Search Results

Search found 22139 results on 886 pages for 'security testing'.

Page 276/886 | < Previous Page | 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283  | Next Page >

  • How to inject dependencies into a custom UserNamePasswordValidator in WCF?

    - by Dannerbo
    I'm using a UserNamePasswordValidator in WCF along with Unity for my dependency injection, but since WCF creates the instance of the UserNamePasswordValidator, I cannot inject my container into the class. So how would one go about this? The simplest solution I can think of is to create a static proxy/wrapper class around a static instance of a UnityContainer, which exposes all the same methods... This way, any class can access the container, and I don't need to inject it everywhere. So I could just do UnityContainerWrapper.Resolve() anywhere in code. So basically this solution solves 2 problems for me, I can use it in classes that I'm not creating an instance of, and I can use it anywhere without having to inject the container into a bunch of classes. The only downside I can think of is that I'm now potentially exposing my container to a bunch of classes that wouldn't of had access to the container before. Not really sure if this is even a problem though?

    Read the article

  • .NET How would I build a DAL to meet my requirments?

    - by Jonno
    Assuming that I must deploy an asp.net app over the following 3 servers: 1) DB - not public 2) 'middle' - not public 3) Web server - public I am not allowed to connect from the web server to the DB directly. I must pass through 'middle' - this is purely to slow down an attacker if they breached the web server. All db access is via stored procedures. No table access. I simply want to provide the web server with a ado dataset (I know many will dislike this, but this is the requirement). Using asmx web services - it works, but XML serialisation is slow and it's an extra set of code to maintain and deploy. Using a ssh/vpn tunnel so that the one connects to the db 'via' the middle server, seems to remove any possible benefit of maintaining 'middle'. Using WCF binary/tcp removes the XML problem, but still there is extra code. Is there an approach that provides the ease of ssh/vpn, but the potential benefit of having the dal on the middle server? Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • Reading Windows ACLs from Java

    - by Matt Sheppard
    From within a Java program, I want to be able to list out the Windows users and groups who have permission to read a given file. Obviously Java has no built-in ability to read the Windows ACL information out, so I'm looking for other solutions. Are there any third party libraries available which can provide direct access to the ACL information for a Windows file? Failing that, maybe running cacls and capturing and then processing the output would be a reasonable temporary solution - Is the output format of cacls thoroughly documented anywhere, and is it likely to change between versions of Windows?

    Read the article

  • Framework for adding users/groups/permissions functionality to an application (possibly integrating

    - by vfilby
    I am looking to see if there is a good library or framework that I can use to simplify adding user/group/permission management to a .Net application (4.0 VS2010). If the framework can work on it's own or integrate with Active Directory that would be a huge bonus. So far I have found Visual Guard, if you have any experience using Visual Guard to provide user/group/permission functionality I definitely want to hear your feedback on how you liked working with it, pitfalls and benefits

    Read the article

  • Prevent query string manipulation by adding a hash?

    - by saille
    To protect a web application from query string manipulation, I was considering adding a query string parameter to every url which stores a SHA1 hash of all the other query string parameters & values, then validating against the hash on every request. Does this method provide strong protection against user manipulation of query string values? Are there any other downsides/side-effects to doing this? I am not particularly concerned about the 'ugly' urls for this private web application. Url's will still be 'bookmarkable' as the hash will always be the same for the same query string arguments. This is an ASP.NET application.

    Read the article

  • Create x509 certificate with openssl/makecert tool

    - by Zé Carlos
    I'm creating a x509 certificate using makecert with the following parameters: makecert -r -pe -n "CN=Client" -ss MyApp I want to use this certificate to encrypt and decrypt data with RSA algoritm. I look to generated certificate in windows certificate store and everything seems ok (It has a private key, public key is a RSA key with 1024 bits and so on..) Now i use this C# code to encrypt data: X509Store store = new X509Store("MyApp", StoreLocation.CurrentUser); store.Open(OpenFlags.ReadOnly); X509Certificate2Collection certs = store.Certificates.Find(X509FindType.FindBySubjectName, "Client", false); X509Certificate2 _x509 = certs[0]; using (RSACryptoServiceProvider rsa = (RSACryptoServiceProvider)_x509.PrivateKey) { byte[] dataToEncrypt = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes("hello"); _encryptedData = rsa.Encrypt(dataToEncrypt, true); } When executing the Encrypt method, i receive a CryptographicException with message "Bad key". I think the code is fine. Probably i'm not creating the certificate properly. Any comments? Thanks ---------------- EDIT -------------- If anyone know how to create the certificate using OpenSsl, its also a valid answer for me.

    Read the article

  • is that possible to crack Private key with Decrypted message and public key?

    - by matt clarck
    for example company B send an encrypted email with company A's public key (RSA/PGP/SSH/openSSL/...) the employer receive the encrypted email and send it to his boss who have the private key to decrypt message. the boss give decrypted email back to employer to work on it. question is can employer compare encrypted email with decrypted version and find out what is private key ? if it is possible then is there anyway to protect cracking private key from decrypted messages and comparing with encrypted messages/public key ?

    Read the article

  • How to keep multiple connectionString passwords safe, separate, and easy to deploy?

    - by Funka
    I know there are plenty of questions here already about this topic (I've read through as many as I could find), but I haven't yet been able to figure out how best to satisfy my particular criteria. Here are the goals: The ASP.NET application will run on a few different web servers, including localhost workstations for development. This means encrypting web.config using a machine key is out. The application will decide which connection string to use based on the server name (using a switch statement). For example, "localhost" and "dev.example.com" will use the DevDatabaseConnectionString, "test.example.com" will use the TestDatabaseConnectionString, and "www.example.com" will use the ProdDatabaseConnectionString, for example. Ideally, the exact same executables and web.config should be able to run on any of these environments, without needing to tailor or configure each environment separately every time that we deploy (something that seems like it would be easy to forget/mess up one day during a deployment, which is why we moved away from having just one connectionstring that has to be changed on each target). Deployment is currently accomplished via FTP. We will not have command-line access to the production web server. This means using aspnet_regiis.exe is out. (I could run on localhost, however, if this would still work.) We would prefer to not have to recompile the application whenever a password changes, so using web.config (or db.config or whatever) seems to make the most sense. A developer should not be able to decrypt the production database password. If a developer checks the source code out onto their localhost laptop (which would determine that it should be using the DevDatabaseConnectionString, remember?) and the laptop gets lost or stolen, it should not be possible to get at the other connection strings. Thus, having a single RSA private key to un-encrypt all three passwords cannot be considered. (Contrary to #3 above, it does seem like we'd need to have three separate key files if we went this route; these could be installed once per machine, and should the wrong key file get deployed to the wrong server, the worst that should happen is that the app can't decrypt anything---and not allow the wrong host to access the wrong database!) I know this is probably a subjective question (asking for a "best" way to do something), but given the criteria I've mentioned, I'm hoping that a single best answer will indeed arise. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Is it inmoral to put a captcha on a login form?

    - by azkotoki
    In a recent project I put a captcha test on a login form, in order to stop possible brute force attacks. The inmediate reaction of other coworkers was a request to remove it, saying that it was innapropiate for that purpose, and that it was quite exotic to see a captcha in that place. I've seen captcha images on signup, contact, password recovery forms, etc. So I personally don't see innapropiate to put a captcha also on a place like that. Well, it obviously burns down usability a little bit, but it's a matter of time and getting used to it. With the lack of a captcha test, one would have to put some sort of blacklist / account locking mechanism, which also has some drawbacks. Is it a good choice for you? Am I getting somewhat captcha-aholic and need some sort of group therapy? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • What information should I log if I detect that my site is under attack?

    - by Abe Miessler
    In the code below if I get into the if statement I can safely say my site is under attack. What information is it a good idea to log? Any recommendations on actions that can be taken to minimize the damage at this point? protected void btn_Search_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { if(tb_SearchBox.Text.Length > tb_SearchBox.MaxLength) { //What should i log? //What actions should I take? } //Otherwise search }

    Read the article

  • RESTFul, statelesness and sessions

    - by Per Arneng
    RESTFul service has a rule that it should be stateless. By beeing that it does not allow a session to be created and maintained by sending a session key between the client and the server and then holding a session state on the server. If i look at the definition in wikipedia of stateless server http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateless_server "A stateless server is a server that treats each request as an independent transaction that is unrelated to any previous request" It states that it should be unrelated to any previous request. In practice this means that any type of authentication will be comparing the credentials of a user to a state on the server that was created by a previous operation. So a service called login is related to and dependent on the state that has been created by previous requests (ex: create_user and/or change_password). In my view you are breaking statelessnes by doing authentication. My point is that people are complaining about having sessions in RESTFul is breaking statelesness but doing authentication is also breaking the same rule. What do you think?

    Read the article

  • X.509 certificate based authentication with OpenSSL (without using sockets)

    - by hartem
    Hi, Is there an alternative in OpenSSL to SSL_set_connect_state()/SSL_set_accept_state() for X.509 certificate based authentication? The problem is that in my application the client and server do not communicate using sockets, and the establishment of direct connection between them is not possible. So what I want from OpenSSL is to 'expose' the intermediate SSL context establishment messages which I would then convey to the party at the other end. Thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • How does XmlSiteMapProvider check user to be in specified role?

    - by abatishchev
    I roll my own SiteMapProvider inheriting System.Web.XmlSiteMapProvider. I want to override logic of checking user to be in a role specified in siteMapNode's property roles: <siteMapNode url="Add.aspx?type=user" title="Add user" roles="admin" /> How can I do that? Which class's member does XmlSiteMapProvider call to check that if securityTrimmingEnabled="true"?

    Read the article

  • Invoke an action that is using ASP.NET MVC [Authorize] from outside the application

    - by Nate Bross
    Is this possible? I'd like to expose a URL (action) such as http://mysever/myapp/UpdateHeartbeat/. In my MVC application it looks like [Authorize] [AcceptsVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult UpdateHeartbeat() { // update date in DB to DateTime.Now } Now, in my MVC application the user has logged in via FORMS authentication and they can execute that action to their hearts content. What I want to do, is hit that URL progromatically (as part of an API that I wouldl like to build) -- is there a way I can do that without removing the [Authorize] attribute and adding username/password as parameters to the POST?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Authorize by Group

    - by Jimmo
    I have what seems like a common issue with SaaS applications, but have not seen this question on here anywhere. I am using ASP.NET MVC with Forms Authentication. I have implemented a custom membership provider to handle logic, but have one issue (perhaps the issue is in my mental picture of the system). As with many SaaS apps, Customers create accounts and use the app in a way that looks like they are the only ones present (they only see their items, users, etc.) In reality, there are generic controllers and views presenting data depending on their account. When calling something like ValidateUser, I have access to their affiliation in the User object - what I don't have is the context of the request to which to compare it. As an example, One company called ABC goes to abc.mysite.com Another company called XYZ goes to xyz.mysite.com When an ABC user calls http://abc.mysite.com/product/edit/12 I have an [Authorize] attribute on the Edit method in the ProductController to make sure he is signed in and has sufficient permission to do so. If that same ABC user tried to access http://xyz.mysite.com/product/edit/12 I would not want to validate him in the context of that call. In the ValidateUser of the MembershipProvider, I have the information about the user, but not about the request. I can tell that the user is from ABC, but I cannot tell that the request is for XYZ at that point in the code. How should I resolve this?

    Read the article

  • Debate: Can a HTTPS connection be hijacked with a man-in-the-middle kind of attack?

    - by Iulian Serbanoiu
    Hi, I'm wondering if the company I work for can see what I'm doing when I'm using a HTTPS connection - gmail for example. My case: I'm using gmail from work but I need to enter a password for a proxy when accesing the first web page - the password is asked inside the browser. I receive from the proxy a certificate which I must accept in order to make the Internet connection work. So the question is: Can https data exchange, between gmail and browser, be tracked? Thanks, Iulian

    Read the article

  • How does XmlSiteMapProvider check user to be in specific role?

    - by abatishchev
    I roll my own SiteMapProvider inheriting System.Web.XmlSiteMapProvider. I want to override logic of checking user to be in a role specified in siteMapNode's property roles: <siteMapNode url="Add.aspx?type=user" title="Add user" roles="admin" /> How can I do that? Which class's member does XmlSiteMapProvider call to check that if securityTrimmingEnabled="true"?

    Read the article

  • How to process AJAX requests more securely in PHP?

    - by animuson
    Ok, so I want to send AJAX requests to my website from my Flash games to process data, but I don't want people downloading them, decompiling them, then sending fake requests to be processed, so I'm trying to figure out the most secure way to process in the PHP files. My first idea was to use Apache's built in Authorization module to require a username and password to access the pages on a separate subdomain of my website, but then you'd have to include that username and password in the AJAX request anyway so that seems kind of pointless to even try. My current option looks pretty promising but I want to make sure it will work. Basically it just checks the IP address being sent using REMOTE_ADDR to make sure it's the IP address that my server runs on. <? $allowed = new Array("64.120.211.89", "64.120.211.90"); if (!in_array($_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR'], $allowed)) header("HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden"); ?> Both of those IP addresses point to my server. Things I'm worried about: 1) If I send a request from Flash/ActionScript, will that affect the IP address in any way? 2) Is it possible for malicious users to change the IP address that is being sent with REMOTE_ADDR to one of my IP addresses? Any other ways you would suggest that might be more secure?

    Read the article

  • How can I prevent users from taking screenshots of my application window?

    - by Midday
    What are some methods to prevent screenshots from being taken, if any? I've considered setting the "Print Screen" button as a hotkey, which makes the window fuzzy. However, there would be the problem of other 3rd party screenshot tools. How can I prevent their use? Why would I want such a thing? The idea is to create a chat client which you can't share the chatted information with others, not by copy & paste nor by print screen... Looking for general ideas or suggestions rather than actual code.

    Read the article

  • Prevent Cross-site request forgery - Never Rely on The SessionID Sent to Your Server in The Cookie H

    - by Yan Cheng CHEOK
    I am reading the tutorial at http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit-incubator/wiki/LoginSecurityFAQ It states Remember - you must never rely on the sessionID sent to your server in the cookie header ; look only at the sessionID that your GWT app sends explicitly in the payload of messages to your server. Is it use to prevent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-site_request_forgery#Example_and_characteristics With this mythology, is it sufficient enough to prevent to above attack?

    Read the article

  • How to lock non-browser clients from submitting a request?

    - by Thomas Kohl
    I want to block non-browser clients from accessing certain pages / successfully making a request. The website content is served to authenticated users. What happens is that our user gives his credentials to our website to 3rd party - it can be another website or a mobile application - that performs requests on his behalf. Say there is a form that the user fills out and sends a message. Can I protect this form so that the server processing the submission can tell whether the user has submitted it directly from the browser or not? I don't want to use CAPTCHA for usability reasons. Can I do it with some javascript?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283  | Next Page >