Search Results

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

Page 193/869 | < Previous Page | 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200  | Next Page >

  • Windows File Checksums - Is my system hacked?

    - by rism
    I would like to know if there is a utility to verify the checksums of every windows file on my Win 7 Ultimate system. It seems on the surface such an obvious utility but I dont ever remember seeing one? I had a very weird experience while surfing earlier today and now Im not entirely sure my system is secure. I have a collection of tools in the WSCC suite but these tools no doubt just make system calls to the win32 api and if that has been subverted then the tools are practically useless. How do I know my Win 7 files are actually Win 7 files? I am particularly interested in verifying the integrity of all network TCP/IP files.

    Read the article

  • Allow outgoing connections for DNS

    - by Jimmy
    I'm new to IPtables, but I am trying to setup a secure server to host a website and allow SSH. This is what I have so far: #!/bin/sh i=/sbin/iptables # Flush all rules $i -F $i -X # Setup default filter policy $i -P INPUT DROP $i -P OUTPUT DROP $i -P FORWARD DROP # Respond to ping requests $i -A INPUT -p icmp --icmp-type any -j ACCEPT # Force SYN checks $i -A INPUT -p tcp ! --syn -m state --state NEW -j DROP # Drop all fragments $i -A INPUT -f -j DROP # Drop XMAS packets $i -A INPUT -p tcp --tcp-flags ALL ALL -j DROP # Drop NULL packets $i -A INPUT -p tcp --tcp-flags ALL NONE -j DROP # Stateful inspection $i -A INPUT -m state --state NEW -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT # Allow established connections $i -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow unlimited traffic on loopback $i -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT $i -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT # Open nginx $i -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT $i -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT # Open SSH $i -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -j ACCEPT However I've locked down my outgoing connections and it means I can't resolve any DNS. How do I allow that? Also, any other feedback is appreciated. James

    Read the article

  • no internet mail group / mail sending and delivery restrictions

    - by Jeff
    I run a win 2k8 a/d server and an win 2k8 exchange 07 server I have a group called 'No Internet Mail', i made it a distribution group. I tried to setup a transport rule on the exchange server that is configured as follows for outgoing: from a member of no internet mail and sent to users outside the organization redirect the message to administrator and send message refused, forwarded to administrator. Please talk to management for external email use. however , when i enable this it forwards everyones emails to me regardless if they are a member of the no internet mail group or not. not sure what im doing wrong, thanks in advanced.

    Read the article

  • In windows 7, how do I disable "Ease of Access" pop ups on the logon screen as I am typing my password?

    - by Silfheed
    So the question is pretty much in the title. Things to note: 'Use On-Screen Keyboard' is un-checked I have disabled Ease of Access by replacing utilman.exe But my problem now is that when I'm typing my password, It'll stop all together on the 'u' or the 'p' character and I have to click on the ease of access button then move focus back to the password to continue. Yes, one obvious solution is to not use a password that has 'u' or 'p' in it (which I've done), but that's obviously not a completely satisfying answer. Thanks! I feel a tumbleweed badge...

    Read the article

  • CPANEL ModSec2 not working with SecFilterSelective

    - by jfreak53
    Ok, I have cPanel/WHM latest on a Dedi, here are my specs on apache: Server version: Apache/2.2.23 (Unix) Server built: Oct 13 2012 19:33:23 Cpanel::Easy::Apache v3.14.13 rev9999 I just ran a re-compile using easyapache as you can see by the date. When running it I made sure that ModSec was selected and it stated in big bold letters something to the effect of If you install Apache 2.2.x you get ModSec 2 So I believed it :) I recompiled, I then ran: grep -i release /home/cpeasyapache/src/modsecurity-apache_2.6.8/apache2/mod_security2.c Hmm, the file is there but grep doesn't output anything, if I run: grep -i release /home/cpeasyapache/src/modsecurity-apache_1.9.5/apache2/mod_security.c I of course get the ModSec 1 version output. But the thing is that ModSec2 is installed since the c file is there. So I continued and put the following in modsec2.user.conf: SecFilterScanOutput On SecFilterSelective OUTPUT "text" Now when I restart Apache I get this error: Syntax error on line 1087 of /usr/local/apache/conf/modsec2.user.conf: Invalid command 'SecFilterScanOutput', perhaps misspelled or defined by a module not included in the server configuration Now supposedly this is supposed to work, I even have it running in ModSec2 on a non-cpanel server setup manually. So I know ModSec2 supports it. Anyone have any ideas? I have asked this question over at cpanel forum and it got nowhere.

    Read the article

  • Use .htaccess to block *All* access to specific folders.

    - by Urda
    I am not sure how to do this, but I want to block all access to a specific set of folders on my web server. Say secret01 and secret 02... homeDir |- data |- www | |- .htaccess (file) | |- images | |- js | |- secret01 | |- secret02 | |... |... What rule(s) do I need to add to my root .htaccess file to do this? I want all access from the web blocked from going into these folders, period. Only way one could get to them would be over SFTP or SSH. So what rule am I looking for? I am preferably looking for a one-liner so I can add more folders or move it to another site down the road. I really would prefer if the rule could be placed in the .htaccess root file so I don't have to jump all over the place to lock and unlock folders.

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

< Previous Page | 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200  | Next Page >