Search Results

Search found 4763 results on 191 pages for 'policy administration'.

Page 17/191 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

  • If you are in Brussels next week... come join a policy dialog on the European Accessibility Act

    - by Peter Korn
    Next week I will be in Brussels attending a policy dialog held at the European Policy Centre on Thursday October 11th. It is titled "The Accessibility Act – ensuring access to goods and services across the EU", and I will be part of a distinguished panel exploring some of the issues the upcoming European Accessibility Act may address - with a particular emphasis in my case on the role of ICT accessibility. This morning policy dialog will be followed by a more focused workshop in the afternoon looking at specific challenges and potential solutions to those challenges. Oracle is sponsoring this policy dialog and workshop, alongside the European Disability Forum. If you are in Brussels, you are invited to attend. Registration by e-mail is now open.

    Read the article

  • Restricting dynamically loaded classes and jars based on a security policy

    - by Max
    Hi, I would like to dynamically load a set of jars or classes (i.e. plugins loaded at runtime). At the same time, I would like to restrict what these plugins are able to do in the JVM. For a test case, I would like to restrict them to pretty much everything (right now I'm just allowing one System.getProperty value to be read). I am currently using a security policy file, but I'm having difficulty specifying a policy for one folder or package in my codeBase, but not another. Here is how my policy looks now: grant codeBase "file:/home/max/programming/java/plugin/plugins/" { permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.version", "read"; }; grant codeBase "file:/home/max/programming/java/plugin/api/" { permission java.security.AllPermission; }; Where (for testing purposes), all files in the plugins package and folder are restricted, but the classes in the api folder are not. Is this possible? Do I have to create a custom class loader? Is there a better way to go about doing this? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • BPA scan did not complete for one or more servers

    - by Hossein Aarabi
    In Windows Server 2012 RTM, I am trying to run the BPA. It fails, saying "BPA scan did not complete for one or more servers" Try #1: Try #2: So, I decided to enable the Turn on Script Execution (with Allow all scripts) in Local Group Policy Editor, now I get a very nice exception message :) Clicking on ignore button, BPA logs the following error message: Try #3: So, I decided to go ahead and set the execution policy for all the scopes in PowerShell to unrestricted. Again no luck. What is going on?

    Read the article

  • IIS 7.5 FTPS external access - 534 Policy requires SSL

    - by markmnl
    I have setup a FTP site that requires SSL but when I try connect to it externally I get the error: 220 Microsoft FTP Service 534 Policy requires SSL. I know - I set it so! Why doesnt it fetch the SSL cert from the site and allow me to logon?! (Incidentally beware of all the tutorials that Allow but do not Require SSL - while that will solve the problem it will be because SSL is not being used!). I suspect it may be I need a client that supports FTPS (FTP over SSL) and Windows explorer just uses IE which does not. But trying FileZilla and WinSCP I get a little further but then it hangs on TLS/SSL negotiation expecting a response from the server.... UPDATE: I have tried (from: http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/309/configuring-ftp-firewall-settings/): Configure the Passive Port Range for the FTP Service. Configure the external IPv4 Address for a Specific FTP Site. Configure the firewall to allow the FTP service to listen on all ports that it opens. Disabling stateful FTP filtering so that Windows Firewall will not block FTP traffic. And still I get (in FileZilla trying both Active and Passive): Status: Connecting to 203.x.x.x:21... Status: Connection established, waiting for welcome message... Response: 220 Microsoft FTP Service Command: AUTH TLS Response: 234 AUTH command ok. Expecting TLS Negotiation. Status: Initializing TLS... Error: Connection timed out Error: Could not connect to server The Windows firewall logs unhelpfully have nothing to say.. UPDATE2: Turning the firewall off does not resolve the problem. I cannot believe how difficult it is to get something so simple to work and even once following the documentation it does not work. UPDATE3: Running FileZilla locally connecting through the loopback works in Active mode, in Passive mode I get up to: Command: LIST Response: 150 Opening BINARY mode data connection. Error: GnuTLS error -53: Error in the push function. Turning the firewall off at both ends I can still not connect the client and get the same error as above.

    Read the article

  • How do I access Glassfish V3 Administration Console Website from a remote host

    - by Tom
    I have installed Glassfish v3 on a standalone server running ubuntu-server 9.10. I can open the Admin website if I use a browser running on the server by browsing to: http:// localhost:4848/ I would like to access it from a remote machine by browsing to something like http:// mydomain.com:4848/ The firewall is definitely allowing traffic through on that port (4848) and I can access the application server by browsing to: http:// mydomain.com:8080/ How can I allow remote access to the administration website?

    Read the article

  • How to override a Magento administration panel?

    - by Michelangelo
    Hi guys, I would like to know how have I do to add a field in the customer administration at system-configuration-Customer settings panel. Have I create the system.xml file from the core and paste in the local folder with the same path? and have I maintain all the content of the file or I can write only the portion interested? thanks

    Read the article

  • iptables syn flood countermeasure

    - by Penegal
    I'm trying to adjust my iptables firewall to increase the security of my server, and I found something a bit problematic here : I have to set INPUT policy to ACCEPT and, in addition, to have a rule saying iptables -I INPUT -i eth0 -j ACCEPT. Here comes my script (launched manually for tests) : #!/bin/sh IPT=/sbin/iptables echo "Clearing firewall rules" $IPT -F $IPT -Z $IPT -t nat -F $IPT -t nat -Z $IPT -t mangle -F $IPT -t mangle -Z $IPT -X echo "Defining logging policy for dropped packets" $IPT -N LOGDROP $IPT -A LOGDROP -j LOG -m limit --limit 5/min --log-level debug --log-prefix "iptables rejected: " $IPT -A LOGDROP -j DROP echo "Setting firewall policy" $IPT -P INPUT DROP # Deny all incoming connections $IPT -P OUTPUT ACCEPT # Allow all outgoing connections $IPT -P FORWARD DROP # Deny all forwaring echo "Allowing connections from/to lo and incoming connections from eth0" $IPT -I INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT $IPT -I OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT #$IPT -I INPUT -i eth0 -j ACCEPT echo "Setting SYN flood countermeasures" $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp -i eth0 --syn -m limit --limit 100/second --limit-burst 200 -j LOGDROP echo "Allowing outgoing traffic corresponding to already initiated connections" $IPT -A OUTPUT -p ALL -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT echo "Allowing incoming SSH" $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW -m recent --set --name SSH -j ACCEPT echo "Setting SSH bruteforce attacks countermeasures (deny more than 10 connections every 10 minutes)" $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -m recent --update --seconds 600 --hitcount 10 --rttl --name SSH -j LOGDROP echo "Allowing incoming traffic for HTTP, SMTP, NTP, PgSQL and SolR" $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 25 -i eth0 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -i eth0 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -p udp --dport 123 -i eth0 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 5433 -i eth0.2654 -s 172.16.0.2 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -p udp --dport 5433 -i eth0.2654 -s 172.16.0.2 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 8983 -i eth0.2654 -s 172.16.0.2 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -p udp --dport 8983 -i eth0.2654 -s 172.16.0.2 -j ACCEPT echo "Allowing outgoing traffic for ICMP, SSH, whois, SMTP, DNS, HTTP, PgSQL and SolR" $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 25 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 43 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 53 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 53 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 80 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT #$IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 5433 -o eth0 -d 176.31.236.101 -j ACCEPT #$IPT -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 5433 -o eth0 -d 176.31.236.101 -j ACCEPT #$IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 8983 -o eth0 -d 176.31.236.101 -j ACCEPT #$IPT -A OUTPUT -p udp --dport 8983 -o eth0 -d 176.31.236.101 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --sport 5433 -o eth0.2654 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p udp --sport 5433 -o eth0.2654 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --sport 8983 -o eth0.2654 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p udp --sport 8983 -o eth0.2654 -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -p icmp -j ACCEPT echo "Allowing outgoing FTP backup" $IPT -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 20:21 -o eth0 -d 91.121.190.78 -j ACCEPT echo "Dropping and logging everything else" $IPT -A INPUT -s 0/0 -j LOGDROP $IPT -A OUTPUT -j LOGDROP $IPT -A FORWARD -j LOGDROP echo "Firewall loaded." echo "Maintaining new rules for 3 minutes for tests" sleep 180 $IPT -nvL echo "Clearing firewall rules" $IPT -F $IPT -Z $IPT -t nat -F $IPT -t nat -Z $IPT -t mangle -F $IPT -t mangle -Z $IPT -X $IPT -P INPUT ACCEPT $IPT -P OUTPUT ACCEPT $IPT -P FORWARD ACCEPT When I launch this script (I only have a SSH access), the shell displays every message up to Maintaining new rules for 3 minutes for tests, the server is unresponsive during the 3 minutes delay and then resume normal operations. The only solution I found until now was to set $IPT -P INPUT ACCEPT and $IPT -I INPUT -i eth0 -j ACCEPT, but this configuration does not protect me of any attack, which is a great shame for a firewall. I suspect that the error comes from my script and not from iptables, but I don't understand what's wrong with my script. Could some do-gooder explain me my error, please? EDIT: here comes the result of iptables -nvL with the "accept all input" ($IPT -P INPUT ACCEPT and $IPT -I INPUT -i eth0 -j ACCEPT) solution : Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 52 ACCEPT all -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 ACCEPT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 LOGDROP tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp flags:0x17/0x02 limit: avg 100/sec burst 200 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 state NEW recent: SET name: SSH side: source 0 0 LOGDROP tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 recent: UPDATE seconds: 600 hit_count: 10 TTL-Match name: SSH side: source 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:25 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:123 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0.2654 * 172.16.0.2 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:5433 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- eth0.2654 * 172.16.0.2 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:5433 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0.2654 * 172.16.0.2 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:8983 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- eth0.2654 * 172.16.0.2 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:8983 0 0 LOGDROP all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 LOGDROP all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 ACCEPT all -- * lo 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 2 728 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:25 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:43 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:53 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:53 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0.2654 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:5433 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * eth0.2654 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:5433 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0.2654 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8983 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * eth0.2654 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:8983 0 0 ACCEPT icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 91.121.190.78 tcp dpts:20:21 0 0 LOGDROP all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain LOGDROP (5 references) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 LOG all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 5/min burst 5 LOG flags 0 level 7 prefix `iptables rejected: ' 0 0 DROP all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 EDIT #2 : I modified my script (policy ACCEPT, defining authorized incoming packets then logging and dropping everything else) to write iptables -nvL results to a file and to allow only 10 ICMP requests per second, logging and dropping everything else. The result proved unexpected : while the server was unavailable to SSH connections, even already established, I ping-flooded it from another server, and the ping rate was restricted to 10 requests per second. During this test, I also tried to open new SSH connections, which remained unanswered until the script flushed rules. Here comes the iptables stats written after these tests : Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 600 35520 ACCEPT all -- lo * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 6 360 LOGDROP tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp flags:0x17/0x02 limit: avg 100/sec burst 200 0 0 LOGDROP tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 STRING match "w00tw00t.at.ISC.SANS." ALGO name bm TO 65535 0 0 LOGDROP tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 STRING match "Host: anoticiapb.com.br" ALGO name bm TO 65535 0 0 LOGDROP tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 STRING match "Host: www.anoticiapb.com.br" ALGO name bm TO 65535 105 8820 ACCEPT icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 10/sec burst 5 830 69720 LOGDROP icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 state NEW recent: SET name: SSH side: source 0 0 LOGDROP tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 recent: UPDATE seconds: 600 hit_count: 10 TTL-Match name: SSH side: source 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:25 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:123 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0 * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:443 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0.2654 * 172.16.0.1 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:5433 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- eth0.2654 * 172.16.0.1 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:5433 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- eth0.2654 * 172.16.0.1 0.0.0.0/0 tcp spt:8983 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- eth0.2654 * 172.16.0.1 0.0.0.0/0 udp spt:8983 16 1684 LOGDROP all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 0 0 LOGDROP all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 600 35520 ACCEPT all -- * lo 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 LOGDROP tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 owner UID match 33 0 0 LOGDROP udp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:80 owner UID match 33 116 11136 ACCEPT all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state RELATED,ESTABLISHED 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:22 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:25 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:53 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:53 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:80 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0.2654 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:5433 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * eth0.2654 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:5433 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0.2654 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:8983 0 0 ACCEPT udp -- * eth0.2654 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 udp dpt:8983 0 0 ACCEPT icmp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:43 0 0 ACCEPT tcp -- * eth0 0.0.0.0/0 91.121.190.18 tcp dpts:20:21 7 1249 LOGDROP all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain LOGDROP (11 references) pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 35 3156 LOG all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 limit: avg 1/sec burst 5 LOG flags 0 level 7 prefix `iptables rejected: ' 859 73013 DROP all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Here comes the log content added during this test : Mar 28 09:52:51 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=52 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55666 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Mar 28 09:52:51 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=52 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55667 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Mar 28 09:52:51 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55668 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Mar 28 09:52:51 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55669 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Mar 28 09:52:52 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55670 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Mar 28 09:52:54 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55671 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Mar 28 09:52:58 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55672 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Mar 28 09:52:59 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=6 Mar 28 09:52:59 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=7 Mar 28 09:52:59 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=8 Mar 28 09:52:59 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=9 Mar 28 09:52:59 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=59 Mar 28 09:53:00 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=152 Mar 28 09:53:01 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=246 Mar 28 09:53:02 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=339 Mar 28 09:53:03 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=432 Mar 28 09:53:04 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=524 Mar 28 09:53:05 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=617 Mar 28 09:53:06 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=711 Mar 28 09:53:07 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=804 Mar 28 09:53:08 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=176.31.236.101 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=84 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=63 ID=0 DF PROTO=ICMP TYPE=8 CODE=0 ID=7430 SEQ=897 Mar 28 09:53:16 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:c0:62:6b:e3:5c:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=61402 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57637 DPT=22 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:19 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:c0:62:6b:e3:5c:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=61403 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57637 DPT=22 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:21 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=64 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55674 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:25 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:c0:62:6b:e3:5c:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=61404 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57637 DPT=22 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:37 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=116 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55675 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK PSH URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:37 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=116 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55676 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK PSH URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:37 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=180 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55677 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK PSH URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:38 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=180 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55678 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK PSH URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:39 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=180 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55679 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK PSH URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:39 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:c0:62:6b:e3:5c:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=5055 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57638 DPT=22 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:41 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=180 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55680 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK PSH URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:42 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:c0:62:6b:e3:5c:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=5056 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57638 DPT=22 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:45 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:10:8c:cf:28:39:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=180 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=55681 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57504 DPT=22 WINDOW=501 RES=0x00 ACK PSH URGP=0 Mar 28 09:53:48 localhost kernel: iptables rejected: IN=eth0 OUT= MAC=00:25:90:54:d7:88:c0:62:6b:e3:5c:80:08:00 SRC=194.51.74.245 DST=176.31.238.3 LEN=60 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=51 ID=5057 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=57638 DPT=22 WINDOW=5840 RES=0x00 SYN URGP=0 If I correctly interpreted these results, they say that ICMP rules were correctly interpreted by iptables, but SSH rules were not. This does not make any sense... Does somebody understand where my error comes from? EDIT #3 : After some more tests, I found out that commenting the SYN flood countermeasure removes the problem. I continue researches in this way but, meanwhile, if somebody sees my anti SYN flood rule error...

    Read the article

  • Oracle Makes Social Services More Effective

    - by michael.seback
    By Brendan B. Read, TMCnet.com, April 5, 2010 Oracle Makes Social Services More Effective with New Oracle Social Services Suite Overworked, with too frequently heart-wrenching cases yet cash-strapped, social service agencies now have a new solution that has been expressly designed to help them accomplish more for their clients with the same resources. Oracle's Oracle Social Services Suite provides them with a complete, open and integrated platform for eligibility and case management to simplify eligibility determination increase caseworker efficiency and improve program effectiveness. The Social Services Suite also includes updated versions of Oracle's Siebel CRM Public Sector 8.2 and Oracle Policy Automation 10. Here are the Oracle Social Services Suite and Siebel CRM Public Sector 8.2 features and benefits: read the article here.

    Read the article

  • EU Digital Agenda scores 85/100

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    If the Digital Agenda was a bottle of wine and I were wine critic Robert Parker, I would say the Digital Agenda has "a great bouquet, many good elements, with astringent, dry and puckering mouth feel that will not please everyone, but still displaying some finesse. A somewhat controlled effort with no surprises and a few noticeable flaws in the delivery. Noticeably shorter aftertaste than advertised by the producers. Score: 85/100. Enjoy now". The EU Digital Agenda states that "standards are vital for interoperability" and has a whole chapter on interoperability and standards. With this strong emphasis, there is hope the EU's outdated standardization system finally is headed for reform. It has been 23 years since the legal framework of standardisation was completed by Council Decision 87/95/EEC8 in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) sector. Standardization is market driven. For several decades the IT industry has been developing standards and specifications in global open standards development organisations (fora/consortia), many of which have transparency procedures and practices far superior to the European Standards Organizations. The Digital Agenda rightly states: "reflecting the rise and growing importance of ICT standards developed by certain global fora and consortia". Some fora/consortia, of course, are distorted, influenced by single vendors, have poor track record, and need constant vigilance, but they are the minority. Therefore, the recognition needs to be accompanied by eligibility criteria focused on openness. Will the EU reform its ICT standardization by the end of 2010? Possibly, and only if DG Enterprise takes on board that Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) have driven half of the productivity growth in Europe over the past 15 years, a prominent fact in the EU's excellent Digital Competitiveness report 2010 published on Monday 17 May. It is ok to single out the ICT sector. It simply is the most important sector right now as it fuels growth in all other sectors. Let's not wait for the entire standardization package which may take another few years. Europe does not have time. The Digital Agenda is an umbrella strategy with deliveries from a host of actors across the Commission. For instance, the EU promises to issue "guidance on transparent ex-ante disclosure rules for essential intellectual property rights and licensing terms and conditions in the context of standard setting", by 2011 in the Horisontal Guidelines now out for public consultation by DG COMP and to some extent by DG ENTR's standardization policy reform. This is important. The EU will issue procurement guidance as interoperability frameworks are put into practice. This is a joint responsibility of several DGs, and is likely to suffer coordination problems, controversy and delays. We have seen plenty of the latter already and I have commented on the Commission's own interoperability elsewhere, with mixed luck. :( Yesterday, I watched the cartoonesque Korean western film The Good, the Bad and the Weird. In the movie (and I meant in the movie only), a bandit, a thief, and a bounty hunter, all excellent at whatever they do, fight for a treasure map. Whether that is a good analogy for the situation within the Commission, others are better judges of than I. However, as a movie fanatic, I still await the final shoot-out, and, as in the film, the only certainty is that "life is about chasing and being chased". The missed opportunity (in this case not following up the push from Member States to better define open standards based interoperability) is a casualty of the chaos ensued in the European Wild West (and I mean that in the most endearing sense, and my excuses beforehand to actors who possibly justifiably cannot bear being compared to fictional movie characters). Instead of exposing the ongoing fight, the EU opted for the legalistic use of the term "standards" throughout the document. This is a term that--to the EU-- excludes most standards used by the IT industry world wide. So, while it, for a moment, meant "weapon down", it will not lead to lasting peace. The Digital Agenda calls for the Member States to "Implement commitments on interoperability and standards in the Malmö and Granada Declarations by 2013". This is a far cry from the actual Ministerial Declarations which called upon the Commission to help them with this implementation by recognizing and further defining open standards based interoperability. Unless there is more forthcoming from the Commission, the market's judgement will be: you simply fall short. Generally, I think the EU focus now should be "from policy to practice" and the Digital Agenda does indeed stop short of tackling some highly practical issues. There is need for progress beyond the Digital Agenda. Here are some suggestions that would help Europe re-take global leadership on openness, public sector reform, and economic growth: A strong European software strategy centred around open standards based interoperability by 2011. An ambitious new eCommission strategy for 2011-15 focused on migration to open standards by 2015. Aligning the IT portfolio across the Commission into one Digital Agenda DG by 2012. Focusing all best practice exchange in eGovernment on one social networking site, epractice.eu (full disclosure: I had a role in getting that site up and running) Prioritizing public sector needs in global standardization over European standardization by 2014.

    Read the article

  • Router 2wire, Slackware desktop in DMZ mode, iptables policy aginst ping, but still pingable

    - by user135501
    I'm in DMZ mode, so I'm firewalling myself, stealthy all ok, but I get faulty test results from Shields Up that there are pings. Yesterday I couldn't make a connection to game servers work, because ping block was enabled (on the router). I disabled it, but this persists even due to my firewall. What is the connection between me and my router in DMZ mode (for my machine, there is bunch of others too behind router firewall)? When it allows router affecting if I'm pingable or not and if router has setting not blocking ping, rules in my iptables for this scenario do not work. Please ignore commented rules, I do uncomment them as I want. These two should do the job right? iptables -A INPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j DROP echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_echo_ignore_all Here are my iptables: #!/bin/sh # Begin /bin/firewall-start # Insert connection-tracking modules (not needed if built into the kernel). #modprobe ip_tables #modprobe iptable_filter #modprobe ip_conntrack #modprobe ip_conntrack_ftp #modprobe ipt_state #modprobe ipt_LOG # allow local-only connections iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT # free output on any interface to any ip for any service # (equal to -P ACCEPT) iptables -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT # permit answers on already established connections # and permit new connections related to established ones (eg active-ftp) iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT #Gamespy&NWN #iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp -m multiport --ports 5120:5129 -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 6667 --tcp-flags SYN,RST,ACK SYN -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 28910 --tcp-flags SYN,RST,ACK SYN -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 29900 --tcp-flags SYN,RST,ACK SYN -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 29901 --tcp-flags SYN,RST,ACK SYN -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 29920 --tcp-flags SYN,RST,ACK SYN -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p udp -m udp -m multiport --ports 5120:5129 -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 6500 -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 27900 -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 27901 -j ACCEPT #iptables -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 29910 -j ACCEPT # Log everything else: What's Windows' latest exploitable vulnerability? iptables -A INPUT -j LOG --log-prefix "FIREWALL:INPUT" # set a sane policy: everything not accepted > /dev/null iptables -P INPUT DROP iptables -P FORWARD DROP iptables -P OUTPUT DROP iptables -A INPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j DROP # be verbose on dynamic ip-addresses (not needed in case of static IP) echo 2 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_dynaddr # disable ExplicitCongestionNotification - too many routers are still # ignorant echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn #ping death echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_echo_ignore_all # If you are frequently accessing ftp-servers or enjoy chatting you might # notice certain delays because some implementations of these daemons have # the feature of querying an identd on your box for your username for # logging. Although there's really no harm in this, having an identd # running is not recommended because some implementations are known to be # vulnerable. # To avoid these delays you could reject the requests with a 'tcp-reset': #iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 113 -j REJECT --reject-with tcp-reset #iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp --sport 113 -m state --state RELATED -j ACCEPT # To log and drop invalid packets, mostly harmless packets that came in # after netfilter's timeout, sometimes scans: #iptables -I INPUT 1 -p tcp -m state --state INVALID -j LOG --log-prefix \ "FIREWALL:INVALID" #iptables -I INPUT 2 -p tcp -m state --state INVALID -j DROP # End /bin/firewall-start

    Read the article

  • Is it safe to have no TOS or PP?

    - by JamerTheProgrammer
    I have coded my own forums from the ground up. I have tried my best to make my code as secure as possible and encrypting everything I can. I want to use this forum for a Minecraft server. I have one concern however.... I would like to setup this forum now but having no TOS or Privacy Policy has put me off. Will having none of either cause me any legal trouble in the unlikely event of a data leakage? Thanks

    Read the article

  • "log on as a batch job" user rights removed by what GPO?

    - by LarsH
    I am not much of a server administrator, but get my feet wet when I have to. Right now I'm running some COTS software on a Windows 2008 Server machine. The software installer creates a few user accounts for running its processes, and then gives those users the right to "log on as a batch job". Every so often (e.g. yesterday at 2:52pm and this morning at 7:50am), those rights disappear. The software then stops working. I can verify that the user rights are gone by using secedit /export /cfg e:\temp\uraExp.inf /areas USER_RIGHTS and I have a script that does this every 30 seconds and logs the results with a timestamp, so I know when the rights disappear. What I see from the export is that in the "good" state, i.e. after I install the software and it's working correctly, the line for SeBatchLogonRight from the secedit export includes the user accounts created by the software. But every few hours (sometimes more), those user accounts are removed from that line. The same thing can be seen by using the GUI tool Local Security Policy > Security Settings > Local Policies > User Rights Assignment > Log on as a batch job: in the "good" state, that policy includes the needed user accounts, and in the bad state, the policy does not. Based on the above-mentioned logging script and the timestamps at which the user rights are being removed, I can see clearly that some GPOs are causing the change. The GPO Operational log shows GPOs being processed at exactly the right times. E.g.: Starting Registry Extension Processing. List of applicable GPOs: (Changes were detected.) Local Group Policy I have run GPOs on demand using gpupdate /force, and was able to verify that this caused the User Rights to be removed. We have looked over local group policies till our eyes are crossed, trying to figure out which one might be stripping these User Rights to "log on as a batch job." We have not configured any local group policies on this machine, that we know of; so is there a default local group policy that might typically do such a thing? Are there typical domain policies that would do this? I have been working with our IT staff colleagues to troubleshoot the problem, but none of them are really GPO experts... They wear many hats, and they do what they need to do in order to keep most things running. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • European Interoperability Framework - a new beginning?

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    The most controversial document in the history of the European Commission's IT policy is out. EIF is here, wrapped in the Communication "Towards interoperability for European public services", and including the new feature European Interoperability Strategy (EIS), arguably a higher strategic take on the same topic. Leaving EIS aside for a moment, the EIF controversy has been around IPR, defining open standards and about the proper terminology around standardization deliverables. Today, as the document finally emerges, what is the verdict? First of all, to be fair to those among you who do not spend your lives in the intricate labyrinths of Commission IT policy documents on interoperability, let's define what we are talking about. According to the Communication: "An interoperability framework is an agreed approach to interoperability for organisations that want to collaborate to provide joint delivery of public services. Within its scope of applicability, it specifies common elements such as vocabulary, concepts, principles, policies, guidelines, recommendations, standards, specifications and practices." The Good - EIF reconfirms that "The Digital Agenda can only take off if interoperability based on standards and open platforms is ensured" and also confirms that "The positive effect of open specifications is also demonstrated by the Internet ecosystem." - EIF takes a productive and pragmatic stance on openness: "In the context of the EIF, openness is the willingness of persons, organisations or other members of a community of interest to share knowledge and stimulate debate within that community, the ultimate goal being to advance knowledge and the use of this knowledge to solve problems" (p.11). "If the openness principle is applied in full: - All stakeholders have the same possibility of contributing to the development of the specification and public review is part of the decision-making process; - The specification is available for everybody to study; - Intellectual property rights related to the specification are licensed on FRAND terms or on a royalty-free basis in a way that allows implementation in both proprietary and open source software" (p. 26). - EIF is a formal Commission document. The former EIF 1.0 was a semi-formal deliverable from the PEGSCO, a working group of Member State representatives. - EIF tackles interoperability head-on and takes a clear stance: "Recommendation 22. When establishing European public services, public administrations should prefer open specifications, taking due account of the coverage of functional needs, maturity and market support." - The Commission will continue to support the National Interoperability Framework Observatory (NIFO), reconfirming the importance of coordinating such approaches across borders. - The Commission will align its internal interoperability strategy with the EIS through the eCommission initiative. - One cannot stress the importance of using open standards enough, whether in the context of open source or non-open source software. The EIF seems to have picked up on this fact: What does the EIF says about the relation between open specifications and open source software? The EIF introduces, as one of the characteristics of an open specification, the requirement that IPRs related to the specification have to be licensed on FRAND terms or on a royalty-free basis in a way that allows implementation in both proprietary and open source software. In this way, companies working under various business models can compete on an equal footing when providing solutions to public administrations while administrations that implement the standard in their own software (software that they own) can share such software with others under an open source licence if they so decide. - EIF is now among the center pieces of the Digital Agenda (even though this demands extensive inter-agency coordination in the Commission): "The EIS and the EIF will be maintained under the ISA Programme and kept in line with the results of other relevant Digital Agenda actions on interoperability and standards such as the ones on the reform of rules on implementation of ICT standards in Europe to allow use of certain ICT fora and consortia standards, on issuing guidelines on essential intellectual property rights and licensing conditions in standard-setting, including for ex-ante disclosure, and on providing guidance on the link between ICT standardisation and public procurement to help public authorities to use standards to promote efficiency and reduce lock-in.(Communication, p.7)" All in all, quite a few good things have happened to the document in the two years it has been on the shelf or was being re-written, depending on your perspective, in any case, awaiting the storms to calm. The Bad - While a certain pragmatism is required, and governments cannot migrate to full openness overnight, EIF gives a bit too much room for governments not to apply the openness principle in full. Plenty of reasons are given, which should maybe have been put as challenges to be overcome: "However, public administrations may decide to use less open specifications, if open specifications do not exist or do not meet functional interoperability needs. In all cases, specifications should be mature and sufficiently supported by the market, except if used in the context of creating innovative solutions". - EIF does not use the internationally established terminology: open standards. Rather, the EIF introduces the notion of "formalised specification". How do "formalised specifications" relate to "standards"? According to the FAQ provided: The word "standard" has a specific meaning in Europe as defined by Directive 98/34/EC. Only technical specifications approved by a recognised standardisation body can be called a standard. Many ICT systems rely on the use of specifications developed by other organisations such as a forum or consortium. The EIF introduces the notion of "formalised specification", which is either a standard pursuant to Directive 98/34/EC or a specification established by ICT fora and consortia. The term "open specification" used in the EIF, on the one hand, avoids terminological confusion with the Directive and, on the other, states the main features that comply with the basic principle of openness laid down in the EIF for European Public Services. Well, this may be somewhat true, but in reality, Europe is 30 year behind in terminology. Unless the European Standardization Reform gets completed in the next few months, most Member States will likely conclude that they will go on referencing and using standards beyond those created by the three European endorsed monopolists of standardization, CEN, CENELEC and ETSI. Who can afford to begin following the strict Brussels rules for what they can call open standards when, in reality, standards stemming from global standardization organizations, so-called fora/consortia, dominate in the IT industry. What exactly is EIF saying? Does it encourage Member States to go on using non-ESO standards as long as they call it something else? I guess I am all for it, although it is a bit cumbersome, no? Why was there so much interest around the EIF? The FAQ attempts to explain: Some Member States have begun to adopt policies to achieve interoperability for their public services. These actions have had a significant impact on the ecosystem built around the provision of such services, e.g. providers of ICT goods and services, standardisation bodies, industry fora and consortia, etc... The Commission identified a clear need for action at European level to ensure that actions by individual Member States would not create new electronic barriers that would hinder the development of interoperable European public services. As a result, all stakeholders involved in the delivery of electronic public services in Europe have expressed their opinions on how to increase interoperability for public services provided by the different public administrations in Europe. Well, it does not take two years to read 50 consultation documents, and the EU Standardization Reform is not yet completed, so, more pragmatically, you finally had to release the document. Ok, let's leave some of that aside because the document is out and some people are happy (and others definitely not). The Verdict Considering the controversy, the delays, the lobbying, and the interests at stake both in the EU, in Member States and among vendors large and small, this document is pretty impressive. As with a good wine that has not yet come to full maturity, let's say that it seems to be coming in in the 85-88/100 range, but only a more fine-grained analysis, enjoyment in good company, and ultimately, implementation, will tell. The European Commission has today adopted a significant interoperability initiative to encourage public administrations across the EU to maximise the social and economic potential of information and communication technologies. Today, we should rally around this achievement. Tomorrow, let's sit down and figure out what it means for the future.

    Read the article

  • Silverlight 3 + Java WebService

    - by Heko
    Hello! I have a Silverlight 3 project, and I need to call a Java WebService - the bindings are ok (SOAP 1.1 and basicHttpBinding): ClientConfig File: <configuration> <system.serviceModel> <bindings> <basicHttpBinding> <binding name="SkyinfoTestInterfaceExport2_SkyinfoTestInterfaceHttpBinding" maxBufferSize="2147483647" maxReceivedMessageSize="2147483647"> <security mode="None"> <transport> <extendedProtectionPolicy policyEnforcement="Never" /> </transport> </security> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> </bindings> <client> <endpoint address="myAddress" binding="basicHttpBinding" bindingConfiguration="SkyinfoTestInterfaceExport2_SkyinfoTestInterfaceHttpBinding" contract="SkyInfoServiceReference.SkyinfoTestInterface" name="SkyinfoTestInterfaceExport2_SkyinfoTestInterfaceHttpPort" /> </client> </system.serviceModel> When I call a method on client I get this Policy error: An error occurred while trying to make a request to URI '...'. This could be due to attempting to access a service in a cross-domain way without a proper cross-domain policy in place, or a policy that is unsuitable for SOAP services. You may need to contact the owner of the service to publish a cross-domain policy file and to ensure it allows SOAP-related HTTP headers to be sent. This error may also be caused by using internal types in the web service proxy without using the InternalsVisibleToAttribute attribute. Please see the inner exception for more details. I know about those 2 policy XML filesbut Java EE service which I'm trying to call is hosted on a IBM WebSphere Process Server to which I don't have access. Does anybody know how to work around this policy exception?

    Read the article

  • Microsoft.Web.Administration.ServerManager can't read config sections containing encrypted passwords

    - by Dylan Beattie
    I have some sites in IIS7 that are configured to run as domain users (MYDOMAIN\someuser). I'm using the Microsoft.Web.Administration namespace to scan my server configuration, but it's throwing an exception when I hit one of these "impersonator" sites: using (ServerManager sm = new ServerManager()) { foreach (Site site in sm.Sites) { foreach (Application app in site.Applications.Reverse()) { foreach (VirtualDirectory vdir in app.VirtualDirectories.Reverse()) { var config = app.GetWebConfiguration(); foreach (var locationPath in config.GetLocationPaths()) { // error occurs in GetLocationPaths() } } } } } The actual error message is: COMException was unhandled Filename: \\?\C:\Windows\system32\inetsrv\config\applicationHost.config Line number: 279 Error: Failed to decrypt attribute 'password' because the keyset does not exist It appears that IIS is storing the MYDOMAIN\someuser password encrypted in applicationHost.config, which is great in terms of security - but I have no idea how to get the ServerManager to decrypt this. Any tips on how I can either allow ServerManager to decrypt this, or just tell IIS to store the passwords in plain text? This is on IIS7 under Windows 7 RC, by the way.

    Read the article

  • Should I be afraid of Linux server administration?

    - by markle976
    I've been trying to figure out what to focus on. I finally realized that the root of my quandary is that I am unsure about learning Linux server administration. I have been getting pretty good with PHP/MySQL and web development, but I am not very familiar with Linux. Is it hard to learn? What would I need to know in order to manage a LAMP stack? Also, which version is most used in enterprises? I think I have also hesitated to dive in because it seems like it is mostly used in small companies, but I guess that could be a good thing.

    Read the article

  • Microsoft.Web.Administration.ServerManager can't read config sections containing encrypted passwords in applicationHost.config

    - by Dylan Beattie
    I have some sites in IIS7 that are configured to run as domain users (MYDOMAIN\someuser). I'm using the Microsoft.Web.Administration namespace to scan my server configuration, but it's throwing an exception when I hit one of these "impersonator" sites: using (ServerManager sm = new ServerManager()) { foreach (Site site in sm.Sites) { foreach (Application app in site.Applications.Reverse()) { foreach (VirtualDirectory vdir in app.VirtualDirectories.Reverse()) { var config = app.GetWebConfiguration(); foreach (var locationPath in config.GetLocationPaths()) { // error occurs in GetLocationPaths() } } } } } The actual error message is: COMException was unhandled Filename: \\?\C:\Windows\system32\inetsrv\config\applicationHost.config Line number: 279 Error: Failed to decrypt attribute 'password' because the keyset does not exist It appears that IIS is storing the MYDOMAIN\someuser password encrypted in applicationHost.config, which is great in terms of security - but I have no idea how to get the ServerManager to decrypt this. Any tips on how I can either allow ServerManager to decrypt this, or just tell IIS to store the passwords in plain text? This is on IIS7 under Windows 7 RC, by the way.

    Read the article

  • MOSS 2007 central administration - cannot connect to the configuration database

    - by Thakkar
    I am unable to access Sharepoint Central Administration. I installed MOSS 2007 successfully on Windows Server 2008 (IIS7 and SQL Server 2005), I launched the admin and got "Cannot connect to the configuration database" error. Application pool is using NetworkService account which has access to SQL Server. I can access the configuration databases through SQL Management Studio. SQL server is on the same machine. Any help, suggestions on how to solve the problem? I am very new to SharePoint.

    Read the article

  • AJAX, same-origin Policy and working XML Requests

    - by Joern
    Hello guys, so, currently I develop Widgets for Smartphones and am going a bit more advanced into fields of data exchange between client and server applications. My problem is: For my current project I want my client file to request data from a PHP script with the help of AJAX XmlHttpRequest and the POST method: function xmlRequestNotes() { var parameter = 'p=1234'; xmlhttp = new XMLHttpRequest(); xmlhttp.open("POST", url, true); // Http Header xmlhttp.setRequestHeader("Content-Type", "application/x-www-form-urlencoded"); xmlhttp.setRequestHeader("Content-length", parameter.length); xmlhttp.setRequestHeader("Connection", "close"); xmlhttp.onreadystatechange=function() { if (xmlhttp.readyState==4 && xmlhttp.status==200) { json = JSON.parse(xmlhttp.responseText); // Doing Stuff with the Response } }; xmlhttp.send(parameter); } This works perfectly fine on my local server set up in XAMPP and the local Widget emulator. But if it gets onto the device (also with access to the target network) I receive the 101 Network Error. And as far as I have read, this is due to the "Same-Origin Policy" of XmlHttpRequests? My problem is to really understand that. Although the idea of this policy is clear to me, I'm a bit confused by the fact that another XmlHttpRequest for a Yahoo Weather XML Feed works fine. Now, could anyone be so helpful to enlighten me? Here is the request that returns a city name from Yahoo's weather feed: function getCityName() { xmlhttp = new XMLHttpRequest(); xmlhttp.open("GET", "http://weather.yahooapis.com/forecastrss?w=645458&u=c", true); xmlhttp.onreadystatechange = function() { if (xmlhttp.readyState==4 && xmlhttp.status==200) { xmlhttp.responseXML; var yweather = "http://xml.weather.yahoo.com/ns/rss/1.0"; alert(xmlhttp.responseXML.getElementsByTagNameNS(yweather, "location")[0].getAttribute("city")); } }; xmlhttp.send(null); } Obvious differences are the POST and GET methods for once, but seeing that the Same-Origin Policy takes effect no matter what method, I can't really make much sense of it. Why does the latter request work but not the first? I would really appreciate some help here. Greetings and a merry Christmas to you guys!

    Read the article

  • Tomcat 6: Access Control Exception?

    - by iftrue
    I'm trying to setup a tomcat6 server, and I'm trying to match another setup someone else established. However, my deployment (default Ubuntu install) uses a policy.d/ directory structure, and the established server just uses a catalina.policy file. I've tried setting every entry in policy.d to match the given catalina.policy, but I still get the following stacktrace on boot (from localhost log). I have two questions, then. First, how do I get tomcat to use a single poilcy file, rather than the directory structure presented by policy.d/? Secondly, why, when I specify all files to use the same policy, do I still get the stack trace below? Stack trace: SEVERE: Servlet /myapp threw load() exception java.security.AccessControlException: access denied (java.lang.RuntimePermission accessClassInPackage.org.apache.jasper) at java.security.AccessControlContext.checkPermission(AccessControlContext.java:342) at java.security.AccessController.checkPermission(AccessController.java:553) at java.lang.SecurityManager.checkPermission(SecurityManager.java:549) at java.lang.SecurityManager.checkPackageAccess(SecurityManager.java:1529) at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:291) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:264) at org.apache.catalina.loader.WebappClassLoader.loadClass(WebappClassLoader.java:1314) at org.apache.catalina.loader.WebappClassLoader.loadClass(WebappClassLoader.java:1245) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClassInternal(ClassLoader.java:332) at org.apache.jasper.servlet.JspServlet.init(JspServlet.java:100) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:616) at org.apache.catalina.security.SecurityUtil$1.run(SecurityUtil.java:244) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at javax.security.auth.Subject.doAsPrivileged(Subject.java:537) at org.apache.catalina.security.SecurityUtil.execute(SecurityUtil.java:276) at org.apache.catalina.security.SecurityUtil.doAsPrivilege(SecurityUtil.java:162) at org.apache.catalina.security.SecurityUtil.doAsPrivilege(SecurityUtil.java:115) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapper.loadServlet(StandardWrapper.java:1166) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardWrapper.load(StandardWrapper.java:992) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.loadOnStartup(StandardContext.java:4058) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.start(StandardContext.java:4367) at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.addChildInternal(ContainerBase.java:791) at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.access$000(ContainerBase.java:123) at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase$PrivilegedAddChild.run(ContainerBase.java:145) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.addChild(ContainerBase.java:769) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHost.addChild(StandardHost.java:525) at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.deployDirectory(HostConfig.java:978) at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.deployDirectories(HostConfig.java:941) at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.deployApps(HostConfig.java:499) at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.start(HostConfig.java:1201) at org.apache.catalina.startup.HostConfig.lifecycleEvent(HostConfig.java:318) at org.apache.catalina.util.LifecycleSupport.fireLifecycleEvent(LifecycleSupport.java:117) at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.start(ContainerBase.java:1053) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardHost.start(StandardHost.java:719) at org.apache.catalina.core.ContainerBase.start(ContainerBase.java:1045) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardEngine.start(StandardEngine.java:443) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardService.start(StandardService.java:516) at org.apache.catalina.core.StandardServer.start(StandardServer.java:710) at org.apache.catalina.startup.Catalina.start(Catalina.java:578) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:616) at org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap.start(Bootstrap.java:288) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:616) at org.apache.commons.daemon.support.DaemonLoader.start(DaemonLoader.java:177) Policy.d grant codeBase "file:${java.home}/lib/-" { permission java.security.AllPermission; }; // These permissions apply to all shared system extensions grant codeBase "file:${java.home}/jre/lib/ext/-" { permission java.security.AllPermission; }; // These permissions apply to javac when ${java.home] points at $JAVA_HOME/jre grant codeBase "file:${java.home}/../lib/-" { permission java.security.AllPermission; }; // These permissions apply to all shared system extensions when // ${java.home} points at $JAVA_HOME/jre grant codeBase "file:${java.home}/lib/ext/-" { permission java.security.AllPermission; }; // ========== CATALINA CODE PERMISSIONS ======================================= // These permissions apply to the daemon code grant codeBase "file:${catalina.home}/bin/commons-daemon.jar" { permission java.security.AllPermission; }; // These permissions apply to the logging API grant codeBase "file:${catalina.home}/bin/tomcat-juli.jar" { permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.util.logging.config.class", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.util.logging.config.file", "read"; permission java.io.FilePermission "${java.home}${file.separator}lib${file.separator}logging.properties", "read"; permission java.lang.RuntimePermission "shutdownHooks"; permission java.io.FilePermission "${catalina.base}${file.separator}conf${file.separator}logging.properties", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "catalina.base", "read"; permission java.util.logging.LoggingPermission "control"; permission java.io.FilePermission "${catalina.base}${file.separator}logs", "read, write"; permission java.io.FilePermission "${catalina.base}${file.separator}logs${file.separator}*", "read, write"; permission java.lang.RuntimePermission "getClassLoader"; // To enable per context logging configuration, permit read access to the appropriate file. // Be sure that the logging configuration is secure before enabling such access // eg for the examples web application: // permission java.io.FilePermission "${catalina.base}${file.separator}webapps${file.separator}examples${file.separator}WEB-INF${file.separator}classes${file.separator}logging.properties", "read"; }; // These permissions apply to the server startup code grant codeBase "file:${catalina.home}/bin/bootstrap.jar" { permission java.security.AllPermission; }; // These permissions apply to the servlet API classes // and those that are shared across all class loaders // located in the "lib" directory grant codeBase "file:${catalina.home}/lib/-" { permission java.security.AllPermission; }; // ========== WEB APPLICATION PERMISSIONS ===================================== // These permissions are granted by default to all web applications // In addition, a web application will be given a read FilePermission // and JndiPermission for all files and directories in its document root. grant { // Required for JNDI lookup of named JDBC DataSource's and // javamail named MimePart DataSource used to send mail permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.home", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.naming.*", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "javax.sql.*", "read"; // OS Specific properties to allow read access permission java.util.PropertyPermission "os.name", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "os.version", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "os.arch", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "file.separator", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "path.separator", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "line.separator", "read"; // JVM properties to allow read access permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.version", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.vendor", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.vendor.url", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.class.version", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.specification.version", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.specification.vendor", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.specification.name", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.vm.specification.version", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.vm.specification.vendor", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.vm.specification.name", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.vm.version", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.vm.vendor", "read"; permission java.util.PropertyPermission "java.vm.name", "read"; // Required for OpenJMX permission java.lang.RuntimePermission "getAttribute"; // Allow read of JAXP compliant XML parser debug permission java.util.PropertyPermission "jaxp.debug", "read"; // Precompiled JSPs need access to this package. permission java.lang.RuntimePermission "accessClassInPackage.org.apache.jasper.runtime"; permission java.lang.RuntimePermission "accessClassInPackage.org.apache.jasper.runtime.*"; // Precompiled JSPs need access to this system property. permission java.util.PropertyPermission "org.apache.jasper.runtime.BodyContentImpl.LIMIT_BUFFER", "read"; };

    Read the article

  • EU Research for ICT - Call 7 - biggest ever at € 780 million

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Under the Digital Agenda for Europe, the Commission has committed to maintaining the pace of a 20% yearly increase of the annual ICT R&D budget at least until 2013. The EU's flagship policy programme calls for doubling of annual public spending on ICT R&D by 2020 and to leverage an equivalent increase in private spending to achieve the goals of Europe's 2020 strategy for jobs and growth. Call 7 is one of the biggest calls ever launched for information and communications technology (ICT) research proposals under the EU's research framework programmes. It will result in project funding of € 780 million in 2011. This funding will advance research on the future internet, robotics, smart and embedded systems, photonics, ICT for energy efficiency, health and well-being in an ageing society, and more. The €780 million call for proposals is part of the biggest ever annual Work Programme under the EU's 7th Framework Programme for Research. Almost €1.2 billion has been budgeted for 2011. €220 million were made available already in July 2010 for public private partnerships focusing on ICT for smart cars, green buildings, sustainable factories and the future internet. Universities, research centres, SMEs, large companies and other organisations in Europe and beyond are eligible to apply for project funding under ICT Call 7. Proposals can be submitted until 18 January 2011, after which they will be evaluated by independent panels of experts for selection on the basis of their quality. Background: Digital Agenda: European Commission announces €780 million boost for strategic ICT research. Call text: ICT Call 7 Deadline: 18/01/2011.

    Read the article

  • Why the “Toilet” Analogy for SQL might be bad

    - by Jonathan Kehayias
    Robert Davis(blog/twitter) recently blogged The Toilet Analogy … or Why I Never Recommend Increasing Worker Threads , in which he uses an analogy for why increasing the value for the ‘max worker threads’ sp_configure option can be bad inside of SQL Server.  While I can’t make an argument against Robert’s assertion that increasing worker threads may not improve performance, I can make an argument against his suggestion that, simply increasing the number of logical processors, for example from...(read more)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >