Search Results

Search found 15648 results on 626 pages for 'wcf security'.

Page 119/626 | < Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >

  • Minimizing data sent over a webservice call on expensive connection

    - by aceinthehole
    I am working on a system that has many remote laptops all connected to the internet through cellular data connections. The application will synchronize periodically to a central database. The problem is, due to factors outside our control, the cost to move data across the cellular networks are spectacularly expensive. Currently the we are sending a compressed XML file across the wire where it is being processed and various things are done with (mainly stuffing it into a database). My first couple of thoughts were to convert that XML doc to json, just prior to transmission and convert back to XML just after receipt on the other end, and get some extra compression for free without changing much. Another thought was to test various other compression algorithms to determine the smallest one possible. Although, I am not entirely sure how much difference json vs xml would make once it is compressed. I thought that their must be resources available that address this problem from an information theory perspective. Does anyone know of any such resources or suggestions on what direction to go in. This developed on the MS .net stack on windows for reference.

    Read the article

  • Why does DataContractJsonSerializer not include generic like JavaScriptSerializer?

    - by Patrick Magee
    So the JavaScriptSerializer was deprecated in favor of the DataContractJsonSerializer. var client = new WebClient(); var json = await client.DownloadStringTaskAsync(url); // http://example.com/api/people/1 // Deprecated, but clean looking and generally fits in nicely with // other code in my app domain that makes use of generics var serializer = new JavaScriptSerializer(); Person p = serializer.Deserialize<Person>(json); // Now have to make use of ugly typeof to get the Type when I // already know the Type at compile type. Why no Generic type T? var serializer = new DataContractJsonSerializer(typeof(Person)); Person p = serializer.ReadObject(json) as Person; The JavaScriptSerializer is nice and allows you to deserialize using a type of T generic in the function name. Understandably, it's been deprecated for good reason, with the DataContractJsonSerializer, you can decorate your Type to be deserialized with various things so it isn't so brittle like the JavaScriptSerializer, for example [DataMember(name = "personName")] public string Name { get; set; } Is there a particular reason why they decided to only allow users to pass in the Type? Type type = typeof(Person); var serializer = new DataContractJsonSerializer(type); Person p = serializer.ReadObject(json) as Person; Why not this? var serializer = new DataContractJsonSerializer(); Person p = serializer.ReadObject<Person>(json); They can still use reflection with the DataContract decorated attributes based on the T that I've specified on the .ReadObject<T>(json)

    Read the article

  • MCTS certification (Windows Communication Foundation Development)

    - by Pinchy
    Hi guys! I seriously need some advice on getting MCTS certified (Windows Communication Foundation Development) I just cannot go to a MS certification courses as they are very expensive here and far from my hometown. I want to self educate myself and I don't know where to start with. My problem is finding good study materials and sample exam questions. I haven't taken any Microsoft exams before so I have got no idea what they would ask me on the exam (70-513). Can anyone give me some ideas on how to start from scratch? Any answer will be much appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • What is the career path for a software developer/ programmer? [closed]

    - by Lo Wai Lun
    I've been working as a programmer for a few months and I often study CCNA , CISSP for future. Besides simple coding I was working on specs, designing applications, and all those around-like things. My question is, I want to be a information / system security specialist. what's the career path I should be aiming for? Is it like working on code for the rest of my life? :) Restart my career from the network engineer ? Or do programmers make a good manager-position people ? I know it's very subjective. Thing is, lately I find myself much more into the designing/working on specs part of the development project then the coding itself. How do you see it? Would you like to go from development to information security? Would you like to work on a project with a manager that used to be a coder?

    Read the article

  • Is this the correct way to implement .NET MVC website structure?

    - by aspdotnetuser
    I have recently seen a .NET MVC solution in which the markup in the .aspx views have a Controller as their model, and the .ascx user controls they contain use a separate model. I'm new to MVC and I wanted to find out about a few things I'm not clear on. An example of how the code is implemented: UserDetails.aspx view has markup that shows it's using the UserDetailsController.cs as the model. It contains RenderPartial("User_Details.ascx", UserDetailsModel) and passes it the UserDetailsModel. Is this the standard/correct way of implementing MVC? Or just one way to implement it? I also noticed that the classes used as Models appear to be Service classes that have [DataMember] and [DataContract] attributes on the class name and properties - what is the advantage of this implementation?

    Read the article

  • Is passing the Model around in this way considered bad practice?

    - by Theomax
    If I have a view called, for example, ViewDetails that displays user information in labels and has a Model called ViewDetailsModel and if I want to allow the user to click a button to edit some of these details, is it considered bad practice is I pass the entire Model in the markup to a controller method which then assigns the values for another model, using the values stored in the Model that was passed in as a parameter to that action method? If so, should there instead be a service method that gets the data required for the edit view? For example: In the ViewDetails view, the user clicks the edit button which calls an action method in the controller (and passes in the Model object). The action method then uses the data in the Model object to populate another model which will be used for the EditDetails view that will be returned.

    Read the article

  • What is the most secure environment for multiple CMS sites? [closed]

    - by Brian Gulino
    I wish to run about 50 Joomla or WordPress low-traffic websites on 1 server, or part of a server. Each website will be managed by its own, naive owner who will have be able to access the Joomla or Wordpress backend of the website. I am concerned about security and isolation as my users will periodically get into trouble by not protecting their sites properly. Two alternatives I know of exist: Run one Linux system with multiple websites under Apache. Follow current Joomla and WordPress security tips. Increase the isolation of the individual sites by using mpm-itk, which will allow each website to run as its own user. The alternative to this is to run virtualization software such as the Xen hypervisor. Each site would have its own, virtual Linux system. I lack the experience needed to make this decision and I am asking which path to take. Obviously, there may be other alternatives that I haven't considered.

    Read the article

  • MVC or Extract Service Layer

    - by Lizzard
    we have an application that is built with .Net MVC. We are now tasked with exposing API's to third parties. Members on our team want to just continue down our current path and just use more controllers so we can reuse the backend of our current application. Logic tells me we need to create a seperate service layer when more clients are going to be accessing it, but .Net MVC seems to take care of all of this. Is it really acceptable architecture to use controllers in a stand alone application to expose API's and what would be the potential gains of extracting the service layer out?

    Read the article

  • Windows Identity Foundation: How to get new security token in ASP.net

    - by Rising Star
    I'm writing an ASP.net application that uses Windows Identity Foundation. My ASP.net application uses claims-based authentication with passive redirection to a security token service. This means that when a user accesses the application, they are automatically redirected to the Security Token Service where they receive a security token which identifies them to the application. In ASP.net, security tokens are stored as cookies. I want to have something the user can click on in my application that will delete the cookie and redirect them to the Security Token Service to get a new token. In short, make it easy to log out and log in as another user. I try to delete the token-containing cookie in code, but it persists somehow. How do I remove the token so that the user can log in again and get a new token?

    Read the article

  • Adding custom filter in spring framework problem?

    - by user298768
    hello there iam trying to make a custom AuthenticationProcessingFilter to save some user data in the session after successful login here's my filter: Code: package projects.internal; import java.io.IOException; import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest; import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletResponse; import org.springframework.security.Authentication; import org.springframework.security.ui.webapp.AuthenticationProcessingFilter; public class MyAuthenticationProcessingFilter extends AuthenticationProcessingFilter { protected void onSuccessfulAuthentication(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response, Authentication authResult) throws IOException { super.onSuccessfulAuthentication(request, response, authResult); request.getSession().setAttribute("myValue", "My value is set"); } } and here's my security.xml file Code: <beans:beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/security" xmlns:beans="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-3.0.xsd http://www.springframework.org/schema/security http://www.springframework.org/schema/security/spring-security-3.0.xsd"> <global-method-security pre-post-annotations="enabled"> </global-method-security> <http use-expressions="true" auto-config="false" entry-point-ref="authenticationProcessingFilterEntryPoint"> <intercept-url pattern="/" access="permitAll" /> <intercept-url pattern="/images/**" filters="none" /> <intercept-url pattern="/scripts/**" filters="none" /> <intercept-url pattern="/styles/**" filters="none" /> <intercept-url pattern="/p/login.jsp" filters="none" /> <intercept-url pattern="/p/register" filters="none" /> <intercept-url pattern="/p/**" access="isAuthenticated()" /> <form-login login-processing-url="/j_spring_security_check" login-page="/p/login.jsp" authentication-failure-url="/p/login_error.jsp" /> <logout /> </http> <authentication-manager alias="authenticationManager"> <authentication-provider> <jdbc-user-service data-source-ref="dataSource"/> </authentication-provider> </authentication-manager> <beans:bean id="authenticationProcessingFilter" class="projects.internal.MyAuthenticationProcessingFilter"> <custom-filter position="AUTHENTICATION_PROCESSING_FILTER" /> </beans:bean> <beans:bean id="authenticationProcessingFilterEntryPoint" class="org.springframework.security.ui.webapp.AuthenticationProcessingFilterEntryPoint"> </beans:bean> </beans:beans> it gives an error here: Code: <custom-filter position="AUTHENTICATION_PROCESSING_FILTER" /> multiple annotation found at this line:cvc-attribute.3 cvc-complex-type.4 cvc-enumeration-vaild what is the problem? thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Why should I Use ASP.NET Membership security model?

    - by ListenToRick
    I'm updating my website at the moment and figure that if I am to update my login/security mode, now is a good time. I have looked through the Membership model which is included in ASP.NET but I'm convinced that it will provide any benefit apart from being familiar to other .NET deevlopers. There seems to be quite a lot of documentation for it, but little discussion for why its worth the effort. Can anybody shed some light upon this?

    Read the article

  • What kind of security issues will I have if I provide my web app write access?

    - by iama
    I would like to give my web application write access to a particular folder on my web server. My web app can create files on this folder and can write data to those files. However, the web app does not provide any interface to the users nor does it publicize the fact that it can create files or write to files. Am I susceptible to any security vulnerabilities? If so, what are they?

    Read the article

  • best approah (security) to do some admin work through web page in Linux?

    - by Data-Base
    Hello, I want to build a web based admin tools that allow the system admin to run pre-configured commands and scripts through a web page (simple and limited webmin), what is the best approach? I already started with Ubuntu installing LAMP and give the user www-data root's privileges !!! as I learned (please check the link) this is a really bad move !!!, so how to build such web-based system without the security risk? cheers

    Read the article

  • SINGLE SIGN ON SECURITY THREAT! FACEBOOK access_token broadcast in the open/clear

    - by MOKANA
    Subsequent to my posting there was a remark made that this was not really a question but I thought I did indeed postulate one. So that there is no ambiquity here is the question with a lead in: Since there is no data sent from Facebook during the Canvas Load process that is not at some point divulged, including the access_token, session and other data that could uniquely identify a user, does any one see any other way other than adding one more layer, i.e., a password, sent over the wire via HTTPS along with the access_toekn, that will insure unique untampered with security by the user? Using Wireshark I captured the local broadcast while loading my Canvas Application page. I was hugely surprised to see the access_token broadcast in the open, viewable for any one to see. This access_token is appended to any https call to the Facebook OpenGraph API. Using facebook as a single click log on has now raised huge concerns for me. It is stored in a session object in memory and the cookie is cleared upon app termination and after reviewing the FB.Init calls I saw a lot of HTTPS calls so I assumed the access_token was always encrypted. But last night I saw in the status bar a call from what was simply an http call that included the App ID so I felt I should sniff the Application Canvas load sequence. Today I did sniff the broadcast and in the attached image you can see that there are http calls with the access_token being broadcast in the open and clear for anyone to gain access to. Am I missing something, is what I am seeing and my interpretation really correct. If any one can sniff and get the access_token they can theorically make calls to the Graph API via https, even though the call back would still need to be the site established in Facebook's application set up. But what is truly a security threat is anyone using the access_token for access to their own site. I do not see the value of a single sign on via Facebook if the only thing that was established as secure was the access_token - becuase for what I can see it clearly is not secure. Access tokens that never have an expire date do not change. Access_tokens are different for every user, to access to another site could be held tight to just a single user, but compromising even a single user's data is unacceptable. http://www.creatingstory.com/images/InTheOpen.png Went back and did more research on this: FINDINGS: Went back an re ran the canvas application to verify that it was not any of my code that was not broadcasting. In this call: HTTP GET /connect.php/en_US/js/CacheData HTTP/1.1 The USER ID is clearly visible in the cookie. So USER_ID's are fully visible, but they are already. Anyone can go to pretty much any ones page and hover over the image and see the USER ID. So no big threat. APP_ID are also easily obtainable - but . . . http://www.creatingstory.com/images/InTheOpen2.png The above file clearly shows the FULL ACCESS TOKEN clearly in the OPEN via a Facebook initiated call. Am I wrong. TELL ME I AM WRONG because I want to be wrong about this. I have since reset my app secret so I am showing the real sniff of the Canvas Page being loaded. Additional data 02/20/2011: @ifaour - I appreciate the time you took to compile your response. I am pretty familiar with the OAuth process and have a pretty solid understanding of the signed_request unpacking and utilization of the access_token. I perform a substantial amount of my processing on the server and my Facebook server side flows are all complete and function without any flaw that I know of. The application secret is secure and never passed to the front end application and is also changed regularly. I am being as fanatical about security as I can be, knowing there is so much I don’t know that could come back and bite me. Two huge access_token issues: The issues concern the possible utilization of the access_token from the USER AGENT (browser). During the FB.INIT() process of the Facebook JavaScript SDK, a cookie is created as well as an object in memory called a session object. This object, along with the cookie contain the access_token, session, a secret, and uid and status of the connection. The session object is structured such that is supports both the new OAuth and the legacy flows. With OAuth, the access_token and status are pretty much al that is used in the session object. The first issue is that the access_token is used to make HTTPS calls to the GRAPH API. If you had the access_token, you could do this from any browser: https://graph.facebook.com/220439?access_token=... and it will return a ton of information about the user. So any one with the access token can gain access to a Facebook account. You can also make additional calls to any info the user has granted access to the application tied to the access_token. At first I thought that a call into the GRAPH had to have a Callback to the URL established in the App Setup, but I tested it as mentioned below and it will return info back right into the browser. Adding that callback feature would be a good idea I think, tightens things up a bit. The second issue is utilization of some unique private secured data that identifies the user to the third party data base, i.e., like in my case, I would use a single sign on to populate user information into my database using this unique secured data item (i.e., access_token which contains the APP ID, the USER ID, and a hashed with secret sequence). None of this is a problem on the server side. You get a signed_request, you unpack it with secret, make HTTPS calls, get HTTPS responses back. When a user has information entered via the USER AGENT(browser) that must be stored via a POST, this unique secured data element would be sent via HTTPS such that they are validated prior to data base insertion. However, If there is NO secured piece of unique data that is supplied via the single sign on process, then there is no way to guarantee unauthorized access. The access_token is the one piece of data that is utilized by Facebook to make the HTTPS calls into the GRAPH API. it is considered unique in regards to BOTH the USER and the APPLICATION and is initially secure via the signed_request packaging. If however, it is subsequently transmitted in the clear and if I can sniff the wire and obtain the access_token, then I can pretend to be the application and gain the information they have authorized the application to see. I tried the above example from a Safari and IE browser and it returned all of my information to me in the browser. In conclusion, the access_token is part of the signed_request and that is how the application initially obtains it. After OAuth authentication and authorization, i.e., the USER has logged into Facebook and then runs your app, the access_token is stored as mentioned above and I have sniffed it such that I see it stored in a Cookie that is transmitted over the wire, resulting in there being NO UNIQUE SECURED IDENTIFIABLE piece of information that can be used to support interaction with the database, or in other words, unless there were one more piece of secure data sent along with the access_token to my database, i.e., a password, I would not be able to discern if it is a legitimate call. Luckily I utilized secure AJAX via POST and the call has to come from the same domain, but I am sure there is a way to hijack that. I am totally open to any ideas on this topic on how to uniquely identify my USERS other than adding another layer (password) via this single sign on process or if someone would just share with me that I read and analyzed my data incorrectly and that the access_token is always secure over the wire. Mahalo nui loa in advance.

    Read the article

  • Java embedded applet page security, how to properly meet its recquirements?

    - by meds
    If I have an applet embedded in a webpage and I want it to connect to server side software (also written in Java) how can I do this properly on a windows machine running local host? Would I have to run the java application from within the localhost directory and access the applet html from a browser (i.e. localhost/applet.html)? From what I undestand if you don't have everything setup correctly you won't be able to connect because of Java's security requirements. Thanks for any help :)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >