low a level - how would a TDD practitioner go about this?

    Read the article

  • Performing user authentication in a CodeIgniter controller constructor?

    - by msanford
    In "The Clean Code Talks -- Unit Testing" (http://youtu.be/wEhu57pih5w), Miško Hevery mentions that "as little work as possible should be done in constructors [to make classes more easily testable]'. It got me thinking about the way I have implemented my user authentication mechanism. Having delved into MVC development through CodeIgniter, I designed my first web application to perform user authentication for protected resources in controllers' constructors in cases where every public function in that controller requires the user to be authenticated. For controllers with public methods having mixed authentication requirements, I would naturally move the authentication from the constructor to each method requiring authentication (though I don't currently have a need for this). I made this choice primarily to keep the controller tight, and to ensure that all resources in the controller are always covered. As for code longevity and maintainability: given the application structure, I can't foresee a situation in which one of the affected controllers would need a public method that didn't require user authentication, but I can see this as a potential drawback in general with this implementation (i.e., requiring future refactoring). Is this a good idea?

    Read the article

  • How to TDD test that objects are being added to a collection if the collection is private?

    - by Joshua Harris
    Assume that I planned to write a class that worked something like this: public class GameCharacter { private Collection<CharacterEffect> _collection; public void Add(CharacterEffect e) { ... } public void Remove(CharacterEffect e) { ... } public void Contains(CharacterEffect e) { ... } } When added an effect does something to the character and is then added to the _collection. When it is removed the effect reverts the change to the character and is removed from the _collection. It's easy to test if the effect was applied to the character, but how do I test that the effect was added to _collection? What test could I write to start constructing this class. I could write a test where Contains would return true for a certain effect being in _collection, but I can't arrange a case where that function would return true because I haven't implemented the Add method that is needed to place things in _collection. Ok, so since Contains is dependent on having Add working, then why don't I try to create Add first. Well for my first test I need to try and figure out if the effect was added to the _collection. How would I do that? The only way to see if an effect is in _collection is with the Contains function. The only way that I could think to test this would be to use a FakeCollection that Mocks the Add, Remove, and Contains of a real collection, but I don't want _collection being affected by outside sources. I don't want to add a setEffects(Collection effects) function, because I do not want the class to have that functionality. The one thing that I am thinking could work is this: public class GameCharacter<C extends Collection> { private Collection<CharacterEffect> _collection; public GameCharacter() { _collection = new C<CharacterEffect>(); } } But, that is just silly making me declare what some private data structures type is on every declaration of the character. Is there a way for me to test this without breaking TDD principles while still allowing me to keep my collection private?

    Read the article

  • Is it useful to unit test methods where the only logic is guards?

    - by Vaccano
    Say I have a method like this: public void OrderNewWidget(Widget widget) { if ((widget.PartNumber > 0) && (widget.PartAvailable)) { WigdetOrderingService.OrderNewWidgetAsync(widget.PartNumber); } } I have several such methods in my code (the front half to an async Web Service call). I am debating if it is useful to get them covered with unit tests. Yes there is logic here, but it is only guard logic. (Meaning I make sure I have the stuff I need before I allow the web service call to happen.) Part of me says "sure you can unit test them, but it is not worth the time" (I am on a project that is already behind schedule). But the other side of me says, if you don't unit test them, and someone changes the Guards, then there could be problems. But the first part of me says back, if someone changes the guards, then you are just making more work for them (because now they have to change the guards and the unit tests for the guards). For example, if my service assumes responsibility to check for Widget availability then I may not want that guard any more. If it is under unit test, I have to change two places now. I see pros and cons in both ways. So I thought I would ask what others have done.

    Read the article

  • TDD vs. Productivity

    - by Nairou
    In my current project (a game, in C++), I decided that I would use Test Driven Development 100% during development. In terms of code quality, this has been great. My code has never been so well designed or so bug-free. I don't cringe when viewing code I wrote a year ago at the start of the project, and I have gained a much better sense for how to structure things, not only to be more easily testable, but to be simpler to implement and use. However... it has been a year since I started the project. Granted, I can only work on it in my spare time, but TDD is still slowing me down considerably compared to what I'm used to. I read that the slower development speed gets better over time, and I definitely do think up tests a lot more easily than I used to, but I've been at it for a year now and I'm still working at a snail's pace. Each time I think about the next step that needs work, I have to stop every time and think about how I would write a test for it, to allow me to write the actual code. I'll sometimes get stuck for hours, knowing exactly what code I want to write, but not knowing how to break it down finely enough to fully cover it with tests. Other times, I'll quickly think up a dozen tests, and spend an hour writing tests to cover a tiny piece of real code that would have otherwise taken a few minutes to write. Or, after finishing the 50th test to cover a particular entity in the game and all aspects of it's creation and usage, I look at my to-do list and see the next entity to be coded, and cringe in horror at the thought of writing another 50 similar tests to get it implemented. It's gotten to the point that, looking over the progress of the last year, I'm considering abandoning TDD for the sake of "getting the damn project finished". However, giving up the code quality that came with it is not something I'm looking forward to. I'm afraid that if I stop writing tests, then I'll slip out of the habit of making the code so modular and testable. Am I perhaps doing something wrong to still be so slow at this? Are there alternatives that speed up productivity without completely losing the benefits? TAD? Less test coverage? How do other people survive TDD without killing all productivity and motivation?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118  | Next Page >