Search Results

Search found 20283 results on 812 pages for 'security context'.

Page 148/812 | < Previous Page | 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155  | Next Page >

• allowing index access only with .htaccess

  - by YsoL8

  Hello I have this in my .htaccess file, in the site root: Options -Indexes <directory ../.*> Deny from all </directory> <Files .htaccess> order allow,deny deny from all </Files> <Files index.php> Order allow,deny allow from all </Files> What I'm trying to achieve is to block folder and file access to anything that isn't called index.php, regardless of which directory is accessed. I have the folder part working perfectly and the deny from all rule is working as well - but my attempt to allow access to index.php is failing. Basically could someone tell me how to get it working?

  Read the article

• allowing index access only with .htaccess

  - by YsoL8

  Hello I have this in my .htaccess file, in the site root: Options -Indexes <directory ../.*> Deny from all </directory> <Files .htaccess> order allow,deny deny from all </Files> <Files index.php> Order allow,deny allow from all </Files> What I'm trying to achieve is to block folder and file access to anything that isn't called index.php, regardless of which directory is accessed. I have the folder part working perfectly and the deny from all rule is working as well - but my attempt to allow access to index.php is failing. Basically could someone tell me how to get it working?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Server attack? how to solve?

  - by saky

  Hello, Something (Someone) is sending out UDP packets sent from our whole ip range. This seems to be multicast DNS. Our server host provided this (Our IP Address is masked with XX): Jun 3 11:02:13 webserver kernel: Firewall: *UDP_IN Blocked* IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:fb:00:30:48:94:46:c4:08:00 SRC=193.23X.21X.XX DST=224.0.0.251 LEN=73 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=255 ID=0 DF PROTO=UDP SPT=5353 DPT=5353 LEN=53 Jun 3 11:02:23 webserver kernel: Firewall: *UDP_IN Blocked* IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:fb:00:30:48:94:46:c4:08:00 SRC=193.23X.21X.XX DST=224.0.0.251 LEN=73 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=255 ID=0 DF PROTO=UDP SPT=5353 DPT=5353 LEN=53 Jun 3 11:02:32 webserver kernel: Firewall: *UDP_IN Blocked* IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:fb:00:30:48:94:46:c4:08:00 SRC=193.23X.21X.XX DST=224.0.0.251 LEN=73 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=255 ID=0 DF PROTO=UDP SPT=5353 DPT=5353 LEN=53 Jun 3 11:02:35 webserver kernel: Firewall: *UDP_IN Blocked* IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=01:00:5e:00:00:fb:00:30:48:94:46:c4:08:00 SRC=193.23X.21X.XX DST=224.0.0.251 LEN=73 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=255 ID=0 DF PROTO=UDP SPT=5353 DPT=5353 LEN=53 I checked my /var/log/auth.log file and found out that someone from China (Using ip-locator) was trying to get in to the server using ssh. ... Jun 3 11:32:00 server2 sshd[28511]: Failed password for root from 202.100.108.25 port 39047 ssh2 Jun 3 11:32:08 server2 sshd[28514]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.100.108.25 user=root Jun 3 11:32:09 server2 sshd[28514]: Failed password for root from 202.100.108.25 port 39756 ssh2 Jun 3 11:32:16 server2 sshd[28516]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=202.100.108.25 user=root ... I have blocked that IP address using this command: sudo iptables -A INPUT -s 202.100.108.25 -j DROP However, I have no clue about the UDP multicasting, what is doing this? who is doing it? and how I can stop it? Anyone know?

  Read the article

• Blocking IP Range in .htaccess Problem

  - by Pedro

  Hi, I'm trying to block the access of one of my webapps using IP Filter in the .htaccess, the problem is that after updating the file with: order allow,deny deny from 58.14.0.0/15 allow from all I get the folowing error: Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request. Please contact the server administrator, [email protected] and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error. More information about this error may be available in the server error log. What is wrong? Regards, Pedro

  Read the article

• Real benefits of tcp TIME-WAIT and implications in production environment

  - by user64204

  SOME THEORY I've been doing some reading on tcp TIME-WAIT (here and there) and what I read is that it's a value set to 2 x MSL (maximum segment life) which keeps a connection in the "connection table" for a while to guarantee that, "before your allowed to create a connection with the same tuple, all the packets belonging to previous incarnations of that tuple will be dead". Since segments received (apart from SYN under specific circumstances) while a connection is either in TIME-WAIT or no longer existing would be discarded, why not close the connection right away? Q1: Is it because there is less processing involved in dealing with segments from old connections and less processing to create a new connection on the same tuple when in TIME-WAIT (i.e. are there performance benefits)? If the above explanation doesn't stand, the only reason I see the TIME-WAIT being useful would be if a client sends a SYN for a connection before it sends remaining segments for an old connection on the same tuple in which case the receiver would re-open the connection but then get bad segments and and would have to terminate it. Q2: Is this analysis correct? Q3: Are there other benefits to using TIME-WAIT? SOME PRACTICE I've been looking at the munin graphs on a production server that I administrate. Here is one: As you can see there are more connections in TIME-WAIT than ESTABLISHED, around twice as many most of the time, on some occasions four times as many. Q4: Does this have an impact on performance? Q5: If so, is it wise/recommended to reduce the TIME-WAIT value (and what to)? Q6: Is this ratio of TIME-WAIT / ESTABLISHED connections normal? Could this be related to malicious connection attempts?

  Read the article

• Grant permanent UAC permission to one program?

  - by dsimcha

  Is there a way to grant permanent UAC permission in Windows 7 to a single program? I have an old program that's supposed to start up in the background when Windows starts. I want to have it "just work" without the nagging, but keep UAC in all other cases.

  Read the article

• What is the EGG environment variable?

  - by Randall

  A user on our (openSuSE) linux systems attempted to run sudo, and triggered an alert. He has the environment variable EGG set - EGG=UH211åH1ÒH»ÿ/bin/shHÁSH211çH1ÀPWH211æ°;^O^Ej^A_j<X^O^EÉÃÿ This looks unusual to say the least. Is EGG a legitimate environment variable? (I've found some references to PYTHON_EGG_CACHE - could be related? But that environment variable isn't set for this user). If it's legit, then I imagine this group has the best chance of recognizing it. Or, given the embedded /bin/sh in the string above, does anyone recognize this as an exploit fingerprint? It wouldn't be the first time we had a cracked account (sigh).

  Read the article

• What is the difference between /sbin/nologin and /bin/false?

  - by Michael Hampton

  I have often heard it recommended that a user account should be disabled by setting its shell to /bin/false. But, on my existing Linux systems, I see that a great number of existing accounts (all of them service accounts) have a shell of /sbin/nologin instead. I see from the man page that /sbin/nologin prints a message to the user saying the account is disabled, and then exits. Presumably /bin/false would not print anything. I also see that /sbin/nologin is listed in /etc/shells, while /bin/false is not. The man page says that FTP will disable access for users with a shell not listed in /etc/shells and implies that other programs may do the same. Does that mean that somebody could FTP in with an account that has /sbin/nologin as its shell? What is the difference here? Which one of these should I use to disable a user account, and in what circumstances? What other effects does a listing in /etc/shells have?

  Read the article

• TeamViewer - only allow domain logins

  - by BloodyIron

  I recently started a Systems Admin job where teamviewer is used pretty frequently here. Another admin recently left, and the concern is they still have access to all our systems due to how teamviewer works. I want to migrate the entire environment to domain authentication. The documentation shows that setting up windows auth (domain) is easy, but I want to be sure that it is the only way to be authenticated with a teamviewer session here. I cannot yet find anything which explicitly says this. We have licensing for teamviewer 5 and 6, I think. Right now we have 7 in the environment, but I think most are in a trial version, so I am likely to revert to 5 or 6.

  Read the article

• tacacs integration with database

  - by chingupt

  We are setting up TACACS+ in our network which is a mix of Cisco AP's and other brands. However we have a centralized managemnet system which allows our customers to centrally configure services. Hence we would like to setup a tacacs+ server integrated with some database. Can this be done? I found the following package at www.shrubbery.net/tac_plus/ but it does not have the necessary plugins for database. Please let me know how to go about this. TIA Sachin

  Read the article

• Exchange 2003 default permissions for ANONYMOUS LOGON and Everyone

  - by Make it useful Keep it simple

  ANONYMOUS LOGON and Everyone have the following top level permissions in our Exchange 2003 Server: Read Execute Read permissions List contents Read properties List objects Create public folder Create named properties in the information store Are these the "default" settings? In particular, are the "Read" and "Execute" permissions a problem? We have a simple small business setup, Outlook clients connect to the server on the local network, OWA is used from outside the network for browser and smartphone access. Thanks

  Read the article

• How to securely delete files stored on a SSD?

  - by Chris Neuroth

  From a (very long, but definitely worth to read) article on SSDs: When you delete a file in your OS, there is no reaction from either a hard drive or SSD. It isn’t until you overwrite the sector (on a hard drive) or page (on a SSD) that you actually lose the data. File recovery programs use this property to their advantage and that’s how they help you recover deleted files. The key distinction between HDDs and SSDs however is what happens when you overwrite a file. While a HDD can simply write the new data to the same sector, a SSD will allocate a new (or previously used) page for the overwritten data. The page that contains the now invalid data will simply be marked as invalid and at some point it’ll get erased. So, what would be the best way to securely erase files stored on a SSD? Overwriting with random data as we are used to from hard disks (e.g. using the "shred" utility) won't work unless you overwrite the WHOLE drive...

  Read the article

• How is my password sent across when I check gmails/access bank site [closed]

  - by learnerforever

  What encryption is used when my password is sent across in gmails/when I do online banking? RSA? DSA? Public-private key encryption?. In key encryption, which entity is assigned a public/private key? Does each unique machine with unique MAC address has a unique public/private key? Does each instance of browser have unique key? Does each user have unique private/public key? How does session key come into picture? How do machines receive their keys?

  Read the article

• Sensitive data in init scripts

  - by Steve Jorgensen

  I'm adapting some examples I've found by Googling to build an init script to run a VirtualBox OSE virtual machine as a daemon. I would like to specify a password for VNC access to the VM, and this must be given as an argument to the VBoxHeadless command. Conventionally, init scripts are readable by standard users, and this seems like a useful convention, but I also don't want the VNC password for this VM to be stored in easily accessible plain text. What's the most appropriate/conventional way to handle this kind of situation? Maybe put a root-readable supporting data file someplace, and have the init script load the value from there?

  Read the article

• Disallow root to su on a user which is not listed in /etc/passwd

  - by marc.riera

  Hello, on linux we autenticate users against AD. The AD users are not listed on /etc/passwd. We are about to deploy a NFS solution to mount some extra space for each group of users. If a user(A) with sudo su privileges goes to root, then he can impersonate user(B) just by su user(B) and going to the NFS. Is there any way to disallow root to su user if the user is not listed on /etc/passwd ? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Webserver logs: "Morfeus Fucking Scanner"

  - by Patrick

  I've just found these accesses in my web server log files: ::ffff:218.38.136.38 109.72.95.175 - [10/Jan/2011:02:54:12 +0100] "GET /user/soapCaller.bs HTTP/1.1" 404 345 "-" "Morfeus Fucking Scanner" ::ffff:218.38.136.38 109.72.95.174 - [10/Jan/2011:02:54:12 +0100] "GET /user/soapCaller.bs HTTP/1.1" 404 345 "-" "Morfeus Fucking Scanner" Should I start to worry ? Or is it just a normal attempt to hack my server ? thanks

  Read the article

• zip password crack possible?

  - by tm1rbrt

  I have a piece of software i have to install on company laptops. The installer needs a serial to work properly, but i don't have it (my manager isn't here so i cant ask him). The installer tells me to ring a phone number which doesnt appear to be connected anymore. I would download win32dasm and ollydbg and have a go at cracking the installer but i dont really have time and i havnt done it in years. There is a zip file on the disc that looks like it contains all the program files but it is passworded. Is it feasible to crack this or will it take ages?

  Read the article

• Which trojan is this?

  - by omgHelpMe

  Could you identify this trojan/keylogger based on the set of files? I've been able to find out that the file names are random except rp.dll. Also, the icons are always the same. Thanks guys.

  Read the article

• Our VPS is being used as a Warez mule

  - by Mikuso

  The company I work for runs a series of ecommerce stores on a VPS. It's a WAMP stack, 50gb storage. We use an archaic piece of ecommerce software which operates almost entirely client-side. When an order is taken, it writes it to disk and then we schedule a task to download the orders once every 10 minutes. A few days ago, we ran out of disk space, which caused orders to fail to be written. I quickly hopped on to delete some old logs from the mailserver and freed up a couple of GB pretty quickly, but I wondered how we could fill up 50gb will nothing much more than logs. Turns out, we didn't. Hidden deep within the c:\System Volume Information directory, we have a stack of pirated videos, which seem to have appeared (looking at the timestamps) over the past three weeks. Porn, American Sports, Australian cooking shows. A very odd collection. Doesn't look like an individual's personal tastes - more like the VPS is being used as a mule. We have a 5-attempts and you're blocked policy on our FTP server (plus, there is no FTP account with access to that directory), and the windows user account has had it's password changed recently. The main avenues are sealed - and logs can verify that. I thought I'd watch and see if it happened again, and yes, another cooking show has appeared this morning. I am the only one to know of this problem at my company, and only one of two with access to the VPS (the other being my boss, but no - it's not him). So how is this happening? Is there a vulnerability in some of the software on the VPS? Are the VPS owners peddling warez across our rented space? (can they do this?) I don't want to delete the warez in case it is seen as a hostile action against this outside force, and they choose to retaliate. What should I do? How do I troubleshoot this? Has this happened to anyone else before?

  Read the article

• PCRE limits exceeded, but triggering rules are SQL related

  - by Wolfe

  [Mon Oct 15 17:12:13 2012] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] ModSecurity: Rule 1d4ad30 [id "300014"][file "/usr/local/apache/conf/modsec2.user.conf"][line "349"] - Execution error - PCRE limits exceeded (-8): (null). [hostname "domain.com"] [uri "/admin.php"] [unique_id "UHx8LEUQwYEAAGutKkUAAAEQ"] And similar are spamming my error log for apache. It's only the admin side.. and only these two lines in the config: line 349: #Generic SQL sigs SecRule ARGS "(or.+1[[:space:]]*=[[:space:]]1|(or 1=1|'.+)--')" "id:300014,rev:1,severity:2,msg:'Generic SQL injection protection'" And line 356: SecRule ARGS "(insert[[:space:]]+into.+values|select.*from.+[a-z|A-Z|0-9]|select.+from|bulk[[:space:]]+insert|union.+select|convert.+\(.*from)" Is there a way to fix this problem? Can someone explain what is going on or if these rules are even valid to cause this error? I know it's supposedly a recursion protection.. but these protect against SQL injection so I'm confused.

  Read the article

• Correctly setting up UFW on Ubuntu Server 10 LTS which has Nginx, FastCGI and MySQL?

  - by littlejim84

  Hello. I'm wanting to get my firewall on my new webserver to be as secure as it needs to be. After I did research for iptables, I came across UFW (Uncomplicated FireWall). This looks like a better way for me to setup a firewall on Ubuntu Server 10 LTS and seeing that it's part of the install, it seems to make sense. My server will have Nginx, FastCGI and MySQL on it. I also want to be allow SSH access (obviously). So I'm curious to know exactly how I should set up UFW and is there anything else I need to take into consideration? After doing research, I found an article that explains it this way: # turn on ufw ufw enable # log all activity (you'll be glad you have this later) ufw logging on # allow port 80 for tcp (web stuff) ufw allow 80/tcp # allow our ssh port ufw allow 5555 # deny everything else ufw default deny # open the ssh config file and edit the port number from 22 to 5555, ctrl-x to exit nano /etc/ssh/sshd_config # restart ssh (don't forget to ssh with port 5555, not 22 from now on) /etc/init.d/ssh reload This all seems to make sense to me. But is it all correct? I want to back this up with any other opinions or advice to ensure I do this right on my server. Many thanks!

  Read the article

• Possible DNS Injection and/or SSL hijack?

  - by Anthony

  So if I go to my site without indicating the protocol, I'm taken to: http://example.org/test.php But if I go directly to: https://example.org/test.php I get a 404 back. If I go to just: https://example.org I get a totally different site (a page about martial arts). I went to the site via https not very long ago (maybe a week?) and it was fine. This is a shared server, as I understand it, and I do not have shell access, so I'm limited to the site's CPanel to do any further investigations. But when I go to: example.org:2083 I'm taken to https://example.org:2083, which, if someone has taken over the SSL port, could mean they have taken over the 2083 part as well (at least in my paranoid mind). I'm made more nervous by the fact that the cpanel login page at the above address looks very new (better, really) compared to the last time I went to it over the weekend. It's possible that wires got crossed somewhere after a system update, but I don't want to put in my name username and password in case it's a phishing attempt. Is there any way to know for sure without shell access to know for sure if someone has taken over? If I look up the IP address for the host name, the IP address matches what I have on a phpinfo page I can get to over http. If I go to the IP address directly on port 2083, I get the same login mentioned above (new and and suspiciously nice). But the SSL cert shows as good when I go this route. So if that's the case (I know the IP is right, the cert checks out, and there isn't any DNS involved), is that enough to feel safe at that point of entry? Finally, if I can safely log in via the IP, does anyone have any advice on where to check first on CPanel for why the SSL port is forwarding to a site on karate? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Encrypt LAN and wifi traffic on small private network

  - by Grimlockz

  I need some advice about encrypt all traffic on a small private network running wi-fi and LAN traffic on 192.168.0.x network. The network would comprise of client laptops connecting to the wi-fi router (192.168.0.254) via ethernet connection or wireless. The main purpose of the server is for the client laptops to talk to two servers on different IP's (192.168.0.200 and 192.168.0.201) on ports 80 and 433. My main concern is having packet sniffers and what not getting access to the data. The only ways I see at the moment is to have VPN running on the network or use IPSec policy's to do this. Any other ways guys?

  Read the article

• My website is infected, I restored a backup of the uninfected files, how long will it take to un-mark as dangerous?

  - by Cyclone

  My website www.sagamountain.com was recently infected by a malware distributor (or at least I think it may have been). I have removed all external content, google ads, firefly chat, etc. I uploaded a backup from a few weeks ago, when there was no issue. I patched the SQL injection hole. Now, how long will it take to unmark it as dangerous? Where can I contact google? I am not sure if this is the right place to post it, but since it may have been a server issue I may as well. Can sites inject base64 code via a virus on the whole server, or is it only via sql injection? Thanks for the help, viruses freak me out. Is there an online virus scanner that can scan my page and tell me what is wrong?

  Read the article

• Network vulnerability and port scanning services

  - by DigitalRoss

  I'm setting up a periodic port scan and vulnerability scan for a medium-sized network implementing a customer-facing web application. The hosts run CentOS 5.4. I've used tools like Nmap and OpenVAS, but our firewall rules have special cases for connections originating from our own facilities and servers, so really the scan should be done from the outside. Rather than set up a VPS or EC2 server and configuring it with various tools, it seems like this could just be contracted out to a port and vulnerability scanning service. If they do it professionally they may be more up to date than something I set up and let run for a year... Any recommendations or experience doing this?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155  | Next Page >