Search Results

Search found 21719 results on 869 pages for 'password security'.

Page 192/869 | < Previous Page | 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199  | Next Page >

  • configuring linux server firewall to allow acces on a certain range of IP addresses

    - by eggman20
    Hi Guys, I'm new to linux server. I'm currently trying to get an Ubuntu 10.10 server up and running for the first time and I'm using Webmin for administration. I'm stuck on the setting up the firewall. What I need to do is to ONLY allow a range of IPs (e.g 128.171.21.1 - 128.171.21.100) to access the HTTP server and Webmin. I've seen a lot of tutorials but none of them fits what I needed. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Dealing with SMTP invalid command attack

    - by mark
    One of our semi-busy mail servers (sendmail) has had a lot of inbound connections over the past few days from hosts that are issuing garbage commands. In the past two days: incoming smtp connections with invalid commands from 39,000 unique IPs the IPs come from various ranges all over the world, not just a few networks that I can block the mail server serves users throughout north america, so I can't just block connections from unknown IPs sample bad commands: http://pastebin.com/4QUsaTXT I am not sure what someone is trying to accomplish with this attack, besides annoy me. any ideas what this is about, or how to effectively deal with it?

    Read the article

  • Find out what resource is triggering bad password attempt?

    - by Craig Tataryn
    Background: Have a problem at work where I am constantly being locked out of my computer. We are in an environment that has a Domain Controller and we use Active Directory for authentication. By going through my normal workflow while on the phone with Desktop Support we were able to track the bad password attempts that were causing the lockouts to an application: "Eclipse". This is the application I use to do software development. I immediately thought it was a cached password for our SVN server that's the culprit, however the desktop support person couldn't tell me which resource the password attempt was being made against (i.e. which URL for instance). Question: Is there a way that I can monitor bad authentication requests made by an application on my desktop and find out what resource they are attempting it against?

    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

  • Putting a whole linux server under source control (git)

    - by Tobias Hertkorn
    I am thinking about putting my whole linux server under version control using git. The reason behind it being that that might be the easiest way to detect malicious modifications/rootkits. All I would naively think is necessary to check the integrity of the system: Mount the linux partition every week or so using a rescue system, check if the git repository is still untempered and then issue a git status to detect any changes made to the system. Apart from the obvious waste in disk space, are there any other negative side-effects? Is it a totally crazy idea? Is it even a secure way to check against rootkits since I most likely would have to at least exclude /dev and /proc ?

    Read the article

  • md5sum or sha1sum of legitmate microsoft system files

    - by martyvis
    Is there a database or repository of the legitimate checksums for Microsoft system files? We think we have a 0day on DNS for Windows 2003 SP2 using IRC for command and control. (Latest McAfee does not see an issue). I want to compare our customer's dns.exe and associated DLLs with the real ones. (I will grab a fresh SP2 and hotfixed system to do this, but wonder how to do this in future without needed to do this.)

    Read the article

  • OSSIM - Snort/OSSEC/Nagios Logging Config Question

    - by user15736
    Quick n00b OSSIM question. I've looked around but haven't found exactly what I'm looking for. I currently have a Nagios, OSSEC, Nessus, and Snort server and I want to keep those servers active but just ship the logs to the OSSIM server and have it do the correlating and graphing. Can that be done? Everything I've seen is putting the various software functions actually on the OSSIM box but I don't want to do that. I'm running CentOS on all of the systems. 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

  • 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

  • Returning "200 OK" in Apache on HTTP OPTIONS requests

    - by i..
    I'm attempting to implement cross-domain HTTP access control without touching any code. I've got my Apache(2) server returning the correct Access Control headers with this block: Header set Access-Control-Allow-Origin "*" Header set Access-Control-Allow-Methods "POST, GET, OPTIONS" I now need to prevent Apache from executing my code when the browser sends a HTTP OPTIONS request (it's stored in the REQUEST_METHOD environment variable), returning 200 OK. How can I configure Apache to respond "200 OK" when the request method is OPTIONS? I've tried this mod_rewrite block, but the Access Control headers are lost. RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{REQUEST_METHOD} OPTIONS RewriteRule ^(.*)$ $1 [R=200,L]

    Read the article

  • PuTTY - Server Unexpectedly Closed Network Connection

    - by Austin
    I have two servers that I have been able to connect fine as s1.website.com and s2.website.com I connected to s1.website.com earlier today without any issues, however, when I connected to s2.website.com it gave me the "Server Unexpectedly Closed Network Connection" I have researched this elsewhere and someone concluded it to a "brute force attempt" However, I know this is not the case. If anyone else has had this issue please let me know. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Several border firewalls in the same network

    - by nimai
    I'm currently analyzing the consequences of multipath connections for the firewalls. In that context, I'm wondering if it's really uncommon to have several firewalls at the borders of a network to protect it. The typical case I'd imagine would be a multihomed network, for which the administrator would have different policies for links from different (or not) ISPs. Or maybe even in an ISP's network. What would be the practical (dis)advantages of such a configuration? Could you provide an example of an existing topology using several border firewalls?

    Read the article

  • Firewall - Preventing Content Theft & Rogue Crawlers

    - by drodecker
    Our websites are being crawled by content thieves on a regular basis. We obviously want to let through the nice bots and legitimate user activity, but block questionable activity. We have tried IP blocking at our firewall, but this becomes to manage the block lists. Also, we have used IIS-handlers, however that complicates our web applications. Is anyone familiar with network appliances, firewalls or application services (say for IIS) that can reduce or eliminate the content scrapers?

    Read the article

  • Mitigating the 'firesheep' attack at the network layer?

    - by pobk
    What are the sysadmin's thoughts on mitigating the 'firesheep' attack for servers they manage? Firesheep is a new firefox extension that allows anyone who installs it to sidejack session it can discover. It does it's discovery by sniffing packets on the network and looking for session cookies from known sites. It is relatively easy to write plugins for the extension to listen for cookies from additional sites. From a systems/network perspective, we've discussed the possibility of encrypting the whole site, but this introduces additional load on servers and screws with site-indexing, assets and general performance. One option we've investigated is to use our firewalls to do SSL Offload, but as I mentioned earlier, this would require all of the site to be encrypted. What's the general thoughts on protecting against this attack vector? I've asked a similar question on StackOverflow, however, it would be interesting to see what the systems engineers thought.

    Read the article

  • How much information can websites get about your browser/PC?

    - by Pickledegg
    I am trying to determine if the information shown on this website is the absolute maximum amount of information that a webserver can obtain from a web visitor. Does anyone know of any other sites that will be able to get more information from the user passively like this? I'm not talking about port-sniffing or any kind of interaction from the user, just the info that a server can get from a 'dumb' visit.

    Read the article

  • File/folder Write/Delete wise, is my server secure?

    - by acidzombie24
    I wanted to know if someone got access to my server by using a nonroot account, how much damage can he do? After i su someuser I used this command to find all files and folders that are writeable. find / -writable >> list.txt Here is the result. Its most /dev/something and /proc/something and these /var/lock /var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock /var/tmp /var/lib/php5 Is my system secure? /var/tmp makes sense but i am unsure why this user has write access to those folders. Should i change them? stat /var/lib/php5 gives me 1733 which is odd. Why write access? why no read? is this some kind of weird use of a temp file?

    Read the article

  • Good free guide for mod_security?

    - by Josh
    I have looked at the official sites documentation, and it is a little tough to find starting points. Is there a free comprehensive guide that is easy to understand for someone that has never dealt with mod_security?

    Read the article

  • How do I securely share my server?

    - by Blue
    I have a large dedicated server running Debian and I want to share it with about 6 friends of mine. I know I can simply just use adduser to create user accounts for them, but I want to know if they can, even as a regular user without root permissions, do anything malicious. I know by default they have read permissions for other users in the /home, and can solve that with chmod, but I just want to make sure that there's nothing else they can do. And also, is there any kind of script or program that makes it easier to create and manage shell users on a server?

    Read the article

  • is there any valid reason for users to request phpinfo()

    - by The Journeyman geek
    I'm working on writing a set of rules for fail2ban to make life a little more interesting for whoever is trying to bruteforce his way into my system. A good majority of the attempts tend to revolve around trying to get into phpinfo() via my webserver -as below GET //pma/config/config.inc.php?p=phpinfo(); HTTP/1.1 GET //admin/config/config.inc.php?p=phpinfo(); HTTP/1.1 GET //dbadmin/config/config.inc.php?p=phpinfo(); HTTP/1.1 GET //mysql/config/config.inc.php?p=phpinfo(); HTTP/1.1 I'm wondering if there's any valid reason for a user to attempt to access phpinfo() via apache, since if not, i can simply use that, or more specifically the regex GET //[^>]+=phpinfo\(\) as a filter to eliminate these attacks

    Read the article

  • This operation has been cancelled due to restrictions in effect on this computer

    - by Dan
    I have this HUGELY irritating problem on Windows 7 (x64). Whenever I click on ANY link (that exists on a Word document, Excel or Outlook), I get an alert box with the message: This operation has been canceled due to restrictions in effect on this computer I have been scouring my settings and the Internet for a solution, but to no avail. What is the reason for this problem? It even happens when I click anchors in word document. That is, I can't even click on an entry in a Table of Contents to go to the appropriate page - I get this same error then. Is this a Windows 7 thing? Is there any way to turn this off?

    Read the article

  • What else can I do to secure my Linux server?

    - by eric01
    I want to put a web application on my Linux server: I will first explain to you what the web app will do and then I will tell you what I did so far to secure my brand new Linux system. The app will be a classified ads website (like gumtree.co.uk) where users can sell their items, upload images, send to and receive emails from the admin. It will use SSL for some pages. I will need SSH. So far, what I did to secure my stock Ubuntu (latest version) is the following: NOTE: I probably did some things that will prevent the application from doing all its tasks, so please let me know of that. My machine's sole purpose will be hosting the website. (I put numbers as bullet points so you can refer to them more easily) 1) Firewall I installed Uncomplicated Firewall. Deny IN & OUT by default Rules: Allow IN & OUT: HTTP, IMAP, POP3, SMTP, SSH, UDP port 53 (DNS), UDP port 123 (SNTP), SSL, port 443 (the ones I didn't allow were FTP, NFS, Samba, VNC, CUPS) When I install MySQL & Apache, I will open up Port 3306 IN & OUT. 2) Secure the partition in /etc/fstab, I added the following line at the end: tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs defaults,rw 0 0 Then in console: mount -o remount /dev/shm 3) Secure the kernel In the file /etc/sysctl.conf, there are a few different filters to uncomment. I didn't know which one was relevant to web app hosting. Which one should I activate? They are the following: A) Turn on Source Address Verification in all interfaces to prevent spoofing attacks B) Uncomment the next line to enable packet forwarding for IPv4 C) Uncomment the next line to enable packet forwarding for IPv6 D) Do no accept ICMP redirects (we are not a router) E) Accept ICMP redirects only for gateways listed in our default gateway list F) Do not send ICMP redirects G) Do not accept IP source route packets (we are not a router) H) Log Martian Packets 4) Configure the passwd file Replace "sh" by "false" for all accounts except user account and root. I also did it for the account called sshd. I am not sure whether it will prevent SSH connection (which I want to use) or if it's something else. 5) Configure the shadow file In the console: passwd -l to lock all accounts except user account. 6) Install rkhunter and chkrootkit 7) Install Bum Disabled those services: "High performance mail server", "unreadable (kerneloops)","unreadable (speech-dispatcher)","Restores DNS" (should this one stay on?) 8) Install Apparmor_profiles 9) Install clamav & freshclam (antivirus and update) What did I do wrong and what should I do more to secure this Linux machine? Thanks a lot in advance

    Read the article

  • Taking user out of MACHINENAME\Users group does not disallow them from authenticating with IIS site

    - by jayrdub
    I have a site that has anonymous access disabled and uses only IIS basic authentication. The site's home directory only has the MACHINENAME\Users group with permissions. I have one user that I don't want to be able to log-in to this site, so I thought all I would need to do is take that user out of the Users group, but doing so still allows him to authenticate. I know it is the Users group that is allowing authentication because if I remove that group's permissions on the directory, he is not allowed to log in. Is there something special about the Users group that makes it so you are actually always a part of it? Is the only solution to revoke the Users group's permissions on the site's home directory and grant a new group access that contains only the allowed users?

    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

  • Securing debain with fail2ban or iptables

    - by Jimmy
    I'm looking to secure my server. Initially my first thought was to use iptables but then I also learnt about Fail2ban. I understand that Fail2ban is based on iptables, but it has the advantages of being able to ban IP's after a number of attempts. Let's say I want to block FTP completely: Should I write a separate IPtable rule to block FTP, and use Fail2ban just for SSH Or instead simply put all rules, even the FTP blocking rule within the Fail2Ban config Any help on this would be appreciated. James

    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

< Previous Page | 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199  | Next Page >