Search Results

Search found 11316 results on 453 pages for 'ip geolocation'.

Page 233/453 | < Previous Page | 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240  | Next Page >

  • Natting trafic from a tunnel to internet

    - by mezgani
    I'm trying to set up a GRE tunnel between a linux box and a router (LAN), and I'm having a few problems which seem to depend to my iptables configuration. Watching with tcpdump on linux box, I can see packets coming with flags GREv0, all i need right know is forwarding this data to internet, found here some trace : iptables -F iptables -X iptables -P INPUT ACCEPT iptables -P FORWARD ACCEPT iptables -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -t nat -F iptables -t nat -X iptables -t nat -P PREROUTING ACCEPT iptables -t nat -P POSTROUTING ACCEPT iptables -t nat -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -t mangle -F iptables -t mangle -X iptables -t mangle -P PREROUTING ACCEPT iptables -t mangle -P OUTPUT ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p 47 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i ppp0 -o cloud -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i cloud -o ppp0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o ppp0 -j MASQUERADE echo "1" /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward cloud Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr C4-CE-7A-2E-F2-BF-DD-C0-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 inet adr:10.3.3.3 P-t-P:10.3.3.3 Masque:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MTU:1476 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:124 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 lg file transmission:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:10416 (10.1 KiB) Table de routage IP du noyau Destination Passerelle Genmask Indic MSS Fenêtre irtt Iface 196.206.120.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0 10.3.3.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 cloud 0.0.0.0 196.206.120.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0 root@aldebaran:~# ip route 196.206.120.1 dev ppp0 proto kernel scope link src 196.206.122.46 192.168.0.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.0.18 10.3.3.0/24 dev cloud scope link default via 196.206.120.1 dev ppp0

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting wireless client-bridged networks between two DD-WRT routers?

    - by KronoS
    I recently purchased a Buffalo N600 wireless router which came with DD-WRT pre-installed. I want to take my old wireless router a Linksys WRT54GL, also with DD-WRT pre-installed, and use it as a wireless bridge for my HTPC and Blu-Ray Player in the other room. I other words, I'm trying to connect to WIRED networks via the wireless on the routers. I followed eactly the instruction from DD-WRT's manual for 'Client Bridged' however I'm still not able to connect to two routers correctly, when the encryption is enabled (WPA2-Personal Mixed) however I am able to connect the two routers when there is NO encryption. I've checked, double checked, and triple checked that EVERYTHING is the same on BOTH routers: Routers 1 & 2 Encryption: WPA2-Personal Mixed Wireless Mode: G-Only Wireless Channel: 6 Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.0 Subnet: 192.168.1.0/254 SSID: Krono$ Primary Router #1 (Buffalo N600) IP Address: 192.168.1.1 Firewall: Enables w/ defaults DCHP: Enabled as DHCP Server Secondary Router #2 (Linksys WRT54GL) IP Address: 192.168.1.2 Firewall: Disabled as per DD-WRT instructions I'm looking for any configurations that I may have missed, or settings that may need to happen in order for this work.

    Read the article

  • Virtual Machine Network Architecture, Isolating Public and Private Networks

    - by Mark
    I'm looking for some insight into best practices for network traffic isolation within a virtual environment, specifically under VMWARE ESXi. Currently I have (in testing) 1 hardware server running ESXi but i expect to expand this to multiple pieces of hardware. The current setup is as follows: 1 pfsense VM, this VM accepts all outside (WAN/internet) traffic and performs firewall/port forwarding/NAT functionality. I have multiple public IP addresses sent to the this VM that are used for access to individual servers (via per incoming IP port forwarding rules). This VM is attached to the private (virtual) network that all other VMs are on. It also manages a VPN link into the private network with some access restrictions. This isn't the perimeter firewall but rather the firewall for this virtual pool only. I have 3 VMs that communicate with each other, as well as have some public access requirements: 1 LAMP server running an eCommerce site, public internet accessible 1 accounting server, access via windows server 2008 RDS services for remote access by users 1 inventory/warehouse management server, VPN to client terminals in warehouses These servers constantly talk with each other for data synchronization. Currently all the servers are on the same subnet/virtual network and connected to the internet through the pfsense VM. The pfsense firewall uses port forwarding and NAT to allow outside access to the servers for services and for server access to the internet. My main question is this: Is there a security benefit to adding a second virtual network adapter to each server and controlling traffic such that all server to server communication is on one separate virtual network, while any access to the outside world is routed through the other network adapter, through the firewall, and on the the internet. This is the type of architecture i would use if these were all physical servers, but i'm unsure if the networks being virtual changes the way i should approach locking down this system. Thank you for any thoughts or direction to any appropriate literature.

    Read the article

  • Isolate clients on same subnet?

    - by stefan.at.wpf
    Given n (e.g. 200) clients in a /24 subnet and the following network structure: client 1 \ . \ . switch -- firewall . / client n / (in words: all clients connected to one switch and the switch connected to the firewall) Now by default, e.g. client 1 and client n can communicate directly using the switch, without any packets ever arriving the firewall. Therefore none of those packets could be filtered. However I would like to filter the packets between the clients, therefore I want to disallow any direct communication between the clients. I know this is possible using vlans, but then - according to my understanding - I would have to put all clients in their own network. However I don't even have that much IP addresses: I have about 200 clients, only a /24 subnet and all clients shall have public ip addresses, therefore I can't just create a private network for each of them (well, maybe using some NAT, but I'd like to avoid that). So, is there any way to tell the switch: Forward all packets to the firewall, don't allow direct communication between clients? Thanks for any hint!

    Read the article

  • Overriding some DNS entries in BIND for internal networks

    - by Remy Blank
    I have an internal network with a DNS server running BIND, connected to the internet through a single gateway. My domain "example.com" is managed by an external DNS provider. Some of the entries in that domain, say "host1.example.com" and "host2.example.com", as well as the top-level entry "example.com", point to the public IP address of the gateway. I would like hosts located on the internal network to resolve "host1.example.com", "host2.example.com" and "example.com" to internal IP addresses instead of that of the gateway. Other hosts like "otherhost.example.com" should still be resolved by the external DNS provider. I have succeeded in doing that for the host1 and host2 entries, by defining two single-entry zones in BIND for "host1.example.com" and "host2.example.com". However, if I add a zone for "example.com", all queries for that domain are resolved by my local DNS server, and e.g. querying "otherhost.example.com" results in an error. Is it possible to configure BIND to override only some entries of a domain, and to resolve the rest recursively?

    Read the article

  • Kickstart: Serve dynamic kickstart images via a CGI or PHP script?

    - by Stefan Lasiewski
    I'd like to kickstart a couple dozen RHEL6/SL6 servers. However, some of these servers are different and I don't want to create a new ks.cfg file for each class of server. Are there any products which can generate a Kickstart file dynamically on the fly, from a template? For example, if I append a line like this to the KERNEL: APPEND ks=http://192.168.1.100/cgi-bin/ks.cgi Then the script ks.cgi can determine what host this is (Via the MAC address), and print out Kickstart options which are appropriate for that host. I could optionally override some options by passing parameters to the script, like this: APPEND ks=http://192.168.1.100/cgi-bin/ks.cgi?NODETYPE=production&IP=192.168.2.80 After we kickstart the server, we activate Cfengine/Puppet on this system and manage the system using our favorite Configuration Management product. We're experimenting with xCAT but it is proving too cumbersome. I've looked into Cobbler, but I'm not sure it does this. Update: A roll-your-own solution is discussed in the O'Reilly book: Managing RPM-Based Systems with Kickstart and Yum, Chapter 3. Customizing Your Kickstart Install Dynamic ks.cfg, which echos some of the comments in this thread: To implement such a tool is beyond the scope of this Short Cut, but I can walk through the high-level design. Any such solution would mix a data store (the things that change) with a templating solution (the things that don’t change). The data store would hold the per-machine data, such as the IP address and hostname. You would also need a unique identifier, perhaps the hostname, such that you could pick up a given machine’s data. The data store could be a flat file, XML data, or a relational database such as PostgreSQL or MySQL. In turn, to invoke the system, you pass a machine’s unique identifier as a URL parameter. For example: boot: linux ks=http://your.kickstart.server/gen_config?host-server25 In this example, the CGI (or servlet, or whatever) generates a ks.cfg for the machine server25. But where, oh where, is the code for ks.cgi?

    Read the article

  • Provisioning DELL servers using only linux tools

    - by Krist van Besien
    We have taken delivery of a bunch off Dell Poweredge Rack servers. Unfortunately when ordering it was neglegted to ask for dhcp to be enabled in the built in iDRAC controlers... So they are all stuck on the same IP address. Which means that I'll have to go to each of them individually and configure a new IP in the console... In the future I want to avoid that. Now Dell proposes to deliver the next batch with auto discovery enabled. As I understand this means that when the machine wakes up for the first time the iDRAC will request a DHCP address. The DHCP server then supposedly also provides a "provisioning" server, that provides it with a username and password, and a configuration to be applied. This would allow us to for example configure things like RAID automatically. However, I can't seem to find a way to set up such a provisioning server that does not involve setting up a windows machine. I want to use Linux tools exclusively. Is there a way to do this? I want to just rack servers, switch them on, and then do everything remotely. And that using only linux tools?

    Read the article

  • Configure one IIS site to handle two separate SSL certificates using external Load Balancing or SSL Acceleration Servers

    - by bmccleary
    I have one web application on our server that needs to be referenced by two different domain names, both of which have their own SSL certificates. The application is exactly the same for both domains, but we have to keep the two domain names for legal reasons. The problem is that, since both domains need to have their own SSL certificate, that inside of our IIS 7.5 configuration we have to have two separate IIS applications (both pointing to the same physical location) with their own unique IP address and SSL certificate installed. Now, I know that, due to the nature of SSL communications, that this is by design and that you can't assign more than one SSL certificate per IP address and domain name. My question is… is there any way around this limitation and keep one web application in IIS and have it service two SSL certificates based on host name? I know that with the basic IIS configuration that this is not possible, but I was thinking that with some sort of combination of external load balancing and/or SSL acceleration servers/services that we could have these servers process the SSL request and leave IIS clean to have one single application. I am not familiar at all with these technologies, hence the reason I am asking if it is theoretically possible. If not, does anyone else know how to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • mount error 5 = Input/output error

    - by alharaka
    I am running out of ideas. After a long period of testing this morning, I cannot seem to get this to work, and I have no idea why. I want to mount a Windows SMB/CIFS share with a Debian 5.0.4 VM, and it is not cooperating. This the command I am using. debianvm:/home/me# whoami root debianvm:/home/me# smbclient --version Version 3.2.5 debianvm:/home/me# mount -t cifs //hostname.domain.tld/share /mnt/hostname.domain.tld/share --verbose -o user=SUBADDOMAIN.ADDOMAIN.DOMAIN.TLD/username mount.cifs kernel mount options: unc=//hostname.domain.tld\share,ip=10.212.15.53,domain=SUBADDOMAIN.ADDOMAIN.DOMAIN.TLD,ver=1,rw,user=username,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,pass=*********mount error 5 = Input/output error Refer to the mount.cifs(8) manual page (e.g.man mount.cifs) debianvm:/home/me# The word on the nets has not been very specific, and unfortunately it is almost always environment-specific. I receive no authentication errors. I have tried mount -t smbfs and mount -t cifs, along with smbmount and such. I get the same error before. I doubt it is a problem with DNS resolution, because logging shows the correct IP address. dmesg | tail -f no longer shows authentication errors when I format the domain and username accordingly. I have played a little with iocharset=utf8, file_mode, and dir_mode as described here. That did not help either. I have also tried ntlm and ntlmv2 assuming it might be a minimum auth method problem, but not forcing sec=ntlmv2 it can still authenticate without errors anymore. smbclient -L hostname.domain.tld -W SUBADDOMAIN.ADDOMAIN.DOMAIN.TLD -U username correctly lists all the shares and shows it as the following. Domain=[SUBADDOMAIN] OS=[Windows 5.0] Server=[Windows 2000 LAN Manager] Sharename Type Comment --------- ---- ------- IPC$ IPC Remote IPC ETC$ Disk Remote Administration C$ Disk Remote Administration Share Disk Connection to hostname.domain.tld failed (Error NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_REFUSED) NetBIOS over TCP disabled -- no workgroup available I find the last line intriguing/alarming. Does anyone have any pointers!? Maybe I misread the effin manual.

    Read the article

  • Amazon EC2 instance missing Network Interface

    - by Sergiks
    I am running Linux on a t1.micro instance at Amazon EC2. Once I noticed bruteforce ssh login attemtps from a certain IP, after litle Googling I issued the two following commands (other ip): iptables -A INPUT -s 202.54.20.22 -j DROP iptables -A OUTPUT -d 202.54.20.22 -j DROP Either this, or maybe some other actions like yum upgrade perhaps, caused the follwing fiasco: after rebooting the server, it came up without the Network Interface! I only can connect to it through AWS Management Console JAVA ssh client - via local 10.x.x.x address. Console's Attach Network Interface as well as Detach.. are greyed out for this instance. Network Interfaces item at the left does not offer any Subnets to choose from, to create a new N.I. Please advice, how can I recreate a Network Interface for the instance? Upd. The instance is not accessible from outside: cannot be pinged, SSH'ed or connected by HTTP on port 80. Here's the ifconfig output: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 12:31:39:0A:5E:06 inet addr:10.211.93.240 Bcast:10.211.93.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::1031:39ff:fe0a:5e06/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1426 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1371 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:152085 (148.5 KiB) TX bytes:208852 (203.9 KiB) Interrupt:25 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b) What is also unusual: a new micro instance I created from scratch, with no relation to the troubled one, was not pingable too.

    Read the article

  • Recommendation on remote access setup for accessing customer systems

    - by gregmac
    I'm looking for a product recommendation (open or commercial) that will allow remote access to customer sites for tech support purposes. We need to be able to gain access to help troubleshoot problems on servers. Currently end up using anything from RDP on public IP, to various VPNs that clients happen to have, to webex-type sessions that require lots of interaction from both sides to get things working. This often means a problem that could take 10 minutes to solve takes an extra 30+ minutes messing around trying to get a connection up. There are multiple customer sites, which should NOT have access to each other. At each site, there is anywhere from 1 to 8 servers (Windows 2003 or 2008) that need to be accessed. Support connection to machines even if they're behind a firewall/router with no public IP Be able to selectively allow/deny access from customer site. Customer site should not be able to connect outbound to anywhere else (our systems, or other customer sites) Support multiple users from our end If not a VPN connection (where RDP could be used over top), should support: Remote desktop access, including copy/paste File transfers Preferably would have some way to list all remote systems, showing online/offline. Anyone have any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Solaris 10 invalid ARP requests from 0.0.0.0? Link up/down every hour or 2

    - by JWD
    The guys at the data center where I'm hosting a server running Solaris 10 are telling me that my server is making a lot of invalid arp requests. This is an example of a portion of what was sent to me from the logs (with Mac addresses and IP addresses changed). [mymacaddress]/0.0.0.0/0000.0000.0000/[myipaddress]/[Datestamp]) It's being logged every hour. I don't see anything in the arp tables (arp -a) or routing tables (netstat -r) and I don't see anything relating to 0.0.0.0 when snoping the arp requests. The only place I see any reference to 0.0.0.0 is if I do netstat -a for the SCTP SCTP: Local Address Remote Address Swind Send-Q Rwind Recv-Q StrsI/O State ------------------------------- ------------------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ----------- 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 102400 0 32/32 CLOSED But not really sure what that means. Doesn't seem like I can disable SCTP. There are some tunable SCTP parameters but it's not something I'm familiar with. Do I have to add changes to /etc/system? Looks like sctp_heartbeat_interval might be what I need to change? If it makes any difference, I have a few solaris zones running on this server, each with their own IP address on a virtual interface. eth0:0, eth0:1, etc. Does anyone have any idea what might be causing this and how to stop it? I think the switch I'm connected to doesn't like it and momentarily drops the connection. Is there anyway to at least block those requests using ipfilter or something else? Update: This was happening more frequently but now it seems to be happening roughly every hour or every two hours. It's not consistent. I tried setting setting the link speed and duplex to match the switch port and that seemed to make it stop happening for a few hours but then it started again.

    Read the article

  • filter / directing URLs coming onto a network

    - by Jon
    Hi all, I an not sure if this is possible or not but what i would like to do is as follows: I have one IP address (dynamic using zoneedit.com to keep it upto date). I have one webserver running my main site which is an Ubuntu machine running Apache. I also have a windows 2008 server running another site. Just to confuse things I also run part of my Apache site on the windows server, currently using proxypassreverse to get the information from it. So it looks something like this: IP 1.2.3.4 maps to mydomain.com as well as myotherdomain.com All requests that come into port 80 are forwarded to the Apache box and I use Virtualhost settings to proxy the windows sites where needed. so mydomain.com is an Apache site mydomain.com/mywindowssection is the Apache server using proxypassreverse to get part of the site from the Windows server myotherdomain.com uses Apache and proxypassreverse to get the whole site. What I would like to be able to do is forward all http requests that come into my network to one machine that figures out who should be serving that content. so: mydomain.com would go to the Apache machine myotherdomain.com would go the windows machine. I am just in the process of setting up an Astaro gateway (never done this before so taking a while to configure) as my firewall, dns, dhcp etc, don't know if this can handle it. I have the capacity to run a VM on the network if a seperate box would be needed for this process as well. Thanks for any and all feedback. Jon

    Read the article

  • My home box as my own host?

    - by Majid
    Hi all, I have a 512 kb/s DSL service at home. I do not have a static IP but I can get one if I pay some extra to my ISP. Now, if I get the static IP, can I make my home box act as my internet host? What else do I need? Thanks P.S. I know that if at all possible, the site I make available this way might be slow, that is alright, my question is if it is possible at all. Edit: I need this for very small traffic. I am a php developer and for my projects I am often asked to provide a demo. I currently use a free hosting for this purpose but it is down most of the time and support is non-existent. So I thought to set-up my home computer as my test server. With this please note that: I will only occasionally have 'visitors' and that will be one or possibly two visitors at any time. These demos, are to showcase functionality, so no big images are served and page views will normally generate under 100KB of traffic.

    Read the article

  • TCPDump and IPTables DROP by string

    - by Tiffany Walker
    by using tcpdump -nlASX -s 0 -vvv port 80 I get something like: 14:58:55.121160 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 49764, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 1480) 206.72.206.58.http > 2.187.196.7.4624: Flags [.], cksum 0x6900 (incorrect -> 0xcd18), seq 1672149449:1672150889, ack 4202197968, win 15340, length 1440 0x0000: 4500 05c8 c264 4000 4006 0f86 ce48 ce3a E....d@[email protected].: 0x0010: 02bb c407 0050 1210 63aa f9c9 fa78 73d0 .....P..c....xs. 0x0020: 5010 3bec 6900 0000 0f29 95cc fac4 2854 P.;.i....)....(T 0x0030: c0e7 3384 e89a 74fa 8d8c a069 f93f fc40 ..3...t....i.?.@ 0x0040: 1561 af61 1cf3 0d9c 3460 aa23 0b54 aac0 .a.a....4`.#.T.. 0x0050: 5090 ced1 b7bf 8857 c476 e1c0 8814 81ed P......W.v...... 0x0060: 9e85 87e8 d693 b637 bd3a 56ef c5fa 77e8 .......7.:V...w. 0x0070: 3035 743a 283e 89c7 ced8 c7c1 cff9 6ca3 05t:(>........l. 0x0080: 5f3f 0162 ebf1 419e c410 7180 7cd0 29e1 _?.b..A...q.|.). 0x0090: fec9 c708 0f01 9b2f a96b 20fe b95a 31cf ......./.k...Z1. 0x00a0: 8166 3612 bac9 4e8d 7087 4974 0063 1270 .f6...N.p.It.c.p What do I pull to use IPTables to block via string. Or is there a better way to block attacks that have something in common? Question is: Can I pick any piece from that IP packet and call it a string? iptables -A INPUT -m string --alog bm --string attack_string -j DROP In other words: In some cases I can ban with TTL=xxx and use that should an attack have the same TTL. Sure it will block some legit packets but if it means keeping the box up it works till the attack goes away but I would like to LEARN how to FIND other common things in a packet to block with IPTables

    Read the article

  • Problem routing between directly connected Subnets w/ ASA-5510

    - by Zephyr Pellerin
    This is an issue I've been struggling with for quite some time, with a seemingly simple answer (Aren't all IT problems?). And that is the problem of passing traffic between two directly connected subnets with an ASA While I'm aware that best practice is to have Internet - Firewall - Router, in many cases this isn't possible. For example, In have an ASA with two interfaces, named OutsideNetwork (10.19.200.3/24) and InternalNetwork (10.19.4.254/24). You'd expect Outside to be able to get to, say, 10.19.4.1, or at LEAST 10.19.4.254, but pinging the interface gives only bad news. Result of the command: "ping OutsideNetwork 10.19.4.254" Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.19.4.254, timeout is 2 seconds: ????? Success rate is 0 percent (0/5) Naturally, you'd assume that you could add a static route, to no avail. [ERROR] route Outsidenetwork 10.19.4.0 255.255.255.0 10.19.4.254 1 Cannot add route, connected route exists At this point, you might gander if its a NAT or Access list problem. access-list Outsidenetwork_access_in extended permit ip any any access-list Internalnetwork_access_in extended permit ip any any There is no dynamic nat (or static nat for that matter), and Unnatted traffic is permitted. When I try pinging the above address (10.19.4.254 from Outsidenetwork), I get this error message from level 0 logging (debugging). Routing failed to locate next hop for icmp from NP Identity Ifc:10.19.200.3/0 to Outsidenetwork:10.19.4.1/0 This led me to set same-security traffic permit, and assigned the same, lesser and greater security numbers between the two interfaces. Am I overlooking something obvious? Is there a command to set static routes that are classified higher than connected routes?

    Read the article

  • Nginx > Varnish > Gunicorn Error Too many Redirections

    - by kollo
    I have the following config: Nginx Varnish Gunicorn Django I want to cache 2 versions of same site (mobile & web) with Varnish. Gunicorn : WEB: gunicorn_django --bind 127.0.0.1:8181 MOBILE: gunicorn_django --bind 127.0.0.1:8182 Nginx: WEB: server { listen 80; server_name www.mysite.com; location / { proxy_pass http://127.0.0.1:8282; # pass to Varnish proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; } } MOBILE: server { listen 80; server_name m.mysite.com; location / { proxy_pass http://127.0.0.1:8282; # pass to Varnish proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; } } Varnish: default.vcl backend mobile_mysite { .host = "127.0.0.1"; .port = "8182"; } backend mysite { .host = "127.0.0.1"; .port = "8181"; } sub vcl_recv { if (req.http.host ~ "(?i)^(m.)?mysite.com$") { set req.http.host = "m.mysite.com"; set req.backend = mobile_mysite; }elsif (req.http.host ~ "(?i)^(www.)?mysite.com$") { set req.http.host = "mysite.com"; set req.backend = mysite; } if (req.url ~ ".*/static") { /* do not cache static content */ return (pass); } } The problem: On Nginx if I setup Mobile version with Varnish (port 8282) and let WEB version with Gunicorn( port 8181), MOBILE is cached by varnish, both WEB & MOBILE works but WEB is not cached. If I set the proxy_pass of WEB version to Varnish (port 8282) and restart Nginx I got an error when accessing web version (www.mysite.com) "Too many redirections" . I Think my problem come from the Varnish config file, as the site works well if I setup Nginx proxy_pass to Gunicorn ports (MOBILE & WEB).

    Read the article

  • Detecting login credentials abuse

    Greetings. I am the webmaster for a small, growing industrial association. Soon, I will have to implement a restricted, members-only section for the website. The problem is that our organization membership both includes big companies as well as amateur “clubs” (it's a relatively new industry…). It is clear that those clubs will share the login ID they will use to log onto our website. The problem is to detect whether one of their members will share the login credentials with people who would not normally supposed to be accessing the website (there is no objection for such a club to have all it’s members get on the website). I have thought about logging along with each sign-on the IP address as well as the OS and the browser used; if the OS/Browser stays constant and there are no more than, say, 10 different IP addresses, the account is clearly used by very few different computers. But if there are 50 OS/Browser combination and 150 different IPs, the credentials have obviously been disseminated far, and there would be then cause for action, such as modifying the password. Of course, it is extremely annoying when your password is being unilaterally changed. So, for this problem, I thought about allowing the “clubs” to manage their own list of sub-accounts, and therefore if abuse is suspected, the user responsible would be easily pinned-down, and this “sub-member” alone would face the annoyance of a password change. Question: What potential problems would anyone see with such an approach?

    Read the article

  • How to make a static route when using two internet connections?

    - by webmasters
    I have asked a question here on how to choose which applications will use a 3G internet connection and which applications will use the LAN. User harrymc gave a very complete and interesting answer, pointing that this is possible using static routes for certain websites. Now, lets say I want to access google.com only through my 3G internet connection. How would that static root look like? google has the IP: 173.194.39.180 here is a print of my route table, the 3G Modem has the IP: 10.81.132.96 +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ IPv4 Route Table ¦ ¦ =========================================================================== ¦ ¦ Active Routes: ¦ ¦ Network Destination Netmask Gateway Interface Metric ¦ ¦ 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.2.1 192.168.2.102 20 ¦ ¦ 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.81.132.97 10.81.132.111 286 ¦ ¦ 10.81.132.96 255.255.255.224 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 ¦ ¦ 10.81.132.111 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 ¦ ¦ 10.81.132.127 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 ¦ ¦ 127.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 ¦ ¦ 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 ¦ ¦ 127.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 ¦ ¦ 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 ¦ ¦ 192.168.2.102 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 ¦ ¦ 192.168.2.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 ¦ ¦ 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 ¦ ¦ 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 ¦ ¦ 224.0.0.0 240.0.0.0 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 ¦ ¦ 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 127.0.0.1 306 ¦ ¦ 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 192.168.2.102 276 ¦ ¦ 255.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 On-link 10.81.132.111 286 ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

    Read the article

  • New Static Website with Hosted DNS alternating 502, 503 and Page Does Not Exist Errors

    - by Dave
    This has become an increasingly frustrating ordeal. I'm mostly a web developer, so forgive me if I am using improper terminology here. I have a client that had purchased a domain at JustHost. We built him a website and have it on our own server space. Now, I'm mostly used to dealing with godaddy and it is simple enough to manage dns records and point the A record to our server IP, where Apache on our end deals with the domains via name-based virtual hosts. But for some reason, in setting this up with JustHost, when attempting to go to the domain name, I either get a 502 or 503 error or "webpage does not exist". Now, I know that the basic functionality of the webpage must be working because I can access the the index etc straight through my servers www data (IE [server-ip]/website_folder). I was on the phone with technical support for over three hours yesterday with justhost and the best I could get was "That's really weird..." I've checked my logs and there doesn't seem to be anything coming through to my end. Does anybody have an idea of whats going on here? I would love for it to be a problem on my end, because justhost doesn't seem capable of helping further. Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks. I forgot to mention that we have several other sites up and running and completely accessible.

    Read the article

  • Bouncing between a 502 and 503 error

    - by Dave
    This has become an increasingly frustrating ordeal. I'm mostly a web developer, so forgive me if I am using improper terminology here. I have a client that had purchased a domain at JustHost. We built him a website and have it on our own server space. Now, I'm mostly used to dealing with godaddy and it is simple enough to manage dns records and point the A record to our server IP, where Apache on our end deals with the domains via name-based virtual hosts. But for some reason, in setting this up with JustHost, when attempting to go to the domain name, I either get a 502 or 503 error or "webpage does not exist". Now, I know that the basic functionality of the webpage must be working because I can access the the index etc straight through my servers www data (IE [server-ip]/website_folder). I was on the phone with technical support for over three hours yesterday with justhost and the best I could get was "That's really weird..." I've checked my logs and there doesn't seem to be anything coming through to my end. Does anybody have an idea of whats going on here? I would love for it to be a problem on my end, because justhost doesn't seem capable of helping further. Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks. I forgot to mention that we have several other sites up and running and completely accessible.

    Read the article

  • SSL Connection Error

    - by toffee.beanns
    I have purchased a comodo ssl cert and have submitted the Certificate Signing Request (CSR) generated by my server to the ssl management site. With the 3 files it returned me with, - AddTrustExternalCARoot.crt - PositiveSSLCA2.crt - www_mydomainname_com.crt I have uploaded them to my /etc/ssl/ssl-certs folder and have updated my virtual host in my sites-available and restarted accordingly. NameVirtualHost 107.167.120.195:80 #sample ip address NameVirtualHost 107.167.120.195:443 #sample ip address ......... #normal http virtual host (working well) <VirtualHost 107.167.120.195:443> ServerAdmin [email protected] ServerName mydomainname.com ServerAlias www.mydomainname.com DocumentRoot /var/www/mydomainname SSLEngine on SSLCertificateFile /etc/ssl/ssl-certs/www_mydomainname.com.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/ssl/ssl-certs/server.key SSLCertificateChainFile /etc/ssl/ssl-certs/PositiveSSLCA2.crt </VirtualHost> I have also enabled ran 'a2enmod ssl' and it's enabled. This is the error I get when I access the webpage https in chrome: SSL connection error Error code: ERR_SSL_PROTOCOL_ERROR Unable to make a secure connection to the server. This may be a problem with the server, or it may be requiring a client authentication certificate that you don't have. I have also checked out my apache log files and there seems to be an error saying that the Common Name (CN) is not the same as the server. RSA server certificate CommonName (CN) `www.mydomainname.com' does NOT match server name!? and Invalid method in request \x16\x03\x01 What should I do?

    Read the article

  • How does Tunlr work?

    - by gravyface
    For those of you not in the US, Tunlr uses DNS witchcraft to allow you to access US-only (and UK-only stuff like BBC radio online) services and Websites like Hulu.com, etc. without using traditional methods like a VPN or Web proxy. From their FAQ: Tunlr does not provide a virtual private network (VPN). Tunlr is a DNS (domain name system) unblocking service. We’re using sophisticated technologies (a.k.a. the Tunlr Secret Sauce ©) to re-adress certain data envelopes, tricking the receiver into thinking the envelope originated from within the U.S. For these data envelopes, Tunlr is transparently creating a network tunnel from your location to our U.S.-based servers. Any data that’s not directly related to the video or music content providers which Tunlr supports is not only left untouched, it’s also not even routed through Tunlr. In order to use Tunlr, you will have to change the DNS address. See Get started for more information. I can't really wrap my head around how this works; I have always assumed that these services performed a geolocation lookup via your client IP. Just really curious as to how this works. EDIT 2 I believe they're only proxying the initial geo check and then modifying the data stream request to include your real IP address so that the streaming is direct, not proxied.

    Read the article

  • Apache httpd workers retry

    - by David Newcomb
    I have an Apache httpd web server running mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer. The whole of /somedir is sent to 2 worker machines which service the requests using the round robin scheduler. Each worker machine is running IIS but I don't think that is important. I can demonstrate the load balancer working by repeatedly requesting a single page which contains the IP address of the machine and can see that it switches from one to the other in a predictable round robin fashion. If I switch off one of the IIS servers and start requesting the same page then each page only contains the IP address of the machine that is up. However, if I start IIS and don't run my IIS application then /somedir returns 500 (as it should). I've added 500 to the failonstatus (Apache 2.4) so when it hits the error Apache places the worker machine into error state. Apache still returns the proxy error to the client though. How can I make Apache catch the proxy failure and retry using a different worker in the same way that a connection failure does. Update There is almost the same question asked in StackOverflow so joining them together. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11083707/httpd-mod-proxy-balancer-failover-failonstatus-transperant-switching

    Read the article

  • My URL has been identified as a phishing site

    - by user2118559
    Some months before ordered VPS at Ramnode According to tutorial (ZPanelCP on CentOS 6.4) http://www.zvps.co.uk/zpanelcp/centos-6 Installed CentOS and ZPanel) Today received email We are requesting that you secure and investigate the phishing website identified below. This URL has been identified as a phishing site and is currently involved in identity theft activities. URL: hxxp://111.11.111.111/www.connet-itunes.fr/iTunesConnect.woasp/ //IP is modified (not real) This site is being used to display false or spoofed content in an apparent effort to steal personal and financial information. This matter is URGENT. We believe that individuals are being falsely directed to this page and may be persuaded into divulging personal information to a criminal, if the content is not immediately disabled. Trying to understand. Some hacker hacked VPS, placed some file (?) with content that redirects to www.connet-itunes.fr/iTunesConnect.woasp? Then questions 1) how can I find the file? Where it may be located? url is URL: hxxp://111.11.111.111/ IP address, not domain name 2) What to do to protect VPS (with CentOS)? Any tutorial? Where may be security problem? I mean may be someone faced something similar....

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240  | Next Page >