Search Results

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

Page 159/812 | < Previous Page | 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166  | Next Page >

  • How to set up Drupal Plugin Manager on MAMP in a secure way?

    - by Andrei
    Hi, I use MAMP PRO as global webserver. First of all, is it a good idea? Secondly, my objective is to run a Drupal website with as easy management as possible. Now I want to use Plugin Manager module to install additional modules and themes for my website. It wants to use ftp for that, and I know that if I open access to FTP port then IT-department guys will come to me and ask to shut it down. So I wonder if there is a way to allow Plugin Manager to install modules, having the port 21 closed somehow?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay to use an administrator account for everyday use if UAC is on?

    - by Valentin Radu
    Since I switched to Windows 7 about 3 years ago, and now using Windows 8.1, I have become familiar with the concept of User Account Control and used my PC the following way: a standard account which I use for every day work and the built-in Administrator account activated and used only to elevate processes when they request so, or to ”Run as administrator” applications when I need to. However, recently after reading more about User Account Control, I started wondering if my way of working is good? Or should I use an administrator account for every day work, since an administrator account is not elevated until requested by apps, or until I request so via the ”Run as administrator” option? I am asking this because I read somewhere that the built-in Administrator account is a true administrator, by which I mean UAC doesn't pop up when logged in within it, and I am scared of not having problems when potential malicious software come into scene. I have to mention that I do not use it on a daily basis, just when I need to elevate some apps. I barely log in into it 10 times a year... So, how's better? Thanks for your answers! And Happy New Year, of course! P.S. I asked this a year ago (:P) and I think I should reiterate it: is an administrator account as safe these days as a standard account coupled with the built-in Administrator account when needed?

    Read the article

  • OSX - Update "Java for OS X 2012-002" is not mentioned on support.apple.com, is this ok?

    - by snies
    Straight after installing "Java for OS X 2012-001" Software Update asks me to install "Java for OS X 2012-002", which has the exact same size (66.6 MB) and description (including the same two links: HT5055 and HT1222) as the former, which strikes me as odd. The "Java for OS X 2012-001" is described on the apple support pages, but the "Java for OS X 2012-002" is not mentioned anywhere. Also searching on google does not yield any usable results. What is your opinon? Am i paranoid? Did you also see this update?

    Read the article

  • Protect individual sites on Ubuntu/Apache server

    - by Christoffer
    Hi,?? I need to set up a Apache server configuration for some client sites that run under the same Ubuntu 9.10 machine. All sites are allowed to run PHP, Python and Ruby on Rails. I do not control the source code of these sites and so I need to set up a filter in order to prevent one user to reach files on another users account.?? If I run a script to list files in "/" from one account, I can browse some files and directories in the actual server root. I want to set the root for each account to /var/usersite.com/www/ instead so that listing files in "/" shows the files in the client's root. ??How is this most easily configured??? Cheers!? /Christoffer

    Read the article

  • How would you secure a home router with a self-signed certificate?

    - by jldugger
    littleblackbox is publishing "private keys" that are accessible on publicly available firmwares. Debian calls these "snake-oil" certs. Most of these routers are securing their HTTPS certs with these, and as I think about it, I've never seen one of these internal admin websites with certs that wasn't self signed. Given a webserver on IP 192.168.1.1, how do you secure it to the point that Firefox doesn't offer warnings (and is still secured)?

    Read the article

  • How would you secure a home router with a self-signed certificate?

    - by jldugger
    littleblackbox is publishing "private keys" that are accessible on publicly available firmwares. Debian calls these "snake-oil" certs. Most of these routers are securing their HTTPS certs with these, and as I think about it, I've never seen one of these internal admin websites with certs that wasn't self signed. Given a webserver on IP 192.168.1.1, how do you secure it to the point that Firefox doesn't offer warnings (and is still secured)?

    Read the article

  • How secure is a subnet?

    - by HorusKol
    I have an unfortunate complication in my network - some users/computers are attached to a completely private and firewalled office network that we administer (10.n.n.x/24 intranet), but others are attached to a subnet provided by a third party (129.n.n.x/25) as they need to access the internet via the third party's proxy. I have previously set up a gateway/router to allow the 10.n.n.x/24 network internet access: # Allow established connections, and those !not! coming from the public interface # eth0 = public interface # eth1 = private interface iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW ! -i eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing connections from the private interface iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT # Masquerade (NAT) iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE # Don't forward any other traffic from the public to the private iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j REJECT However, I now need to enable access to users on our 129.n.n.x/25 subnet to some private servers on the 10.n.n.x/24 network. I figured that I could do something like: # Allow established connections, and those !not! coming from the public interface # eth0 = public interface # eth1 = private interface #1 (10.n.n.x/24) # eth2 = private interface #2 (129.n.n.x/25) iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW ! -i eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing connections from the private interfaces iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT # Allow the two public connections to talk to each other iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth2 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT # Masquerade (NAT) iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE # Don't forward any other traffic from the public to the private iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j REJECT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -j REJECT My concern is that I know that the computers on our 129.n.n.x/25 subnet can be accessed via a VPN through the larger network operated by the provider - therefore, would it be possible for someone on the provider's supernet (correct term? inverse of subnet?) to be able to access our private 10.n.n.x/24 intranet?

    Read the article

  • How do I remove the ServerSignature added by mod_fcgid?

    - by matthew
    I'm running Mod_Security and I'm using the SecServerSignature to customize the Server header that Apache returns. This part works fine, however I'm also running mod_fcgid which appends "mod_fcgid/2.3.5" to the header. Is there any way I can turn this off? Setting ServerSignature off doesn't do anything. I was able to get it to go away by changing the ServerTokens but that removed the customization I had added.

    Read the article

  • Running Radius on a Novell Backbone

    - by YsoL8
    Hello I am a rookie network engineer and I've been asked to create a secure wireless system intergrated with an existing network. So far I'd decided to use 802.1x secuity with a Radius enabled server over a Novell backbone. My question is: does Novell still support this type of server setup? I heard rumours it is at the end of it's supported life and I'd like some confirmation. Also can I get some recommendations on better backbone / server providers. Cheers

    Read the article

  • Managing service passwords with Puppet

    - by Jeff Ferland
    I'm setting up my Bacula configuration in Puppet. One thing I want to do is ensure that each password field is different. My current thought is to hash the hostname with a secret value that would ensure each file daemon has a unique password and that password can be written to both the director configuration and the file server. I definitely don't want to use one universal password as that would permit anybody who might compromise one machine to get access to any machine through Bacula. Is there another way to do this other than using a hash function to generate the passwords? Clarification: This is NOT about user accounts for services. This is about the authentication tokens (to use another term) in the client / server files. Example snippet: Director { # define myself Name = <%= hostname $>-dir QueryFile = "/etc/bacula/scripts/query.sql" WorkingDirectory = "/var/lib/bacula" PidDirectory = "/var/run/bacula" Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 3 Password = "<%= somePasswordFunction =>" # Console password Messages = Daemon }

    Read the article

  • How to protect custom shapes from being reused? Visio 2010

    - by Chris
    We are building a set of documentation for our business with Visio 2010. We need to make the Visio files accessible to external consultants for review, but we want to ensure that they cannot copy any of our custom shapes or formulas. How can we protect custom shapes/stencils so that they cannot be used outside of our documents? Or, if that's not possible, how can we mark our shapes in such a way that we could prove that they were created by us?

    Read the article

  • How can I stop SipVicious ('friendly-scanner') from flooding my SIP server?

    - by a1kmm
    I run an SIP server which listens on UDP port 5060, and needs to accept authenticated requests from the public Internet. The problem is that occasionally it gets picked up by people scanning for SIP servers to exploit, who then sit there all day trying to brute force the server. I use credentials that are long enough that this attack will never feasibly work, but it is annoying because it uses up a lot of bandwidth. I have tried setting up fail2ban to read the Asterisk log and ban IPs that do this with iptables, which stops Asterisk from seeing the incoming SIP REGISTER attempts after 10 failed attempts (which happens in well under a second at the rate of attacks I'm seeing). However, SipVicious derived scripts do not immediately stop sending after getting an ICMP Destination Host Unreachable - they keep hammering the connection with packets. The time until they stop is configurable, but unfortunately it seems that the attackers doing these types of brute force attacks generally set the timeout to be very high (attacks continue at a high rate for hours after fail2ban has stopped them from getting any SIP response back once they have seen initial confirmation of an SIP server). Is there a way to make it stop sending packets at my connection?

    Read the article

  • Looking for a new, free firewall (Sunbelt has a huge hole)

    - by Jason
    I've been using Sunbelt Personal Firewall v. 4.5 (previously Kerio). I've discovered that blocking Firefox connections in the configuration doesn't stop EXISTING Firefox connections. (See my post here yesterday http://superuser.com/questions/132625/sunbelt-firewall-4-5-wont-block-firefox) The "stop all traffic" may work on existing connections - but I'm done testing, as I need to be able to be selective, at any time. I was using the free version, so the "web filtering" option quit working after some time (mostly blocking ads and popups), but I didn't use that anyway. I used the last free version of Kerio before finally having to go to Sunbelt, because Kerio had an unfixed bug where you'd eventually get the BSOD and have to reset Kerio's configuration and start over (configure everything again). So I'm looking for a new Firewall. I don't like ZoneAlarm at all (no offense to all it's users that may be here - personal taste). I need the following: (Sunbelt has all these, except *) - 1. Be able to block in/out to localhost (trusted)/internet selectively for each application with a click (so there's 4 click boxes for each application) [*that effects everything immediately, regardless of what's already connected]. When a new application attempts a connection, you get an allow/deny/remember windows. - 2. Be able to easily set up filter rules for 'individual application'/'all applications,' by protocol, port/address (range), local, remote, in, out. [*Adding a filter rule also doesn't block existing connections in Sunbelt. That needs to work too.] - 3. Have an easy-to-get-to way to "stop all traffic" (like a right click option on the running icon in the task bar). - 4. Be able to set trusted/internet in/out block/allowed (4 things per item) for each of IGMP, ping, DNS, DHCP, VPN, and broadcasts. - 5. Define locahost as trusted/untrusted, define adapter connections as trusted/untrusted. - 6. Block incoming connetions during boot-up and shutdown. - 7. Show existing connections, including local & remote ip/port, protocol, current speed, total bytes transferred, and local ports opened for Listening. - 8. An Intrusion Prevention System which blocks (optionally select each one) known intrustions (long list). - 9. Block/allow applications from starting other applications (deny/allow/remember window). Wish list: A way of knowing what svchost.exe is doing - who is actually using it/calling it. I allowed it for localhost, and selectively allowed it for internet each time the allow/deny window came up. Thanks for any help/suggestions. (I'm using Windows XP SP3.)

    Read the article

  • Password protect a folder

    - by Lee Treveil
    What are the available options for password protecting a folder? I'm talking about requiring a password to actually access the folder, not just user access rights. Is the third-party software out there secure and stable? What are the recommendations?

    Read the article

  • Very Slow DSL (ethernet) speed [New Interesting Update]

    - by Abhijit
    Very IMPORTANT and INTERESTING UPDATE: Due to some reason I just thought to do a complete new setup and this time I decided to again have openSUSE plus ubuntu. So I first reinstall lubuntu and then I installed OpenSUSE 12.2 (64 bit). Now, my DSL speed is working very normal and fine on opensuse. So this is very scary. Is it possible for any operating system to manipulate my NIC so that it will work fine only on that operating system and not on another os? Regarding positive thinking and not being paranoid, what is it that makes ONLY suse to get my NIC to work at normal speed but ubuntu can not do it? Not even fedora? Not even linux mint? What all these OS are lacking that enables suse to work great? == ORIGINAL QUESTION == I 'was' on opensuse 12.2 when my dsl speed was normal. Yesterday I switched from opensuse to ubuntu 12.04 and speed decreased. It came to range of 7-10-13-20-25-kbps. Then I switch to linux mint, and then to fedora. Still slow speed. When I was in ubuntu I disabled ipv6 but still no luck. Now I am in fedora but this time with DIFFERENT ISP. And still I am getting very slow sped. So my guess is this is nothing to do with os. What can be wrong? Is this problem of NIC? Does NIC speed decreases over time? Does NIC life ends over time as with keyboard or mouse? Help please All the os I used are 64 bit and my laptop is Compaq Presario A965Tu Intel Centrino DUal Core. Interesting thing to notice is I get normal speed while downloading torrent inside torrent client softwares. This slow speed issue applied to download from any web browser or installing software using terminal.

    Read the article

  • china and gmail attachs -

    - by doug
    "We have evidence to suggest that a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists. Based on our investigation to date we believe their attack did not achieve that objective. Only two Gmail accounts appear to have been accessed, and that activity was limited to account information (such as the date the account was created) and subject line, rather than the content of emails themselves.” [source] I don't know much about how internet works, but as long the chines gov has access to the chines internet providers servers, why do they need to hack gmail accounts? I assume that i don't understand how submitting/writing a message(from user to gmail servers) works, in order to be sent later to the other email address. Who can tell me how submitting a message to a web form works?

    Read the article

  • User permission settings on DNS with windows 2003 server R2 standard edition

    - by Ghost Answer
    I have windows server 2003 r2 standard edition and some XP OS clients systems. I have created the DNS and profiles for all user. Now I want to authorized some users to installation of softwares, remove softwares and other such kind of things. How to I make such kind of policies for all different users on DNS. Please help me. May be this question can be same for another but I didn't get the solutions.

    Read the article

  • Is there a filesystem firewall?

    - by Jenko
    Ever since firewalls appeared on the scene, it became hard for rogue programs to access the internet. But you and I know that running applications get unrestricted access to the filesystem. They can read your files and send them to poppa. (programs such as web browsers and IM clients, which are allowed thru the internet firewall) Any way to know which programs are accessing your files? or limit their access to a specific partition?

    Read the article

  • SFTP: How to keep data out of the DMZ

    - by ChronoFish
    We are investigating solutions to the following problem: We have external (Internet) users who need access to sensitive information. We could offer it to them via SFTP which would offer a secure transport method. However, we don't want to maintain the data on server as it would then reside in the DMZ. Is there an SFTP server that has "copy on access" such that if the box in the DMZ were to be compromised, no actual data resided on that box? I am envisioning an SFTP Proxy or SFTP passthrough. Does such a product exist currently?

    Read the article

  • Change OpenSSH account password in Linux

    - by TK Kocheran
    I suppose that my main Linux user account password serves as my SSH password as well. Is there a way I can modify this? As it turns out, I'd like to have a REALLY secure SSH password for obvious reasons, but a less secure local password, as it makes typing in passwords a heck of a lot easier on a machine. Is there a way I can change my account password in SSH without changing my Linux user password?

    Read the article

  • New Secure Website with Apache Reverse Proxy

    - by jtnire
    I wish to set up a new website that will be accessed by users using HTTPS. I think it is good practise to put the "real" web server in a seperate subnet, and then install an Apache Reverse Proxy in a DMZ. My question is, where should I put the SSL cert(s)? Should I a) Use a self-signed cert on the "real" web server, and a proper cert on the reverse proxy? b) Use 2 real certs on both the "real" web server and the reverse proxy? c) Don't use any cert on the "real" web server, and use a proper cert on the reverse proxy? I'd like to use a) or c), if possible. I also don't want anyone's browser complaining of a self-signed cert. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Our company claims that the DLP system can even monitor the contents of HTTPS traffic, how is this possible?

    - by Ryan
    There is software installed on all client machines for DLP (Data Loss Prevention) and HIPAA compliance. Supposedly it can read HTTPS data clearly. I always thought that between the browser and the server, this was encrypted entirely. How can software sneak in and grab this data from the browser prior to it is encrypted or after it is decrypted? I am just curious as to how this could be possible. I would think that a browser wouldn't be considered very secure if this was possible.

    Read the article

  • How to setup server to accept pem(private RSA key) login w/o password like EC2?

    - by Chandler.Huang
    I am manage a group of VM and I need to setup all vm create a ssh tunnel to a specific host A. One way to do this is append public key of each VM to host's authorized_keys, but I guess I have to do the append each time i create a VM. So I am trying to config host A to accept pem or private key login without passowrd, just like EC2, client can use "ssh -i PEM" to login host A. But I have tried in vain for hours. I create a rsa public/private key and let VM use the private key to login, no matter what I do, host a still ask for password. Is there anything I missed ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • CPANEL ModSec2 not working with SecFilterSelective

    - by jfreak53
    Ok, I have cPanel/WHM latest on a Dedi, here are my specs on apache: Server version: Apache/2.2.23 (Unix) Server built: Oct 13 2012 19:33:23 Cpanel::Easy::Apache v3.14.13 rev9999 I just ran a re-compile using easyapache as you can see by the date. When running it I made sure that ModSec was selected and it stated in big bold letters something to the effect of If you install Apache 2.2.x you get ModSec 2 So I believed it :) I recompiled, I then ran: grep -i release /home/cpeasyapache/src/modsecurity-apache_2.6.8/apache2/mod_security2.c Hmm, the file is there but grep doesn't output anything, if I run: grep -i release /home/cpeasyapache/src/modsecurity-apache_1.9.5/apache2/mod_security.c I of course get the ModSec 1 version output. But the thing is that ModSec2 is installed since the c file is there. So I continued and put the following in modsec2.user.conf: SecFilterScanOutput On SecFilterSelective OUTPUT "text" Now when I restart Apache I get this error: Syntax error on line 1087 of /usr/local/apache/conf/modsec2.user.conf: Invalid command 'SecFilterScanOutput', perhaps misspelled or defined by a module not included in the server configuration Now supposedly this is supposed to work, I even have it running in ModSec2 on a non-cpanel server setup manually. So I know ModSec2 supports it. Anyone have any ideas? I have asked this question over at cpanel forum and it got nowhere.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166  | Next Page >