Search Results

Search found 25872 results on 1035 pages for 'document security'.

Page 181/1035 | < Previous Page | 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188  | Next Page >

  • Jail user to home directory while still allowing permission to create and delete files/folders

    - by Sevenupcan
    I'm trying to give a client SFTP access to the root directory of their site on my server (Ubuntu 10.10) so they can manager their website themselves. While I have been successful in jailing a user to a directory and giving them SFTP access; they are only allowed to create and delete new files in sub directories (the directories they own). This means that I must give them access to the parent directory to the root of their site. How can I limit them to the root of their site (for example public_html) while still allowing them the ability create and delete files. All the tutorials I have read suggest that the root must be the owner of the user's home directory, which prevents them from write access inside that directory. I'm relatively new to managing my own server so any advice would be very grateful. Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • VPS, what to install next?

    - by Camran
    I have my VPS now, with ubuntu 9.10 OS. I wonder about SSH. What is it for, and how do I use it? Also, in which order should I install apps on my server? (ex: PuTTY, IPTABLES, LAMP etc...)? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How intrusive is using VPN?

    - by Slade
    My company lets us work from home sometimes using VPN (during weather emergencies and stuff). When logging in a big window comes up that says the network is private and for employees only and that there's no right to privacy while using VPN. It makes sense that they don't want people poking around their network but I wonder if the company can use the connection to look around my computer while I'm connected. I'm not entirely computer-illiterate but I'm not a networks person at all so the technical documents I've found don't help me. Is that possible, and if so to what degree? UPDATE Thanks Mark. The funneling thing is what I was really asking about. Mostly I was worried that I would already have some IM conversation open or log into eBay forgetting that the VPN was open and that my company IT people would see it or that they would log my eBay password. Thanks again. ANOTHER UPDATE What if my son wants to play online poker or Warcraft etcetera while I have VPN on to work? Can my company think I'm the one playing if I am not typing often?

    Read the article

  • My Window's 7 is exposing me and my files I am the only administrator.

    - by Connie
    I am the only administrator on my Window's 7 Asus x53E series laptop. Why is a standard user able to access my files by just searching my name in the start menu? If I log into guest account and search my name it shows an error that i don't have permission. When i log into my roommate's standard account and go to the start menu I put my name in search and everything I have done or searched is open to them . How can i make my administrator account private

    Read the article

  • Linux File Permissions & Access Control Query

    - by Jason
    Hi, Lets say I am user: bob & group: users. There is this file: -rw----r-- 1 root users 4 May 8 22:34 testfile First question, why can't bob read the file as it's readable by others? Is it simply that if you are denied by group, then you are auto-blacklisted for others? I always assumed that the final 3 bits too precedence over user/group permission bits, guess I was wrong... Second question, how is this implemented? I suppose it's linked to the first query, but how does this work in relation to Access Control, is it related to how ACLs work / are queried? Just trying to understand how these 9 permission bits are actually implemented/used in Linux. Thanks alot.

    Read the article

  • Using Windows as a gateway to the internet

    - by James Wright
    My customer currently blocks outbound RDP and SSH, which means that none of their employees can get access to external Windows and Linux boxes (at the console level). However, a need has recently arisen to give access to an assortment of RDP and SSH endpoints scattered throughout the internet. The endpoint IP addresses are a moving target, and an access list exists to define what those IP addresses are. So now my customer wants to have a single Windows Server that they control as the sole outbound point for RDP/SSH to the internet. Consider it a jump box to the internet. If one of our admins have an access to this Windows box then they can log on, and from there bounce around to RDP/SSH endpoints on the internet. Is a standard Windows 2008 box going to work as a jump box? For example, I seem to recall that Win2k8 limits the number of users that can log on simultaneously, which means that the jump box may not be accessible if lots of users are on it. Advice as to how to make this work..?

    Read the article

  • Disable modsec2 blacklist rule for specific hostname

    - by KevinL
    I have a server running Apache2 with mod_security2. In modsec2.user.conf, there is a blacklist rule: ###BLACKLIST### SecRule REQUEST_URI "mkdir" I need to disable that rule for just one hostname on the server. I realize I could just remove it entirely but I'd rather keep it on for the other sites. I realize you can use the SecRuleRemoveByID directive, based on each rule's ID, but as you can see above, this has no ID, it's just a string. How do I disable that rule for just www.example.com, is there something I can do in custom.conf, whitelist.conf or exclude.conf ?

    Read the article

  • Wipe free space on LVM-LUKS (dm-crypt) Volume

    - by peter4887
    My three partitions for my system are created with LVM on a LUKS partition (dm-crypt). These are /home, / and swap. The filesystem is ext4. They are encrypted, because they are on my laptop and I don't want that some laptop thieves get my data. But I often share my laptop with other people so they can access my encrypted partitions. I don't want that these people can recover my cache and all the data I deleted. So I'm now trying to wipe all my free space on /home to prevent against recovering with tools like photorec. (one overwrite should do, the need of multiple overwriting is just a rumor) But still I haven't found any solution to wipe this free space successfully. I tried dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/fillitup bs=512 count=[count of free sectiors] so my partition was complete full of data. df /dev/mapper/home said 100% is used and there are 0 sectors available. But I could still recover gigs of data with photorec, although I selected to recover just form the free space. photorec displays: /dev/mapper/home - 340 GB / 317 GiB (RO) , but df displays that the size of /home is just 313G, why are there these differences and what did the 340GB means? It looks like there is a place on my /dev/mapper/home partition, that I can't access to overwrite, but I can access it to recover. I also checked for corrupted sectors, but there aren't any. Maybe this is the space between my existing files? Did anyone knows why I can't wipe my free space with dd, and how I can find the location of the loads of recoverable files, to securely delete them?

    Read the article

  • Is the guideline: don't open email attachments or execute downloads or run plug-ins (Flash, Java) from untrusted sites enough to avert infection?

    - by therobyouknow
    I'd like to know if the following is enough to avert malware as I feel that the press and other advisory resources aren't always precisely clear on all the methods as to how PCs get infected. To my mind, the key step to getting infected is a conscious choice by the user to run an executable attachment from an email or download, but also viewing content that requires a plug-in (Flash, Java or something else). This conscious step breaks down into the following possibilities: don't open email attachments: certainly agree with this. But lets try to be clear: email comes in 2 parts -the text and the attachment. Just reading the email should not be risky, right? But opening (i.e. running) email attachments IS risky (malware can be present in the attachment) don't execute downloads (e.g. from sites linked from in suspect emails or otherwise): again certainly agree with this (malware can be present in the executable). Usually the user has to voluntary click to download, or at least click to run the executable. Question: has there ever been a case where a user has visited a site and a download has completed on its own and run on its own? don't run content requiring plug-ins: certainly agree: malware can be present in the executable. I vaguely recall cases with Flash but know of the Java-based vulnerabilities much better. Now, is the above enough? Note that I'm much more cautious than this. What I'm concerned about is that the media is not always very clear about how the malware infection occurs. They talk of "booby-trapped sites", "browser attacks" - HOW exactly? I'd presume the other threat would be malevolent use of Javascript to make an executable run on the user's machine. Would I be right and are there details I can read up on about this. Generally I like Javascript as a developer, please note. An accepted answer would fill in any holes I've missed here so we have a complete general view of what the threats are (even though the actual specific details of new threats vary, but the general vectors are known).

    Read the article

  • Preventing back connect in Cpanel servers

    - by Fernando
    We run a Cpanel server and someone gained access to almost all accounts using the following steps: 1) Gained access to an user account due to weak password. Note: this user didn't had shell access. 2) With this user account, he accessed Cpanel and added a cron task. The cron task was a perl script that connected to his IP and he was able to send back shell commands. 3) Having a non jailed shell, he was able to change content of most websites in server specially for users who set their folders to 777 ( Unfortunately a common recommendation and sometimes a requirement for some PHP softwares ). Is there a way to prevent this? We started by disabling cron in Cpanel interface, but this is not enough. I see a lot of other options in which an user could run this perl script. We have a firewall running and blocking uncommon outgoing ports. But he used port 80 and, well, I can't block this port as a lot of processes use them to access things, even Cpanel itself.

    Read the article

  • Iptables to lock down compromised server to a single ip

    - by ollybee
    I have a Linux server which is compromised, I can see nasty looking perl scripts executing with root privileges. I want to get some data off it before I wipe it. How can I block all inbound and outbound traffic except for my ip? It's a Centos server I assume i can do this with iptables? I'm aware a the server is rooted there is a possibility that attackers could have made changes on the server that would prevent this from working. Ill be testing to make sure and only have the server online for a couple of hours before it is nuked.

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • How to put fear of God (law) into Wi-Fi hacking neighbors [closed]

    - by Shakehar
    I live in an apartment and some new guys have apparently moved into one of the apartments. They have been shamelessly hacking into my WiFi. Mine was initially a WEP encrypted network and out of laziness I just limited and reserved the IPS on my router for the people in my house. Yesterday I had to free up an IP for a guest in my house but before he could join the network these guys connected in. I have changed my encryption to WPA2 and hope they dont have the hardware/patience required to hack into it, but there are many wi-fi networks in my apartment most of which are secured using WEP. I don't really want to call the police on them. Is there any way to deter them from misusing other people's wi-fi ? I have gone through I think someone else has access to my wireless network. What next? but I have already taken the steps mentioned there.

    Read the article

  • Is allowing remote Sql Server Management Studio safe?

    - by dave thieben
    I administer a website that runs on IIS on one box, and SQL Server 2008 Workgroup on another box. typically I remote into the DB box and run SSMS to work on the db, but I would like to be able to access the db directly with SSMS on my local box. I've seen the other questions about allowing remote access to the database, but my question is, is this safe? I'm concerned that I'm opening a hole in the firewall and potential for hack attempts. Is this just a bad idea in general?

    Read the article

  • How to troubleshoot this memory usage?

    - by Camran
    I have a classifieds website. I use PHP, MySql, and SOLR. Solr uses a Servlet Container, in my case JETTY, which is java application. I just noticed that something was terribly wrong on my website. I opened the terminal and entered the "top" command and noticed that JAVA was EATING all the cpu and mem. Now I thought "Ok, maybe I need more mem and cpu" So I increased it. But along with the increase the java app started eating more. This has never happened before, and it is either a bug, or a hack of some kind. Anyways, I need to troubleshoot this now, and so I wonder how do I do this? Can I somehow pinpoint exactly when the memory usage started to go up from some error log? How does one troubleshoot this? How do I prevent it? Is it possible to prevent too many requests somehow, if they are within a timeline? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Cant Add Columns to a AD Task pad except for the top level of the domain

    - by Darktux
    We are working on Active Directory taskpads application for user management in our organization and facing stange issue. When we create a taskpad, and when we are at top level of the domain, i can click view - Add/Remove Columns and add "Pre Windows Name" (and lots of other properties) to the taskpad as columns, but when i just go 1 level down , i can only see "Operating System" and "Service Pack" ; why is it happening , isnt "Domain Admins" supposed to god access to all the things in AD domain , atleast of objects they own? It is important to have "Pre Windows 2000" Name as a column begause with out that our "Shell Command" task wont show up in taskpads, since its bound to parameter "Col<9" (which is pre qindows name). Please do let me know if any additions questions to clarify my problem.

    Read the article

  • Is there some file browser that uses low level functions to browse hard disk?

    - by watbywbarif
    I have Windows 7, NTFS hard disk. I have detected rootkit files but can't delete them through Windows explorer, obviously because they are not visible. Is there some other file browser that is using low level function calls, lower that win api, so that I can try to see and study these files before removal. I know the exact locations. I know that I can load some live CD and delete them, but I wonder about the first possible solution.

    Read the article

  • File permissions on web server

    - by plua
    I have just read this useful article on files permissions, and I am about to implement a as-strict-as-possible file permissions policy on our webserver. Our situation: we have a web server accessed through sftp by different users from within our company, and we have the general public accessing Apache - sometimes uploading files through PHP. I distinguish folders and files by their use. So based on this reading, here is my plan: All people who need to upload files will have separate users. But all of those users will belong to two groups: uploaders, and webserver. Apache will belong to the group webserver. Directories Permission: 771 Owner: user:uploaders Explanation: to access files in the folder, everybody needs to have execute permission. Only uploaders will be adding/removing files, so they also get r+w permission. Files within the web-root Permission: 664 Owner: user:uploaders Explanation: they will be uploaded and changed by different users, so both owner and group need to have w+r permissions. Webserver needs to only read files, so r permission only. Upload-directories Permission: 771 Owner: user:webserver Explanation: when files need to be uploaded, Apache needs to be able to write to this directory. But I figure it is safer to change the owner to webroot, thus giving Apache sufficient privileges (and all uploaders also belong to this group and will have the same permissions), while safeguarding from "others" writing to this folder. Uploaded files Permission: 664 Owner: user:webserver Explanation: after uploading Apache might need to delete files, but this is no problem because they have w+r permission of the folder. So no need to make this file any more accessible than r access for group. Being not an expert on file permissions, my question is whether or not this is the best possible policy for our situation? Any suggestions welcome.

    Read the article

  • Monitor someone on server

    - by edo
    Im in the unfortunate position of having to give someone who I do not fully trust privileged access to a webserver to finish work that they never completed. They will access the server remotely (ie I will not be able to see their screen). What can be done to a) proactively limit any potential damage and b) accurately log anything they do on the server for analysis afterwards, even if things seem ok? They will be updating a web application. Thanks in advance! --- More informtion: The server is a Ubuntu AWS server.

    Read the article

  • Finding Webserver Vulnerability

    - by Brent
    We operate a webserver farm hosting around 300 websites. Yesterday morning a script placed .htaccess files owned by www-data (the apache user) in every directory under the document_root of most (but not all) sites. The content of the .htaccess file was this: RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} ^http:// RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !%{HTTP_HOST} RewriteRule . http://84f6a4eef61784b33e4acbd32c8fdd72.com/%{REMOTE_ADDR} Googling for that url (which is the md5 hash of "antivirus") I discovered that this same thing happened all over the internet, and am looking for somebody who has already dealt with this, and determined where the vulnerability is. I have searched most of our logs, but haven't found anything conclusive yet. Are there others who experienced the same thing that have gotten further than I have in pinpointing the hole? So far we have determined: the changes were made as www-data, so apache or it's plugins are likely the culprit all the changes were made within 15 minutes of each other, so it was probably automated since our websites have widely varying domain names, I think a single vulnerability on one site was responsible (rather than a common vulnerability on every site) if an .htaccess file already existed and was writeable by www-data, then the script was kind, and simply appended the above lines to the end of the file (making it easy to reverse) Any more hints would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to decouple development server from Internet?

    - by intoxicated.roamer
    I am working in a small set-up where there are 4 developers (might grow to 6 or 8 in cuople of years). I want to set-up an environment in which developers get an internet access but can not share any data from the company on internet. I have thought of the following plan: Set-up a centralized git server (Debian). The server will have an internet access. A developer will only have git account on that server, and won't have any other account on it. Do not give internet access to developer's individual machine (Windows XP/Windows 7). Run a virtual machine (any multi-user OS) on the centralized server (the same one on which git is hosted). Developer will have an account on this virtual machine. He/she can access internet via this virtual machine. Any data-movement between this virtual machine and underlying server, as well as any of the developer's machine, is prohibited. All developers require USB port on their local machine, so that they can burn their code into a microcontroller. This port will be made available only to associated software that dumps the code in a microcontroller (MPLAB in current case). All other softwares will be prohibited from accessing the port. As more developers get added, providing internet support for them will become difficult with this plan as it will slow down the virtual machine running on the server. Can anyone suggest an alternative ? Are there any obvious flaws in the above plan ? Some key details of the server are as below: 1) OS:Debian 2) RAM: 8GB 3) CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1220v2 4C/4T

    Read the article

  • Solaris 11 installed, no updates?

    - by Paul De Niro
    I was messing around with solaris and decided to give Solaris 11 a try so I downloaded it from the Oracle website. After installing the OS, I went into the package manager and did an update. It told me that there were to available updates! I find this hard to believe considering that it's running a vulnerable version of firefox and java, its own in-house software product! Many of the other software products that came with the default install are also out of date and vulnerable. Is this normal for an Oracle install, or did I do something wrong with the upgrade process? I typed "pkg update" at the prompt, and I noticed that it did call out to pkg.oracle.com looking for updates. I find it bizarre that there are no updates available for an OS that was released a couple months ago with vulnerable software...

    Read the article

  • Apache deny access to images folder, but still able to display via <img> on site

    - by jeffery_the_wind
    I have an images folder on my site, let's call it /images/ where I keep a lot of images. I don't want anyone to have direct access to the images via the web, so I put a new directive in my Apache config that achieves this: <Directory "/var/www/images/"> Options Includes AllowOverride All Order allow,deny Deny from All </Directory> This is working, but it is blocking out ALL ACCESS, and I can't show the images anymore through my web pages. I guess this makes sense. So how do I selectively control access to these images? Basically I only want to display certain images through certain webpages and to certain users. What is best way to do this? Do I need to save the images to the database? Tim

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188  | Next Page >