Search Results

Search found 13240 results on 530 pages for 'privacy and security'.

Page 135/530 | < Previous Page | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >

  • In Windows XP, is it possible to disable user credential caching for particular users

    - by kdt
    I understand that when windows caches user credentials, these can sometimes be used by malicious parties to access other machines once a machine containing cached credentials is compromised, a method known as "pass the hash"[1]. For this reason I would like to get control over what's cached to reduce the risk of cached credentials being used maliciously. It is possible to prevent all caching by zeroing HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\CachedLogonsCount, but this is too indiscriminate: laptops users need to be able to login when away from the network. What I would like to do is prevent the caching of credentials of certain users, such as administrators -- is there any way to do that in Windows XP? http://www.lbl.gov/cyber/systems/pass-the-hash.html

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 r2 Hardening [on hold]

    - by Natasha
    I have created windows server 2008 r2, running on VM, Where Running services in Server Manager 1) File services ( in Role) 2) Telnet Client ( Features) Windows Firewall Disabled and we are using TOMCAT APACHE WEB SERVER, here i want to harden the windows server, While running SCW by simply clicking with default NEXT, at last when i have clicked SAVE and RUN now in SCW, immediately my remote desktop services disabled. May I Know the things i want to add in Roles,features and finally want to harden windows ? and also what about audit policy and network settings in that ? Please help me out, Don't Ignore.

    Read the article

  • iptables -- OK, **now** am I doing it right?

    - by Agvorth
    This is a follow up to a previous question where I asked whether my iptables config is correct. CentOS 5.3 system. Intended result: block everything except ping, ssh, Apache, and SSL. Based on xenoterracide's advice and the other responses to the question (thanks guys), I created this script: # Establish a clean slate iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -F # Flush all rules iptables -X # Delete all chains # Disable routing. Drop packets if they reach the end of the chain. iptables -P FORWARD DROP # Drop all packets with a bad state iptables -A INPUT -m state --state INVALID -j DROP # Accept any packets that have something to do with ones we've sent on outbound iptables -A INPUT -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Accept any packets coming or going on localhost (this can be very important) iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT # Accept ICMP iptables -A INPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT # Allow ssh iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT # Allow httpd iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT # Allow SSL iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT # Block all other traffic iptables -A INPUT -j DROP Now when I list the rules I get... # iptables -L -v Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 DROP all -- any any anywhere anywhere state INVALID 9 612 ACCEPT all -- any any anywhere anywhere state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT all -- lo any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT icmp -- any any anywhere anywhere 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- any any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:ssh 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- any any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:http 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- any any anywhere anywhere tcp dpt:https 0 0 DROP all -- any any anywhere anywhere Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 5 packets, 644 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination I ran it and I can still log in, so that's good. Anyone notice anything major out of wack?

    Read the article

  • Finding proof of server being compromised by Black Hole Toolkit exploit

    - by cosmicsafari
    I recently took over maintenance of a company server. (Just Host, C Panel, Linux server), theres a tonne of websites on it which i know nothing about. It had came to my attention that a client had attempted to access one of the websites hosted on this server and was met with a warning from windows defender. It had blocked access because it said the website had been compromised by the Black Hole Toolkit or something to that effect. Anyway I went in and updated various plugins and deleted some old suspect websites. I have since ran the website in question through a few online malware scanners and its comes up clean everytime. However im not convinced. Do any of you guys know extensive ways i can check that the server isn't still compromised. I have no way to install any malware scanners or anti virus programs on the server as it is horribly locked down by Just Host.

    Read the article

  • Putting a Windows DC, Exchange in a DMZ

    - by blsub6
    I have one guy at my company telling me that I should put FF:TMG in between my main Internet-facing firewall (Cisco 5510) and put my Exchange server and DC on the internal network. I have another guy telling me that I should put the Exchange server and DC in a DMZ I don't particularly like the idea of having my mailboxes and DC's usernames/passwords in a DMZ and I think that Windows authentication would require me opening up so many ports between my DMZ and my internal network that it would be a moot point to have it out there anyways. What are some thoughts? How do you have it set up?

    Read the article

  • This operation has been cancelled due to restrictions in effect on this computer

    - by Dan
    I have this HUGELY irritating problem on Windows 7 (x64). Whenever I click on ANY link (that exists on a Word document, Excel or Outlook), I get an alert box with the message: This operation has been canceled due to restrictions in effect on this computer I have been scouring my settings and the Internet for a solution, but to no avail. What is the reason for this problem? It even happens when I click anchors in word document. That is, I can't even click on an entry in a Table of Contents to go to the appropriate page - I get this same error then. Is this a Windows 7 thing? Is there any way to turn this off?

    Read the article

  • Windows: View "all" permissions of a specific user or group

    - by peterchen
    For a Windows domain, is there a way to see for a certain user or group, where the user/group has permissions? Primarily: List which files / folders the user can access on a certain network share. (Kind of a recursive "effective permissions") However, other permissions would be cool as well. I believe I've seen such a tool in action, but I can't remember anything beyond that - so this might be a false memory. Recommendations?

    Read the article

  • How to report a malicious site to Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, etc. so that they will warn users

    - by Jayapal Chandran
    I completed a project a year ago. Now a few modification were needed. While trying to test the site, there was an index.html file with a malicious script which had an iframe to another site's jar file. Kaspersky antivirus blocked it. I browsed via ftp to find the file and I deleted it. I also disabled directory listing. Maybe the ftp details of the site owner would have been hacked. I want to report this site to Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, and other antivirus providers. How do I do that? I hope kaspersky would have updated it in their database, but I still want to explicitly report this. Here is the popup kaspersky showed:

    Read the article

  • Apache httpOnly Cookie Information Disclosure CVE-2012-0053

    - by John
    A PCI compliance scan, on a CentOS LAMP server fails with this message. The server header and ServerSignature don't expose the Apache version. Apache httpOnly Cookie Information Disclosure CVE-2012-0053 Can this be resolved by simply specifying a custom ErrorDocument for the 400 Bad Request response? How is the scanner determining this vulnerability, is it invoking a bad request then looking to see if it's the default Apache 400 response?

    Read the article

  • Restrict Computer or Users from Internet but allow access to intranet and Windows Update / ePO?

    - by MoSiAc
    So this may be impossible but I've been asked to try and find something about it. So far nothing I have found is possible. I need to restrict specific machines or user accounts from regular Internet access but let them have access to the intranet portion of our network. I do not have Active Directory control, nor does anyone at my local workplace (corporate control in a different state). I have tried going through IPsec and doing this per local machine, but that system seems to have been removed from the images that are installed on these machines so that is out. So far the only other option I can think of is assigning the machines a specific ip address and removing their gateway access. This would probably work but the machines need to be able to receive updates that are being pushed to them through ePO and LanDesk. I would really like to do this on the user level because then if I need to do tech work to the machine and need internet access I can get to it but a "special" user could login and not be able to get into anything.

    Read the article

  • How to find on the Windows 7 who and when use(d) a certain share?

    - by John Thomas
    We have a workstation using Win7 on a LAN with a domain. On that workstation we set up some network shares. Can we find who used (user name and/or computer name) and when the shares? Note that we know about Computer Management System Tools Shared Folders Open Files. We don't want to see so much real-time who's using the shares but we are interested more in a logging solution, ideally interpreting / using the data from Win7's Event Viewer.

    Read the article

  • How to use basic auth for single file in otherwise forbidden Apache directory?

    - by mit
    I want to allow access to a single file in a directory that is otherwise forbidden. This did not work: <VirtualHost 10.10.10.10:80> ServerName example.com DocumentRoot /var/www/html <Directory /var/www/html> Options FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None order allow,deny allow from all </Directory> # disallow the admin directory: <Directory /var/www/html/admin> order allow,deny deny from all </Directory> # but allow this single file:: <Files /var/www/html/admin/allowed.php> AuthType basic AuthName "private area" AuthUserFile /home/webroot/.htusers Require user admin1 </Files> ... </VirtualHost> When I visit http://example.com/admin/allowed.php I get the Forbidden message of the http://example.com/admin/ directory. How can I make an exception for allowed.php? If not possible, maybe I could enumerate all forbidden files in another Files directive? Let's say admin/ contains also user.php and admin.php which should be forbidden in this virtual host.

    Read the article

  • How do I properly check if a program is a virus/trojan in VMware?

    - by acidzombie24
    How I should check if a program is a virus in VMware? Some programs I do need admin ability to install and it makes sense. But how do I know if it's doing more than I want? Some thoughts are: How many processes open when I launch the application What is added to the startup tab in msconfig If any services are added. That's pretty much all my ideas. Even if it does something I recognize I wouldn't know if it's necessary or not. What are some rule of thumb? -Edit- What about registries, can I use that information to help? Maybe have a scanner tell me if the application I just used has messed with sections (like bootup) it shouldn't have?

    Read the article

  • Can Solaris RBAC roles be ported to Linux using SElinux only?

    - by Jimmy
    We are migrating an application from Solaris to Linux and the main user is allowed, through the use of RBAC roles, to run a few system commands like svccfg/svcadm (chkconfig on redhat). Is it possible, using only SElinux (no sudo), to allow a normal user to run chkconfig off/on (basically give it the ability to add remove services) ? My approach was to try to create an SElinux user with a corresponding SElinux role that manages the app's domain/type and is allowed to transition to all other domains required to run chkconfig, tcpdump or any other system utility usually restricted to root access only. All my attempts so far have failed, so my second question would be where could I find good documentation that applies to this specific problem ?

    Read the article

  • Isolating Apache virtualhosts from the rest of the system

    - by JesperB
    I am setting up a web server that will host a number of different web sites as Apache VirtualHosts, each of these will have the possibility to run scripts (primarily PHP, possiblu others). My question is how I isolate each of these VirtualHosts from eachother and from the rest of the system? I don't want e.g. website X to read the configuration of website Y or any of the server's "private" files. At the moment I have set up the VirtualHosts with FastCGI, PHP and SUExec as described here (http://x10hosting.com/forums/vps-tutorials/148894-debian-apache-2-2-fastcgi-php-5-suexec-easy-way.html), but the SUExec only prevents users from editing/executing files other than their own - the users can still read sensitive information such as config files. I have thought about removing the UNIX global read permission for all files on the server, as this would fix the above problem, but I'm not sure if I can safely do this without disrupting the server function. I also looked into using chroot, but it seems that this can only be done on a per-server basis, and not on a per-virtual-host basis. I'm looking for any suggestions that will isolate my VirtualHosts from the rest of the system. PS I'm running Ubuntu 12.04 server

    Read the article

  • Does a VPS need a firewall?

    - by Camran
    Do I need a firewall on my VPS which I ordered today? If so, which one would you recommend? I plan on running a classifieds website with Java, php, mysql. My OS is ubuntu 9.10 Thanks Btw: What is iptables?

    Read the article

  • Enabling Bitlocker in Native VHD Boot

    - by Trevor Sullivan
    I have a laptop with a single hard drive, using the GUID Partition Table (GPT) disk layout, with the following partitions: 120MB EFI System Partition 300MB Microsoft Reserved Partition (MSR) Remainder - GPT primary partition I have a Windows 8 Professional VHD configured as a native-boot VHD on the GPT primary partition. Can I use Bitlocker to encrypt my main partition, or to encrypt the VHD volume?

    Read the article

  • Apache httpd: Send error logs to syslog and local disk? Without touching /etc/syslog.conf?

    - by Stefan Lasiewski
    I have an Apache httpd 2.2 server. I want to log all messages using syslog, so that the requests are sent to our central syslog server. I also want to ensure that all log messages are sent to local disk, so that a sysadmin can have easy access to the log files on the local system. It is easy to send HTTP access logs to both the local disk and to syslog. One common method is: LogFormat "%V %h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %b \"%{Referer}i\" \"%{User-Agent}i\"" combined CustomLog logs/access_log combined CustomLog "|/usr/bin/logger -t httpd -i -p local4.info" combined But it is not easy to do this for error logs. The following configuration doesn't work, because the error logs only use the last ErrorLog stanza. The first ErrorLog stanza is ignored. ErrorLog logs/error_log ErrorLog syslog:local4.error How can I ensure that Apache errors logs are written to the local disk and are sent to syslog? Is it possible to do this without touching /etc/syslog.conf ? I am fine if my users want to manage their own Apache configuration files, but I do not want them touching system files such as /etc/syslog.conf

    Read the article

  • Retrieve malicious IP addresses from Apache logs and block them with iptables

    - by Gabriel Talavera
    Im trying to keep away some attackers that try to exploit XSS vulnerabilities from my website, I have found that most of the malicious attempts start with a classic "alert(document.cookie);\" test. The site is not vulnerable to XSS but I want to block the offending IP addresses before they found a real vulnerability, also, to keep the logs clean. My first thought is to have a script constantly checking in the Apache logs all IP addresses that start with that probe and send those addresses to an iptables drop rule. With something like this: cat /var/log/httpd/-access_log | grep "alert(document.cookie);" | awk '{print $1}' | uniq Why would be an effective way to send the output of that command to iptables? Thanks in advance for any input!

    Read the article

  • 3 simple questions about file permissions

    - by Camran
    1- Wonder, is this a good setup of permissions in the /var directory? drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-05-30 03:34 backups drwxr-xr-x 7 root root 4096 2010-05-29 17:55 cache drwxr-xr-x 29 root root 4096 2010-05-29 17:55 lib drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 2009-07-14 04:36 local drwxrwxrwt 3 root root 60 2010-06-02 03:34 lock drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 4096 2010-06-02 03:34 log drwxrwsr-x 2 root man 4096 2009-09-20 20:36 mail drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2009-09-20 20:36 opt drwxrwxrwt 12 root root 420 2010-06-02 12:12 run drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 2009-09-20 20:37 spool drwxrwxrwt 2 root root 4096 2009-07-14 04:36 tmp drwxr-xr-x 14 user root 4096 2010-05-30 22:21 www 2- Could you give me a brief explanation of the columns above? First one is which permissions they have. Second is a nr. Third and fourth says "root root" for example. fifth is another nr (4096 for example). and the others are obvious. 3- Could you give me a brief explanation of the folders above? Especially the "lock" and "tmp" folders. Lock contains an apache2 folder which seems empty. Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142  | Next Page >