Search Results

Search found 25872 results on 1035 pages for 'document 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 176/1035 | < Previous Page | 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

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

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

    Read the article

  • Which linux x86 hardware keystore?

    - by byeo
    I'm terminating SSL/TLS in my DMZ and I have to assume that machine will be hacked. At which point my certificates are compromised. Previously I've used nCipher hardware keystore/accelerator to solve this issue. These cards won't reveal the private key even to root. The card performs the encryption and decryption onboard and is hardened against physical attack. The only way to get at the keys is by attaching a smart card reader to the card itself. I'm having trouble finding information about something to recreate this approach. Is this the domain of specialist switches and firewalls these days? This old page references some of the old hardware: http://www.kegel.com/ssl/hw.html#cards

    Read the article

  • Manually start screensaver with password protect

    - by gibberish
    Windows 7 I wish to manually lock the computer so I placed a shortcut to scrnsave.exe on the desktop. (I do not want the user to use Ctrl+Alt+Del -- Lock This Computer for various reasons) Problem is that when double-clicked, the screen saver starts but it's not password protected. However, in Personalization -- Screen Saver, that same screen saver is the selected one and it IS configured to display logon screen upon resume. And that works when Windows starts the screen saver. So how can I cause "On resume, display logon screen" behavior by manually starting a screen saver? (Scripting is an option if I know what to do.)

    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

  • how to know who is accessing my system?

    - by calvin
    Is it possible to know if anyone is accessing any of folders or drives in my system(32 bit windows 2003)? I mean shared folders or non-shared folders, anything. And once if we know, how to deny access to particular host. For shared folders i know how to do, but if anyone is accessing some folder with proper credentials, i don't know how to control. Please ignore cases like bit torrent etc. All i wanted to know is if anyone is accessing my system folders in this way \\10.30.188.231\d$\calvin_docs with some valid username and password. I wanted to know ip/username of system who is accessing

    Read the article

  • Strange ssh login

    - by Hikaru
    I am running debian server and i have received a strange email warning about ssh login It says, that user mail logged in using ssh from remote address: Environment info: USER=mail SSH_CLIENT=92.46.127.173 40814 22 MAIL=/var/mail/mail HOME=/var/mail SSH_TTY=/dev/pts/7 LOGNAME=mail TERM=xterm PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/games LANG=en_US.UTF-8 SHELL=/bin/sh KRB5CCNAME=FILE:/tmp/krb5cc_8 PWD=/var/mail SSH_CONNECTION=92.46.127.173 40814 my-ip-here 22 I looked in /etc/shadow and find out, that password for is not set mail:*:15316:0:99999:7::: I found this lines for login in auth.log n 3 02:57:09 gw sshd[2090]: pam_winbind(sshd:auth): getting password (0x00000388) Jun 3 02:57:09 gw sshd[2090]: pam_winbind(sshd:auth): pam_get_item returned a password Jun 3 02:57:09 gw sshd[2091]: pam_winbind(sshd:auth): user 'mail' granted access Jun 3 02:57:09 gw sshd[2091]: Accepted password for mail from 92.46.127.173 port 45194 ssh2 Jun 3 02:57:09 gw sshd[2091]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session opened for user mail by (uid=0) Jun 3 02:57:10 gw CRON[2051]: pam_unix(cron:session): session closed for user root and lots of auth failures for this user. There is no lines with COMMAND string for this user. Nothing was found with "rkhunter" and with "ps aux" process inspection, also there is no suspicious connections was found with "netstat" (as I can see) Can anyone tell me how it is possible and what else should be done? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Can't connect back to the wireless network after the password was changed

    - by 7777
    Family changed the network password and some other network settings after new computers were brought into the house because apparently they wouldn't work with what we had. Actually an off-site tech remotely changed it, and I have no idea what he did. My laptop detects the network (it shows up under available networks) but whenever I try to connect it says: Windows is unable to connect to the selected network. The network may no longer be in range. Please refresh the list of available networks, and try to connect again. I wish I could give more details, config settings, but frankly I have no idea what I'm looking for. This is XP (also, not a password issue, I know the password, it's just that I have no idea where to enter it, etc.)

    Read the article

  • Software for defining rules for folder permissions and monitoring deviations

    - by Kjensen
    Let's say a company has a large number of users, and each user has a home area. On each share used for home area folders, I would like to define some rules saying who is supposed to have which permissions on the folder. Then I would like to audit automatically, that this is actually the case and get some sort of report on deviations. So a rule for \MegaServer\Home01 could be defined something like: Domain Admins - Full Control Backup Agent - Read [Home folder owner] - Full Control I am talking about Windows platform and Windows servers, although I think it would most likely also work for *nix machines that expose Windows shares. Does software like this exist? I could roll my own basic version, but if something already exists, that is usually a better option. I am aware of tools to make displaying permissions easier (AccessEnum, DumpSec), but that is not what I am looking for.

    Read the article

  • How can I start any application with Guest permissions by default?

    - by Tom Wijsman
    Here are my two questions: How can I start any application with Guest permissions by default? How can I set certain applications not to launch with Guest permissions? For the first bullet, any non-Microsoft signed application I launch should run as the Guest account. For the second bullet, I'm imagining adding menu entries like this would be a nice approach: Set to run as Guest (= default selected entry) Set to run as User Set to run as Admin But how do I do this?

    Read the article

  • Get the "source network address" in Event ID 529 audit entries on Windows XP

    - by Make it useful Keep it simple
    In windows server 2003 when an Event 529 (logon failure) occures with a logon type of 10 (remote logon), the source network IP address is recorded in the event log. On a windows XP machine, this (and some other details) are omitted. If a bot is trying a brute force over RDP (some of my XP machines are (and need to be) exposed with a public IP address), i cannot see the originating IP address so i don't know what to block (with a script i run every few minutes). The DC does not log this detail either when the logon attempt is to the client xp machine and the DC is only asked to authenticate the credentials. Any help getting this detail in the log would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to disabled password authentication for specific users in SSHD

    - by Nick
    I have read several posts regarding restricting ALL users to Key authentication ONLY, however I want to force only a single user (svn) onto Key auth only, the rest can be key or password. I read How to disable password authentication for every users except several, however it seems the "match user" part of sshd_config is part of openssh-5.1. I am running CentOS 5.6 and only have OpenSSH 4.3. I have the following repos available at the moment. $ yum repolist Loaded plugins: fastestmirror repo id repo name status base CentOS-5 - Base enabled: 3,535 epel Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux 5 - x86_64 enabled: 6,510 extras CentOS-5 - Extras enabled: 299 ius IUS Community Packages for Enterprise Linux 5 - x86_64 enabled: 218 rpmforge RHEL 5 - RPMforge.net - dag enabled: 10,636 updates CentOS-5 - Updates enabled: 720 repolist: 21,918 I mainly use epel, rpmforge is used to the latest version (1.6) of subversion. Is there any way to achieve this with my current setup? I don't want to restrict the server to keys only because if I lose my key I lose my server ;-)

    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

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

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

    Read the article

  • Host's sys admins - can they view files?

    - by FullTrust
    Hi, Just a quick question. When using shared hosting, can system admins (employed by the host) access your files and read your database connectionstring details? Can they also access your database, and view the files, without a connectionstring? I'm assuming there's a certain level of trust, but is this possible/common? Thanks

    Read the article

  • certutil -ping fails with 30 seconds timeout - what to do?

    - by mark
    Dear ladies and sirs. The certificate store on my Win7 box is constantly hanging. Observe: C:\1.cmd C:\certutil -? | findstr /i ping -ping -- Ping Active Directory Certificate Services Request interface -pingadmin -- Ping Active Directory Certificate Services Admin interface C:\set PROMPT=$P($t)$G C:\(13:04:28.57)certutil -ping CertUtil: -ping command FAILED: 0x80070002 (WIN32: 2) CertUtil: The system cannot find the file specified. C:\(13:04:58.68)certutil -pingadmin CertUtil: -pingadmin command FAILED: 0x80070002 (WIN32: 2) CertUtil: The system cannot find the file specified. C:\(13:05:28.79)set PROMPT=$P$G C:\ Explanations: The first command shows you that there are –ping and –pingadmin parameters to certutil Trying any ping parameter fails with 30 seconds timeout (the current time is seen in the prompt) This is a serious problem. It screws all the secure communication in my app. If anyone knows how this can be fixed - please share. Thanks. P.S. 1.cmd is simply a batch of these commands: certutil -? | findstr /i ping set PROMPT=$P($t)$G certutil -ping certutil -pingadmin set PROMPT=$P$G

    Read the article

  • Fix Fatal Error Condition showing system path

    - by JMC
    I've noticed there are a large number of servers running Magento Commerce that will return a fatal error showing the system path: Fatal error: Uncaught exception 'Exception' with message 'File '/usr/local/www/magento/data1702/media/css' does not exists.' in /usr/local/www/magento/data1702/lib/Varien/File/Transfer/Adapter/Http.php:96 Stack trace: #0 /usr/local/www/magento/data1702/get.php(205): Varien_File_Transfer_Adapter_Http->send('/usr/local/www/...') #1 /usr/local/www/magento/data1702/get.php(165): sendFile('/usr/local/www/...') #2 {main} thrown in /usr/local/www/magento/data1702/lib/Varien/File/Transfer/Adapter/Http.php on line 96 Magento as an application is generally good about supressing error messages. How can a linux server running apache be configured to avoid returning this error message since the app has problems suppressing it.

    Read the article

  • Is it okay to use a SSH key with an empty passphrase?

    - by mozillalives
    When I first learned how to make ssh keys, the tutorials I read all stated that a good passphrase should be chosen. But recently, when setting up a daemon process that needs to ssh to another machine, I discovered that the only way (it seems) to have a key that I don't need to auth at every boot is to create a key with an empty passphrase. So my question is, what are the concerns with using a key with no passphrase?

    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

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 | 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183  | Next Page >