Search Results

Search found 97980 results on 3920 pages for 'code 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 221/3920 | < Previous Page | 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228  | Next Page >

  • Windows 7 admin denied access to taskmgr, system32 dir

    - by DotNet Zebra
    I have a Windows 7 (32-bit) box with 2 users, both admins (my wife and I are both developers). My admin account was created during Windows setup, hers was created later. Both accounts are in the same groups, yet we have VERY different permissions. In the beta and RC, both accounts worked identically (RC to RTM was a fresh install on this box, not an upgrade). I have a C:\bin folder with the sysinternals utilities and a bunch of other stuff. Running anything in there or in system32 just works on my account, on hers I get access denied errors (cannot access file or path). If I right click and try Run As Administrator, I still get the same thing!!!

    Read the article

  • What permissions / ownership to set on PHP Sessions Folder when running FastCGI / PHP-FPM (as user "nobody")?

    - by Professor Frink
    I'm having trouble getting a number of scripts running because PHP-FPM can't write to my session folder: "2009/10/01 23:54:07 [error] 17830#0: *24 FastCGI sent in stderr: "PHP Warning: Unknown: open(/var/lib/php/session/sess_cskfq4godj4ka2a637i5lq41o5, O_RDWR) failed: Permission denied (13) in Unknown on line 0 PHP Warning: Unknown: Failed to write session data (files). Please verify that the current setting of session.save_path is correct (/var/lib/php/session) in Unknown on line 0" while reading upstream" Obviously this is a permission issue; my session folder's owner/group is the webserver's user, NGINX. PHP-FPM runs as nobody though, and hence adding it to the nginx group is not so trivial. A temporary solution is to set the permissions of /var/lib/php/session to 777 - I have a feeling that's not the "best practice" though. What is the best practice when you need to assign a daemon write access to a folder, but it is running as nobody ?

    Read the article

  • Do proxies really provide anonymity?

    - by Somebody still uses you MS-DOS
    Do web proxies really provide anonymity? I mean, without someone asking for logs in a web proxy server for who/when connected, is it impossible to know who was behind that IP address? I'm asking this because I heard somewhere that some technologies (like "flash") bypass personal IP information for requests or something like that. (I'm a noob in server configuration and concepts like DNS and proxies. Thanks!)

    Read the article

  • Cannot access an application folder in Program files

    - by GiddyUpHorsey
    I recently installed Windows 7 Professional 64bit on a new machine. I installed an application using a ClickOnce installer. The application runs fine, but I cannot access the application folder it created in c:\Program files (x86). It bombs with access denied. I try to view the properties on the folder and it takes about 1 minute to display (other folders take 1 second). It says I cannot view any information because I'm not the owner. It doesn't say who the current owner is (instead - Unable to display current owner.) but says I can take ownership. When I try it fails again with Access Denied, even though I have administrative permissions. Why can't I access this folder nor take ownership?

    Read the article

  • Start multiple instances of Firefox

    - by Vi
    How can I have multiple independent instances of Mozilla Firefox 3.5 on the same X server, but started from different user accounts (consequently, different profiles)? Limited success was only with Xephyr :1, DISPLAY=:1 /usr/local/bin/firefox, but Xephyr has no Cygwin/X's "rootless" mode so it's not comfortable (see other question). The idea is to have one Firefox instance for various "Serious Business" things and the other for regular browsing with dozens of add-ons securely isolated.

    Read the article

  • How to create a password-less service account in AD?

    - by Andrew White
    Is it possible to create domain accounts that can only be accessed via a domain administrator or similar access? The goal is to create domain users that have certain network access based on their task but these users are only meant for automated jobs. As such, they don't need passwords and a domain admin can always do a run-as to drop down to the correct user to run the job. No password means no chance of someone guessing it or it being written down or lost. This may belong on SuperUser ServerFault but I am going to try here first since it's on the fuzzy border to me. I am also open to constructive alternatives.

    Read the article

  • How to stop registration attempts on Asterisk

    - by Travesty3
    The main question: My Asterisk logs are littered with messages like these: [2012-05-29 15:53:49] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:50] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:55] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:55] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:57] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device <sip:[email protected]>;tag=cb23fe53 [2012-05-29 15:53:57] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device <sip:[email protected]>;tag=cb23fe53 [2012-05-29 15:54:02] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:54:03] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 21:20:36] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '"55435217"<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '65.218.221.180' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 21:20:36] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '"1731687005"<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '65.218.221.180' - No matching peer found [2012-05-30 01:18:58] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=dEBcOzUysX [2012-05-30 01:18:58] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=9zUari4Mve [2012-05-30 01:19:00] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=sOYgI1ItQn [2012-05-30 01:19:02] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=2EGLTzZSEi [2012-05-30 01:19:04] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=j0JfZoPcur [2012-05-30 01:19:06] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=Ra0DFDKggt [2012-05-30 01:19:08] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=rR7q7aTHEz [2012-05-30 01:19:10] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=VHUMtOpIvU [2012-05-30 01:19:12] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=JxZUzBnPMW I use Asterisk for an automated phone system. The only thing it does is receives incoming calls and executes a Perl script. No outgoing calls, no incoming calls to an actual phone, no phones registered with Asterisk. It seems like there should be an easy way to block all unauthorized registration attempts, but I have struggled with this for a long time. It seems like there should be a more effective way to prevent these attempts from even getting far enough to reach my Asterisk logs. Some setting I could turn on/off that doesn't allow registration attempts at all or something. Is there any way to do this? Also, am I correct in assuming that the "Registration from ..." messages are likely people attempting to get access to my Asterisk server (probably to make calls on my account)? And what's the difference between those messages and the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages? Further detail: I know that the "Registration from ..." lines are intruders attempting to get access to my Asterisk server. With Fail2Ban set up, these IPs are banned after 5 attempts (for some reason, one got 6 attempts, but w/e). But I have no idea what the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages mean or how to stop these potential intrusion attempts. As far as I can tell, they have never been successful (haven't seen any weird charges on my bills or anything). Here's what I have done: Set up hardware firewall rules as shown below. Here, xx.xx.xx.xx is the IP address of the server, yy.yy.yy.yy is the IP address of our facility, and aa.aa.aa.aa, bb.bb.bb.bb, and cc.cc.cc.cc are the IP addresses that our VoIP provider uses. Theoretically, ports 10000-20000 should only be accessible by those three IPs.+-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ | Order | Source Ip | Protocol | Direction | Action | Destination Ip | Destination Port | +-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ | 1 | cc.cc.cc.cc/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 2 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 80 | | 3 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2749 | | 4 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 443 | | 5 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 53 | | 6 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1981 | | 7 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1991 | | 8 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2001 | | 9 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 137-138 | | 10 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 139 | | 11 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 445 | | 14 | aa.aa.aa.aa/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 17 | bb.bb.bb.bb/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 18 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1971 | | 19 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2739 | | 20 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1023-1050 | | 21 | any | all | inbound | deny | any on server | 1-65535 | +-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ Set up Fail2Ban. This is sort of working, but it's reactive instead of proactive, and doesn't seem to be blocking everything (like the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages). Set up rules in sip.conf to deny all except for my VoIP provider. Here is my sip.conf with almost all commented lines removed (to save space). Notice at the bottom is my attempt to deny all except for my VoIP provider:[general] context=default allowguest=no allowoverlap=no bindport=5060 bindaddr=0.0.0.0 srvlookup=yes disallow=all allow=g726 allow=ulaw allow=alaw allow=g726aal2 allow=adpcm allow=slin allow=lpc10 allow=speex allow=g726 insecure=invite alwaysauthreject=yes ;registertimeout=20 registerattempts=0 register = user:pass:[email protected]:5060/700 [mysipprovider] type=peer username=user fromuser=user secret=pass host=sip.mysipprovider.com fromdomain=sip.mysipprovider.com nat=no ;canreinvite=yes qualify=yes context=inbound-mysipprovider disallow=all allow=ulaw allow=alaw allow=gsm insecure=port,invite deny=0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 permit=aa.aa.aa.aa/255.255.255.255 permit=bb.bb.bb.bb/255.255.255.255 permit=cc.cc.cc.cc/255.255.255.255

    Read the article

  • Does WD Drive Lock encrypt the data?

    - by ssg
    I wonder if WD Drive Lock ineed encrypts the data on a Western Digital My Book Essential device or just puts a firmware-level password on the device. If it's just a password the data surely could be retrieved by a third party. I could not find anything on about that on user manuals. I found a blog saying "data is secured with AES256" bla bla but that doesn't say anything about if the password could be compromised or not. Because I don't see any delays when I add/remove the password. On the other hand when I enable BitLocker, it takes hours before it encrypts everything with my password.

    Read the article

  • Lock System when certain hardware is removed

    - by er4z0r
    Hi all, I am working at a company where you are suppused to lock your screen whenever you leave your desk alone for a few minutes. Now I wondered if there is a nifty little tool that would lock my screen once a certain device is removed from the system. The ideal thing would of course be to have a short-range transmitter that causes the screen to be locked once it goes out of range. But for now I would also stick with removing a pen-drive from my laptop. I am pretty sure this is feasible. I just wan't to know if there are any preexistent projects.

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between /sbin/nologin and /bin/false?

    - by Michael Hampton
    I have often heard it recommended that a user account should be disabled by setting its shell to /bin/false. But, on my existing Linux systems, I see that a great number of existing accounts (all of them service accounts) have a shell of /sbin/nologin instead. I see from the man page that /sbin/nologin prints a message to the user saying the account is disabled, and then exits. Presumably /bin/false would not print anything. I also see that /sbin/nologin is listed in /etc/shells, while /bin/false is not. The man page says that FTP will disable access for users with a shell not listed in /etc/shells and implies that other programs may do the same. Does that mean that somebody could FTP in with an account that has /sbin/nologin as its shell? What is the difference here? Which one of these should I use to disable a user account, and in what circumstances? What other effects does a listing in /etc/shells have?

    Read the article

  • hard drive forensics tool for linux

    - by Jack
    I am looking for an application I used in 2001. It was a curses application that displayed devices or files in hexadecimal format, and allowed searching through them and other functionality. I can't find anything remotely like this, does anyone have an idea?

    Read the article

  • Isolate user from the rest of the system..?

    - by Shiki
    There is a non-techsavvy user, who doesn't want to learn, and can only use Windows XP or 7. The problem is, that the computer is shared which she would like to use, and the computer stores sensitive, important data. Since she clicks on everything, it's quite a russian roulette. How could I isolate her account from the rest of the system? Like having a profile on the computer (it runs Windows 7 now) which would have the files and other stuff sandboxed? I was thinking of having a dual boot system, but that could compromise the files too, or the boot sector (talking about Windows). Linux is not a way, hence ... see the first line. Is there such a software that can set up a sandboxed environment?

    Read the article

  • How do I remove the ServerSignature added by mod_fcgid?

    - by matthew
    I'm running Mod_Security and I'm using the SecServerSignature to customize the Server header that Apache returns. This part works fine, however I'm also running mod_fcgid which appends "mod_fcgid/2.3.5" to the header. Is there any way I can turn this off? Setting ServerSignature off doesn't do anything. I was able to get it to go away by changing the ServerTokens but that removed the customization I had added.

    Read the article

  • PCRE limits exceeded, but triggering rules are SQL related

    - by Wolfe
    [Mon Oct 15 17:12:13 2012] [error] [client xx.xx.xx.xx] ModSecurity: Rule 1d4ad30 [id "300014"][file "/usr/local/apache/conf/modsec2.user.conf"][line "349"] - Execution error - PCRE limits exceeded (-8): (null). [hostname "domain.com"] [uri "/admin.php"] [unique_id "UHx8LEUQwYEAAGutKkUAAAEQ"] And similar are spamming my error log for apache. It's only the admin side.. and only these two lines in the config: line 349: #Generic SQL sigs SecRule ARGS "(or.+1[[:space:]]*=[[:space:]]1|(or 1=1|'.+)--')" "id:300014,rev:1,severity:2,msg:'Generic SQL injection protection'" And line 356: SecRule ARGS "(insert[[:space:]]+into.+values|select.*from.+[a-z|A-Z|0-9]|select.+from|bulk[[:space:]]+insert|union.+select|convert.+\(.*from)" Is there a way to fix this problem? Can someone explain what is going on or if these rules are even valid to cause this error? I know it's supposedly a recursion protection.. but these protect against SQL injection so I'm confused.

    Read the article

  • How can I get a data usage/access log for an external hard-drive?

    - by Vittorio Vittori
    Hello, I'm working in an office with many people and sometimes I leave my external hard drive with my personal data inside. I would to know if there is some way to see if my hard disk was used during my absence. I'm not the computer administrator, so I can't use exclusive file permissions and I would really like to know hard disk is opened from another computer. I am using a Mac. Does exist some other way to protect personal data on usb device like an hard-drive? If yes can you write some link to possible guides? I hope there is some ploy!!

    Read the article

  • Kernel Log "TCP: Treason uncloaked!"

    - by hurikhan77
    On one linux server (Gentoo hardened), we are experiencing bursts of the following messages in dmesg from time to time: TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer xx.xx.xxx.xxx:65039/80 shrinks window 4094157295:4094160199. Repaired. Is there anything we should take care of or is this normal? Update: Maybe related, we are using net.ipv4.tcp_congestion_control = cubic. Kernel version is 2.6.28 with Gentoo hardening patches.

    Read the article

  • WEP/WPA/WPA2 and wifi sniffing

    - by jcea
    Hi, I know that WEP traffic can be "sniffed" by any user of the WIFI. I know that WPA/WPA2 traffic is encrypted using a different link key for each user, so they can't sniff traffic... unless they capture the initial handshake. If you are using a PSK (preshared key) schema, then you recover the link key trivially from this initial handshake. If you don't know the PSK, you can capture the handshake and try to crack the PSK by bruteforce offline. Is my understanding correct so far?. I know that WPA2 has AES mode and can use "secure" tokens like X.509 certificates and such, and it is said to be secure against sniffing because capturing the handshake doesn't help you. So, is WPA2+AES secure (so far) against sniffing, and how it actually works?. That is, how is the (random) link key negociated?. When using X.509 certificates or a (private and personal) passphrase. Do WPA/WPA2 have other sniffer-secure modes beside WPA2+AES? How is broadcast traffic managed to be received by all the WIFI users, if each has a different link key?. Thanks in advance! :).

    Read the article

  • SELinux adding new allowed samba type to access httpd_sys_content_t?

    - by Josh
    allow samba_share_t httpd_sys_content_t {read execute getattr setattr write}; allow smbd_t httpd_sys_content_t {read execute getattr setattr write}; I am taking a stab in the dark with resources I've looked at, at various places that the above policies are what I want. I basically want to allow Samba to write to my web docs without giving it free access to the operating system. I read a post by a NSA rep saying the best way was defining a new type and allowing both samba and httpd access. Setting the content to public content (public_content_rw_t) does not work without making use of some unrestrictive booleans. To state this in short, how do I allow samba to access a new type?

    Read the article

  • A non interactive alternative to makecert.

    - by mark
    Dear ladies and sirs. I have a need to create a self signed certificate non interactively. Unfortunately, the only tool that I know of (makecert) is interactive - it uses GUI to ask for a password. My OS is Windows (from XP to 2008). The only thing close that I managed to find is http://www.codeproject.com/Tips/125982/How-to-run-Makecert-without-password-window.aspx, however, it is still not good. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2003 W3SVC Failing, Brute Force attack possibly the cause

    - by Roaders
    This week my website has disappeared twice for no apparent reason. I logged onto my server (Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2) and restarted the World Web Publishing service, website still down. I tried restarting a few other services like DNS and Cold Fusion and the website was still down. In the end I restarted the server and the website reappeared. Last night the website went down again. This time I logged on and looked at the event log. SCARY STUFF! There were hundreds of these: Event Type: Information Event Source: TermService Event Category: None Event ID: 1012 Date: 30/01/2012 Time: 15:25:12 User: N/A Computer: SERVER51338 Description: Remote session from client name a exceeded the maximum allowed failed logon attempts. The session was forcibly terminated. At a frequency of around 3 -5 a minute. At about the time my website died there was one of these: Event Type: Information Event Source: W3SVC Event Category: None Event ID: 1074 Date: 30/01/2012 Time: 19:36:14 User: N/A Computer: SERVER51338 Description: A worker process with process id of '6308' serving application pool 'DefaultAppPool' has requested a recycle because the worker process reached its allowed processing time limit. Which is obviously what killed the web service. There were then a few of these: Event Type: Error Event Source: TermDD Event Category: None Event ID: 50 Date: 30/01/2012 Time: 20:32:51 User: N/A Computer: SERVER51338 Description: The RDP protocol component "DATA ENCRYPTION" detected an error in the protocol stream and has disconnected the client. Data: 0000: 00 00 04 00 02 00 52 00 ......R. 0008: 00 00 00 00 32 00 0a c0 ....2..À 0010: 00 00 00 00 32 00 0a c0 ....2..À 0018: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ 0020: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ 0028: 92 01 00 00 ... With no more of the first error type. I am concerned that someone is trying to brute force their way into my server. I have disabled all the accounts apart from the IIS ones and Administrator (which I have renamed). I have also changed the password to an even more secure one. I don't know why this brute force attack caused the webservice to stop and I don't know why restarting the service didn't fix the problem. What should I do to make sure my server is secure and what should I do to make sure the webserver doesn't go down any more? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • AWS EC2: How to determine whether my EC2/scalr AMI was hacked? What to do to secure it?

    - by Niro
    I received notification from Amazon that my instance tried to hack another server. there was no additional information besides log dump: Original report: Destination IPs: Destination Ports: Destination URLs: Abuse Time: Sun May 16 10:13:00 UTC 2010 NTP: N Log Extract: External 184.xxx.yyy.zzz, 11.842.000 packets/300s (39.473 packets/s), 5 flows/300s (0 flows/s), 0,320 GByte/300s (8 MBit/s) (184.xxx.yyy.zzz is my instance ip) How can I tell whether someone has penetrated my instance? What are the steps I should take to make sure my instance is clean and safe to use? Is there some intrusion detection techinque or log that I can use? Any information is highly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Looking for a host based network monitor solution

    - by Ole Martin Handeland
    Hi all! Problem So, my hosting company has a network usage graph for my dedicated server. It seems that one day earlier this month, my network usage suddenly spiked with several hundred megabytes transferred (usually it's in the tens, not hundreds). It was probably me, but i just can't be sure who or what it was. Question So my question is; does anyone know of any host based solution for monitoring network usage that would tell me the client's IP-address, the port/service he/she used? What I don't want I'm just guessing that someone will suggest i use nagios, munin, zabbix, cacti, mrtg - I've also looked at those, but a graph over network usage will not give me the answers I'm looking for. :-) Almost there I've already looked at a lot of monitoring solutions, and I've tried [ntop][http://www.ntop.org/], [darkstat][http://unix4lyfe.org/darkstat/] and others. Darkstat just didn't give me the answers. Although it listed a lot of statistics, and i could list the clients - it doesn't show me the network usage for a particular period. Ntop is by far the best I've seen so far - but i think it mostly shows current network usage, not the historical part. I could run apt-get upgrade and download a whole bunch of software, but not see it in the log afterwards.

    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 | 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228  | Next Page >