Search Results

Search found 22238 results on 890 pages for 'db security'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 168/890 | < Previous Page | 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175  | Next Page >

  • The Story of secure user-authentication in squid

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry if the story is boring and messy, but most of it is real! =) /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • Execute build task in Hudson with root privilages

    - by jensendarren
    I have a build script which executes apt-get and therefore requires root privileges. What is the best way to run this script in Hudson? Currently the only solution I have found that works is to add an entry to the sudoers file for the user hudson like so: hudson ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD:ALL However, although my build script now runs without error in Hudson, I am not entirely comfortable with this solution. Is there a better way?

    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

  • 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

  • how to detect device type from connected device to router?

    - by molly
    i have a att router and there is an unknown device connected to my network. i cant seem to kick it off because of how att's router settings are created which is kind of dumb. i am able to see its local ip and mac address. i am on a mac with snow leopard. how can i get more information on the device with the information that i have? i want to see what kind of device it is, i have checked all deviced that are connected to the router and non seem to match the local ip that is connected. i have wpa encryption setup with a strong password.

    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

  • Can remote LogMeIn Hamachi users access our local LAN?

    - by Kev
    Unknown to me, one of the kids has installed LogMeIn Hamachi on his PC so that he can access and play on his pal's Minecraft server, and vice versa. One of the things I did was disable the Client for Microsoft Networks and File and Printer Sharing for Microsoft Networks on the Hamachi NIC in Windows 7's Network Connections. However, my lack of fu when it comes to these types of services is leaving me feeling a little uncomfortable about him using this. Is there anything I should be worried about here? For example, can his friends access our local LAN (which has a number of NAS boxes with unsecured shares) and get up to no good?

    Read the article

  • Steps to make sure network is not blacklisted...Again

    - by msindle
    I have an interesting issue. I have a client that just got blacklisted due to spam being sent out over the last 2 days. I have my firewall configured to only allow mail to go outbound on port 25 from our mail server (Exchange 2010) exclusively and I have verified that there are no open relay's on our transport rules. We are running Vipre Business and after running deep scans with updated definitions all computers come back clean. I ran a message tracking report on our Exchange server that shows all mail sent via the mail server over the last couple of weeks and didn't see anything malicious or out of the ordinary. I have also verified that there are no home devices or rouge computers on the network. For all practical purposes it appears that the network is clean, but we still wound up on 5 or 6 blacklists...Where should I start looking next? Is there a "best practices" guide that can help eradicate this issue? Thanks in advance! msindle

    Read the article

  • Router reporting failed admin login attempts from home server

    - by jeffora
    I recently noticed in the logs of my home router that it relatively regularly lists the following entry: [admin login failure] from source 192.168.0.160, Monday, June 20,2011 18:13:25 192.168.0.160 is the internal address of my home server, running Windows Home Server 2011. Is there anyway I can find out what specifically is trying to login to the router? Or is there some explanation for this behaviour? (not sure if this belongs here or on superuser...)

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry for this boring and messy story! /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • Router reporting failed admin login attempts from home server

    - by jeffora
    I recently noticed in the logs of my home router that it relatively regularly lists the following entry: [admin login failure] from source 192.168.0.160, Monday, June 20,2011 18:13:25 192.168.0.160 is the internal address of my home server, running Windows Home Server 2011. Is there anyway I can find out what specifically is trying to login to the router? Or is there some explanation for this behaviour? (not sure if this belongs here or on superuser...) [Update] I've run both Wireshark and netmon for a while on my home server. Wireshark captured the traffic, but didn't really show anything useful (or nothing I could make use of). A simple HTTP GET request is sent from the server (192.168.0.160) to the router (192.168.0.1), from a seemingly random port (I've seen examples from 50068, 52883), and it appears to do it twice in quick succession (incrementing port by 1), about every hour. Running netstat around the time of the failure didn't show anything (probably too long after anyway). I tried using netmon as it categorises by process, so I thought it might show a corresponding process for the port. Unfortunately, this comes in under the 'unknown' category, meaning it's basically just a slower, less useful Wireshark. I know there's not much to go on here, but does this help in anyway?

    Read the article

  • How to allow password protected start-stop-daemon functionality?

    - by Mahmoud Abdelkader
    I would like to use Ubuntu's start-stop-daemon to start my application, but the application protects some sensitive information, so I have a mechanism where the application prompts for a password that's then used to generate a hashkey, which is used as the secret key for a symmetric encryption (AES) to encrypt and decrypt things from a database. I'd like to daemonize this application and have it run from start-stop-daemon, so that sudo service appname stop and sudo service appname start would work, but, I'm not sure how to go about doing this with the added complexity of a password prompt. Is there something that supports this or do I have to program it from scratch? I figured I should ask first before re-inventing the wheel. Thanks in advance.

    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

  • 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

  • Is SSL to the proxy good enough?

    - by Josh Smeaton
    We are currently trying to decide on how best to do SSL traffic in our environment. We have an externally facing Apache proxy server that is responsible for directing all traffic into our environment. It is also doing the SSL work for the majority of our servers. There are one or two IIS servers in particular that are doing their own SSL, but they are also behind the proxy. I'm wondering, is SSL to the proxy good enough? It would mean that traffic within our network is identifiable, but is that such a big deal?

    Read the article

  • How to Suppress Repetition of Warnings That an Application Was Downloaded From the Internet on Mac OS X?

    - by Jonathan Leffler
    On Mac OS X, when I run Firefox (and Thunderbird, and ...) which I downloaded from Mozilla, the OS pops up a warning that the file was downloaded over the internet, giving the date on which it was downloaded. I have no problem with that warning on the first time I use a downloaded application - but the repeated warnings are a nuisance. Is there a way to suppress that dialogue box? Is there a way to avoid it appearing in the first place? (Some applications I download from a corporate intranet - those don't produce the equivalent warning; any idea what the criteria are for when the warning is generated?)

    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

  • Encrypt shared files on AD Domain.

    - by Walter
    Can I encrypt shared files on windows server and allow only authenticated domain users have access to these files? The scenario as follows: I have a software development company, and I would like to protect my source code from being copied by my programmers. One problem is that some programmers use their own laptops to developing the company's software. In this scenario it's impossible to prevent developers from copying the source code for their laptops. In this case I thought about the following solution, but i don't know if it's possible to implement. The idea is to encrypt the source code and they are accessible (decrypted) only when developers are logged into the AD domain, ie if they are not logged into the AD domain, the source code would be encrypted be useless. Can be implemented this ? What technology should be used?

    Read the article

  • Why are email transfers between mail servers often not encrypted? Why aren't users warned about it?

    - by AmV
    Users can often choose if they want to access their email provider (such as Gmail) using a secure channel (e.g. using HTTPS). However, to the best of my knowledge, when it comes to mail-server-to-mail-server communications, most emails are still transferred in plain text and not encrypted, making it possible to anybody on the network to read their content. Are there any technologies that give the user some guarantees that his emails are sent securely from end to end ? Why not let the user know when encryption is not supported and let him choose if he wants his email to be still delivered ?

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid: The Story

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry for this boring and messy story! /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • Encrypt shared files on AD Domain.

    - by Walter
    Can I encrypt shared files on windows server and allow only authenticated domain users have access to these files? The scenario as follows: I have a software development company, and I would like to protect my source code from being copied by my programmers. One problem is that some programmers use their own laptops to developing the company's software. In this scenario it's impossible to prevent developers from copying the source code for their laptops. In this case I thought about the following solution, but i don't know if it's possible to implement. The idea is to encrypt the source code and they are accessible (decrypted) only when developers are logged into the AD domain, ie if they are not logged into the AD domain, the source code would be encrypted be useless. How can be implemented this using EFS?

    Read the article

  • CentOS: How to prevent a user from executing an application installed in a specific directory

    - by slayernoah
    I have an application installed in /etc/mydir. I have executed the following to remove the ability for users to execute this program. chown root:group1 /etc/mydir -R chmod 700 /etc/mydir -R I created a new user and logged in as this user. The new user was not added to group1 However, I was able to execute this program by just typing the program name. How can I stop users being able to run this using chmod and chown. Please let me know. PS. the new users cannot cd into /etc/mydir but they can still execute using the program name.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175  | Next Page >