Search Results

Search found 98288 results on 3932 pages for 'user interface'.

Page 600/3932 | < Previous Page | 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607  | Next Page >

  • csvde doesn't import users

    - by The Eighth Ero
    I have a small problem as I'm a server manager beginner, I installed a Domain Controller on my Windows Server 2008, and I created three OUs, now I'm trying to add users to each OU via csvde command, but I get as a result of the operation, without mentioning any errors: > C:\csvde>csvde -i -f List.csv > Connecting to "(null)" > Logging in as current user using SSPI Importing directory from file > "List.csv" Loading entries. > 0 entries modified successfully. Below is the csv file I'm using to add 2 users to "Offshoring1" OU, the domain name is "iado.lan". DN objectClass sAMAccountName sn givenName userPrincipalNAme cn=BB NN,ou=Offshoring1,dc=iado,dc=lan user BB NN BB [email protected] cn=II YY,ou=Offshoring1,dc=iado,dc=lan user II YY II [email protected] and this the csv data as generated by Word 2011 on my mac : DN;objectClass;sAMAccountName;sn;givenName;userPrincipalNAme cn=BB NN,ou=Offshoring1,dc=iado,dc=lan;user;BB;NN;BB;[email protected] cn=II YY,ou=Offshoring1,dc=iado,dc=lan;user;II;YY;II;[email protected] I do use -k option to force import but still no success.

    Read the article

  • Apache - Same username in several .htpasswd files

    - by greydet
    In a virtual host, I setup two different <Location> blocks for which the access is restricted by two basic authentication htpasswd files. One htpasswd contains different usernames + a common user name. The other htpasswd file only contains the common user name. My problem is that once users connect a location with the common user name, they have immediate access to the other location without being asker for a different user name. Is there a way to restrict the username access only to the corresponding htpasswd file? Is there a way for users to ask to be re-prompted for another username/password?

    Read the article

  • Why's SMC failing on startup?

    - by Brian Knoblauch
    Trying to remove a user from one of our servers, but I seem to be thwarted at every turn... SMC refuses to load the user list (failing with a NoClassDefFoundError in the listAll method of UserContent). vipw just returns with "vipw: /etc/passwd file busy". I'm the only user on the system at the moment (it's our backup SRSS box), and both of these fail even right after a reboot. I don't have console access at the moment either unfortunately (or I would try single user mode). Of course, even if init mode S worked and let me do this one task, it doesn't solve the root problem. Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Anonymous Login attemps from IPs all over Asia, how do I stop them from being able to do this?

    - by Ryan
    We had a successful hack attempt from Russia and one of our servers was used as a staging ground for further attacks, actually somehow they managed to get access to a Windows account called 'services'. I took that server offline as it was our SMTP server and no longer need it (3rd party system in place now). Now some of our other servers are having these ANONYMOUS LOGIN attempts in the Event Viewer that have IP addresses coming from China, Romania, Italy (I guess there's some Europe in there too)... I don't know what these people want but they just keep hitting the server. How can I prevent this? I don't want our servers compromised again, last time our host took our entire hardware node off of the network because it was attacking other systems, causing our services to go down which is really bad. How can I prevent these strange IP addresses from trying to access my servers? They are Windows Server 2003 R2 Enterprise 'containers' (virtual machines) running on a Parallels Virtuozzo HW node, if that makes a difference. I can configure each machine individually as if it were it's own server of course... UPDATE: New login attempts still happening, now these ones are tracing back to Ukraine... WTF.. here is the Event: Successful Network Logon: User Name: Domain: Logon ID: (0x0,0xB4FEB30C) Logon Type: 3 Logon Process: NtLmSsp Authentication Package: NTLM Workstation Name: REANIMAT-328817 Logon GUID: - Caller User Name: - Caller Domain: - Caller Logon ID: - Caller Process ID: - Transited Services: - Source Network Address: 94.179.189.117 Source Port: 0 For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. Here is one from France I found too: Event Type: Success Audit Event Source: Security Event Category: Logon/Logoff Event ID: 540 Date: 1/20/2011 Time: 11:09:50 AM User: NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON Computer: QA Description: Successful Network Logon: User Name: Domain: Logon ID: (0x0,0xB35D8539) Logon Type: 3 Logon Process: NtLmSsp Authentication Package: NTLM Workstation Name: COMPUTER Logon GUID: - Caller User Name: - Caller Domain: - Caller Logon ID: - Caller Process ID: - Transited Services: - Source Network Address: 82.238.39.154 Source Port: 0 For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.

    Read the article

  • Assign a secondary IP address to a Windows machine using DHCP

    - by IndigoFire
    Is it possible to configure dhcpd (on a Linux box) to assign a Windows PC 2 separate IP configurations? Right now I've configured the two IP addresses manually and it does exactly what's needed, but I can't figure out how to achieve the same thing with DHCP. For example, is it possible to set up a virtual interface that piggy-backs onto the first interface and gets its own configuration? Alternatively, is it possible to run a script upon getting IP values from DHCP that would then be able to configure the secondary IP?

    Read the article

  • GPO - Setting not applied, although policy is applied

    - by Kenny Bones
    This is rather strange. In our domain we have several terminal servers and this morning a user reported that no drives are mapped when he logs on to the terminal server. So, I checked Group Policy Results and compare two users. Both users have the exact same policies applied. But for this particular user, the Script section under User Configuration - Policies - Windows Settings is just not there. For the other user, which this is working fine for, it says under the Script section that Winning GPO is Terminal2008, which is the GPO that contains the script section. And the Terminal2008 GPO is applied to both users. Also, the loopback processing is set to Replace. What could be the cause for this? I've never seen this particular issue before. I mean, both users are in the same OU, they log on to the same terminal server and the same policies are applied to both. They do not however have the exact same group memberships, but should that matter? It's not stated that the script should be run only if the user is a member of a certain group either. Not sure if that could be done through that specific setting either.All I know is, the very same policies are applied to both users, in the same OU and the same computer. Meaning, the same policies should be applied? Edit: I just ran Group Policy Results on one of the other terminal servers, which are also in the same OU, and the Scripts section is there! This means that this particular user don't get this setting when he's logged onto this particular server. What could be the cause of this?

    Read the article

  • Execute encrypted files but don't let anybody read them.

    - by Stebi
    I want to provide a virtual machine image with an installed web application. The user should be able to boot the vm (don't login, just boot) and a webserver should start automatically. The point is I want to hide the (ruby) source code of the web application from everyone as there is no obfuscator for ruby. I thought I could use file system encryption to encrypt the directory with the sourcecode (or even a whole partition). But the webserver user must be able to read it automatically after booting. Nobody is allowed to login as the webserver user (or any other user) so no other can read the contents. My questions are now: Is this possible? Because I give away the whole vm everybody could mount its virtual discs and read them (except the encrypted one). Is it now possible to find the key the webserver user needs to decrypt the files and decrypt them manually? Or is it safe to give such a vm away? The problem is that everything needed to decrypt must be included somewhere in the vm else the webserver cannot start automatically. Maybe I'm completely wrong and you have another tip for me securing the source code.

    Read the article

  • Httpd and LDAP Authentication not working for sub-pages

    - by DavisTasar
    I just recently installed a Nagios implementation, and I'm trying to get LDAP authentication working for httpd on Red Hat. (nagios.conf for Apache config below, sanitized of course) ScriptAlias /nagios/cgi-bin "/usr/local/nagios/sbin" <Directory "/usr/local/nagios/sbin"> #SSLRequireSSL Options ExecCGI AllowOverride none AuthType Basic AuthName "LDAP Authentication" AuthLDAPURL "ldap://my.domain.controller:389/OU=Users,DC=my,DC=domain,DC=controller?sAMAccountName?sub?(objectClass=user)" NONE AuthzLDAPAuthoritative off AuthLDAPBindDN "CN=NagiosAdmin,DC=my,DC=domain,DC=controller" AuthLDAPBindPassword "myPassword" require valid-user </Directory> Alias /nagios "/usr/local/nagios/share" <Directory /usr/local/nagios/share> #SSLRequireSSL Options None AllowOverride none AuthBasicProvider ldap AuthType Basic AuthName "LDAP Authentication" AuthzLDAPAuthoritative off AuthLDAPURL "ldap://my.domain.controller:389/OU=Users,DC=my,DC=domain,DC=controller?sAMAccountName?sub?(objectClass=user)" NONE AuthLDAPBindDN "CN=NagiosAdmin,DC=my,DC=domain,DC=controller" AuthLDAPBindPassword "myPassword" require valid-user </Directory> Now, the initial authentication works, so when you first hit the page you can log in just fine. However, when you go anywhere else, it prompts you for authentication, fails (asking for a re-prompt), and gives this error message: [Mon Oct 21 14:46:23 2013] [error] [client 172.28.9.30] access to /nagios/cgi-bin/statusmap.cgi failed, reason: verification of user id '<myuseraccount>' not configured, referer: http://<nagiosserver>/nagios/side.php I'm almost certain its a simple flag or option, but I just can't find it, and I don't have a lot of experience working with Apache. Any assistance or help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • FTP Server with advanced features

    - by Nikolas Sakic
    Hi, We supply zone-files to our customers. Some zone files are big about 300MB and some are quite small, maybe like 1MB. We had this issue that someone setup a script to continually download the file. Imagine downloading 300MB file a few hundred times a day. Since, we don't have packet-shaper to throttle the traffic, we need to upgrade ftp server and use add-on modules to limit the download somehow. We currently use proftpd server. Also note that there are different users for different domains - say, if you want to download zone file for .INFO domain, then you use a particular user. That user can't download any other zone's file. This is what we are looking for: Have maximum of 400MB download per user per day. Or even have different download limit for different users per day. Have one connection per user at any time. Max # of connection (non-simultaneous) per user per day is 5. Anyone trying to exceed that gets banned for 24 hours. Has anyone used FTP server with similar restrictions above? Does anyone have any ideas where I can start? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. -N

    Read the article

  • Print directly to CUPS server from non-local clients (Ubuntu 14.04)

    - by OEP
    I set up a CUPS server with a few queues and printing from local clients (the CUPS test page and Samba) seems to work just fine. It seems like the CUPS server is denying non-local clients though: 130.127.48.70 - - [03/Jun/2014:14:29:19 -0400] "POST /printers/m137 HTTP/1.1" 200 390 Validate-Job successful-ok 130.127.48.70 - - [03/Jun/2014:14:29:19 -0400] "POST /printers/m137 HTTP/1.1" 200 339 Create-Job client-error-not-authorized localhost - - [03/Jun/2014:14:40:50 -0400] "POST /printers/m137 HTTP/1.1" 200 410869 Print-Job successful-ok This makes me think I have some sort of host-based restriction in my configuration file, but I can't find it. I've even set my default policy to Allow all only to get the same log message. I'm working from a configuration file which had previously worked on an older version of CUPS, which looks quite similar to the example cupsd.conf. I could be wrong but it looks like that final <Limit All> block ought to allow the actions the logs complain about. MaxLogSize 2000000000 # Log general information in error_log - change "info" to "debug" for # troubleshooting... LogLevel info #AccessLog syslog #ErrorLog syslog #PageLog syslog # Administrator user group... SystemGroup sys root lp # Only listen for connections from the local machine. Listen 0.0.0.0:631 Listen :::631 Listen /var/run/cups/cups.sock ServerName <snipped> # Show shared printers on the local network. Browsing Off BrowseOrder allow,deny # (Change '@LOCAL' to 'ALL' if using directed broadcasts from another subnet.) BrowseAllow @LOCAL # Default authentication type, when authentication is required... DefaultAuthType Basic # Restrict access to the server... <Location /> Order allow,deny Allow all </Location> # Restrict access to the admin pages... <Location /admin> AuthType Default Require user @SYSTEM Encryption Required Order allow,deny Allow all </Location> # Restrict access to configuration files... <Location /admin/conf> AuthType Default Require user @SYSTEM Encryption Required Order allow,deny Allow all </Location> # Set the default printer/job policies... <Policy default> # Job-related operations must be done by the owner or an administrator... <Limit Send-Document Send-URI Hold-Job Release-Job Restart-Job Purge-Jobs Set-Job-Attributes Create-Job-Subscription Renew-Subscription Cancel-Subscription Get-Notifications Reprocess-Job Cancel-Current-Job Suspend-Current-Job Resume-Job CUPS-Move-Job> Require user @OWNER @SYSTEM Order deny,allow </Limit> # All administration operations require an administrator to authenticate... <Limit CUPS-Add-Modify-Printer CUPS-Delete-Printer CUPS-Add-Modify-Class CUPS-Delete-Class CUPS-Set-Default> AuthType Default Require user @SYSTEM Order deny,allow </Limit> # All printer operations require a printer operator to authenticate... <Limit Pause-Printer Resume-Printer Enable-Printer Disable-Printer Pause-Printer-After-Current-Job Hold-New-Jobs Release-Held-New-Jobs Deactivate-Printer Activate-Printer Restart-Printer Shutdown-Printer Startup-Printer Promote-Job Schedule-Job-After CUPS-Accept-Jobs CUPS-Reject-Jobs> AuthType Default Require user @SYSTEM Order deny,allow </Limit> # Only the owner or an administrator can cancel or authenticate a job... <Limit Cancel-Job CUPS-Authenticate-Job> Require user @OWNER @SYSTEM Order deny,allow </Limit> <Limit All> Order allow,deny </Limit> </Policy>

    Read the article

  • Scripted forwarding for Outlook 2003

    - by John Gardeniers
    We have a staff member in sales who has gone onto a 4 day week (getting ready for retirement), so each Thursday afternoon her email needs to be forwarded to another user and each Friday afternoon it needs to be set back. I'm using the VBS script below to do this, run via the Task Scheduler. Although the script appears to do it's job, based on what I see when I view the user's Exchange settings, Exchange doesn't always recognise that the setting has changed. e.g. Last Thursday the forwarding was a enabled and worked correctly. On Friday the script did it's thing to clear the forwarding but Exchange continued to forward messages all weekend. I found that I can force Exchange to honour the changed setting be merely opening and closing the user's properties in ADUC. Of course I don't want to have to do that. Is there a non-manual way I can have Exchange read and honour the setting? The script (VBS): ' Call this script with the following parameters: ' ' SrcUser - The logon ID of the suer who's account is to be modified ' DstUser - The logon account of the person to who mail is to be forwarded ' Use "reset" to clear the email forwarding SrcUser = WScript.Arguments.Item(0) DstUser = WScript.Arguments.Item(1) SourceUser = SearchDistinguishedName(SrcUser) 'The user login name Set objUser = GetObject("LDAP://" & SourceUser) If DstUser = "reset" then objUser.PutEx 1, "altRecipient", "" Else ForwardTo = SearchDistinguishedName(DstUser)' The contact common name objUser.Put "AltRecipient", ForwardTo End If objUser.SetInfo Public Function SearchDistinguishedName(ByVal vSAN) Dim oRootDSE, oConnection, oCommand, oRecordSet Set oRootDSE = GetObject("LDAP://rootDSE") Set oConnection = CreateObject("ADODB.Connection") oConnection.Open "Provider=ADsDSOObject;" Set oCommand = CreateObject("ADODB.Command") oCommand.ActiveConnection = oConnection oCommand.CommandText = "<LDAP://" & oRootDSE.get("defaultNamingContext") & ">;(&(objectCategory=User)(samAccountName=" & vSAN & "));distinguishedName;subtree" Set oRecordSet = oCommand.Execute On Error Resume Next SearchDistinguishedName = oRecordSet.Fields("DistinguishedName") On Error GoTo 0 oConnection.Close Set oRecordSet = Nothing Set oCommand = Nothing Set oConnection = Nothing Set oRootDSE = Nothing End Function

    Read the article

  • unable to install mysql completely on debian 5.0

    - by austin powers
    hi, its been a couple of days that I'm trying to install mysql on my vps which has debian 5.0 with 256mb ram. I've installed webmin also. here is the symptoms : after installing mysql using either webmin or apt-get I am trying to connect to mysql for changing root password but every time I cope with this error : ERROR 1045 (28000): Access denied for user 'root'@'localhost' (using password: YES) so I start to investigate and I understand there is no root user inside mysql database when I use : UPDATE user SET password=PASSWORD('newpassword') WHERE user="root"; it says 0 row affected I reinstall mysql for several times but the same problem still exits. please help me how can I install mysql-server as well as mysql-client correctly. regards.

    Read the article

  • Average mail quota usage: tricks to implement unlimited email quota.

    - by Marco Demaio
    I suppose that hosters who provides unlimited mail quota are only claiming it unlimited, and hope that they won't run out of disk space. Correct me if I'm wrong. In order to do such trick they will have probably to calculate the average real quota used by the average user. Let's say on a 100 GB space hosting I offer to 20 x 1GB emails, obviously if all user fill their mail my server would stop working cause they would require 200 GB, but I think I can expect this trick to work cause it will never happen (or it's extermly unprobable) that all user fills up all their mails. But the QUESTTIONS are: What's the average email usage? Can we say that a user normally fills up 1/2 or 1/3 of the quota you provide him? Thanks to any answers/suggetions you might provide.

    Read the article

  • Getting permission denied error

    - by JM4
    On my Media Temple DV 4.0 server I am getting permission denied errors: -bash: cd: httpdocs: Permission denied If I switch from my login user to sudo (sudo su) or switch to root using su-, I can access the directory with any issue. This is just my site's files directory though so not sure why I'm being denied. Additionally, I added my user to the visudo commands file with: user ALL=(ALL) ALL Any suggestions to what else could be the issue?

    Read the article

  • How to receive mail in Qmail?

    - by Ivan
    I've a server that uses Qmail. It is installed by default and it is supposed to work. I've created a new domain and new user (vadddomain + vadduser) without problems, but when I send an email from Gmail to [email protected] (the address I've created) it desappears, it is. But if connect to SMTP server directly (telnet domain.com 25) and post an email it arrives to the user queue. What's happening?!? Note: If I try to access to my user through telnet domain.com 110 it seems my pwd is not correct and it's the same I used when created the user with vadduser

    Read the article

  • USER_LOGIN audit log with incorrect auid value?

    - by hijinx
    We have a CentOS 6.2 x86_64 system that's logging what looks to be erroneous audit information. We were receiving alerts for failed logins by a user who wasn't actually trying to log in. After some diagnosis, we figured out that the source of the events is our tool that periodically checks to see if SSH is answering. When that happens, we see this log this entry: type=USER_LOGIN msg=audit(1340312224.011:489216): user pid=28787 uid=0 auid=501 ses=8395 subj=unconfined_u:system_r:sshd_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 msg='op=login acct=28756E6B6E6F776E207A01234567 exe="/usr/sbin/sshd" hostname=? addr=127.0.0.1 terminal=ssh res=failed' This is the entry we get whenever there is an incomplete ssh connection, but usually the auid is the same as the ses= value. For some reason, on this system, it's using a particular user's auid, regardless of the login user. For example, ssh'ng to this system as [email protected] and cancelling before providing a password generates this error. Attempting to log to an unrelated account with a bogus password will also create an entry with the incorrect auid value.

    Read the article

  • FTP account ownership on vhost directory makes Apache not run website correctly

    - by CodeShining
    I've purchased a virtual server, where I'm given of a non-root sudo-enabled user. Actually I do need to create an FTP account that's not that sudo-able account, so I created a no-login account just for that purpose. I've set up VSFTPd correctly, also enabling the "userlist" feature, to specify which user are permitted to use FTP. Then I created an empty directory under my sudo-able account, and I gave ownership permissions to the second account, so to make it more easy to understand, let's say the main account (the one I do use to manage my VPS) is called ubuntu and the FTP-user is named ftpuser, I created a directory /home/ubuntu/mywebsite giving the ownership to ftpuser:ftpuser. Then I uploaded a worpdress website, whose default permissions are 755 and 644. The issue is that Apache is not given of any privilege to run the website. How can I make the website run properly, and which is the most secure? Should I run that virtualhost with another user (if it's possible)? Should I force the FTP user to use the www-data group (if that's possible) and run with permissions like 775 and 664? How can I solve this issue? Any help is appreciated, I'd like to run it using the default permissions, so any update won't break up anything (because of permissions reset).

    Read the article

  • I've got very brazen pop3 attack how to protect the server?

    - by Ken Tang
    Today I have brazen attack to my pop3-dovecot server and mail log is full over (200MB) with this kind of information: Nov 11 09:28:14 lax dovecot: pop3-login: Aborted login (auth failed, 1 attempts): user=<shawn>, method=PLAIN, rip=200.233.152.111, lip=myip Nov 11 09:28:14 lax dovecot: pop3-login: Aborted login (auth failed, 1 attempts): user=<shop>, method=PLAIN, rip=200.233.152.111, lip=myip Nov 11 09:28:14 lax dovecot: pop3-login: Aborted login (auth failed, 1 attempts): user=<sitetest>, method=PLAIN, rip=200.233.152.111, lip=myip Nov 11 09:28:14 lax dovecot: pop3-login: Aborted login (auth failed, 1 attempts): user=<solar>, method=PLAIN, rip=200.233.152.111, lip=myip Nov 11 09:28:15 lax dovecot: pop3-login: Aborted login (auth failed, 1 attempts): user=<services>, method=PLAIN, rip=200.233.152.111, lip=myip I just blocked attacker's ip by iptables -A INPUT -s 200.233.152.111 -j DROP But it this can be continued anytime from other ips. My question is: Is there any method to disallow anyone to connect my pop3 server (except only me?) because my ip is dynamic from ISP side so I don't know how to make pop3 server know that it is exactly me connecting to. Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • Two DHCP Servers, Block Clients for one of them?

    - by Rilindo
    I am building out a kickstart network that resides on a different VLAN uses its own DHCP server. For some reason, my kickstart clients kept getting assign IPs from my primary DHCP server. The way I have it set up is that I have a primary DHCP server on this router here: 192.168.15.1 Connected to that DHCP server is a switch with the IP of 192.168.15.2. My kickstart (Scientific Linux) server is connected to that switch on two ports: Port 2 - where the kickstart server communicates to the rest of the production network via eth0. The IP assigned to the server on that interface is 192.168.15.100 (on eth0). The details are: Interface: eth0 IP: 192.168.15.100 Netmask: 255.255.255.0 Gateway: 192.168.15.1 Port 7 - has it's own VLAN ID (along with port 8). The kickstart server is connected to that port with the IP of 172.16.15.100 (on eth1). Again, the details are: Interface: eth1 IP: 172.16.15.100 Netmask: 255.255.255.0 Gateway: none The kickstart server runs its own DHCP server and assigns them over the eth1. Most of the kick starts are built over the kickstart VLAN through port 8. To prevent the kickstart DHCP server from assigning addresses over the production network, I have the route setup like so: route add -host 255.255.255.255 dev eth1 At this point, the clients kept getting assign IPs from the 192.168.15.1 DHCP server. I need to figure out a way to block client requests from reaching that DHCP. Its should be noted that but I also build KVM hosts on the kickstart server as well, so I need those KVMs to have the ability to get DHCP requests from the 192.168.15.1 DHCP server via the bridge network once I finish resolved this particular problem. (Currently, they communicate via NAT). So what would be done to resolve this? Through iptables or some sort of routing I need to put in? I tried to limited to requests via IPtables on that interface, allowing DHCP requests for 172.16.15.x network: -A INPUT -i eth1 -s 172.16.15.0/24 -p udp -m udp --dport 69 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -s 172.16.15.0/24 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 69 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -s 172.16.15.0/24 -p udp -m udp --dport 68 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -s 172.16.15.0/24 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 68 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -s 172.16.15.0/24 -p udp -m udp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT -A INPUT -i eth1 -s 172.16.15.0/24 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 67 -j ACCEPT And rejects assignments on eth1 from 192.168.15.x network: -A FORWARD -o eth1 -s 192.168.15.0/24 -p udp -m udp --dport 69 -j REJECT -A FORWARD -o eth1 -s 192.168.15.0/24 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 69 -j REJECT -A FORWARD -o eth1 -s 192.168.15.0/24 -p udp -m udp --dport 68 -j REJECT -A FORWARD -o eth1 -s 192.168.15.0/24 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 68 -j REJECT -A FORWARD -o eth1 -s 192.168.15.0/24 -p udp -m udp --dport 67 -j REJECT -A FORWARD -o eth1 -s 192.168.15.0/24 -p tcp -m tcp --dport 67 -j REJECT Nope. :(

    Read the article

  • TFS 2010 Subfolder Permissions

    - by gmcalab
    I am a TFSAdmin and when I have a TFS project in which a subfolder needs specific permissions to deny some users. So, I right click on the folder in question hit Properties, and click the Security tab. There I select the Windows User or Group radio, then click Add. I put in the AD User that I want specific permissions for and hit Check Names. That resolves, so I click OK. Next, I select the permissions to Allow or Deny below in the Permissions for list. I hit OK. The permission are honored by TFS, this user no longer has PendChange permissions and I was expecting. The odd thing is, I was expecting to be able to go back into the Security tab and see that User in the list of Users and Groups and see the current state. But the list is always empty. Not sure why, but the permissions are definitely being honored, I can re-add the user with different permissions and those are also honored. Any ideas why the current users are not showing up in the Users and Groups list under the Security tab for a folder's properties? I also used the tf permission $\... to see if there were any permissions but it always returns There are no permissions set for this item (Inherit: Yes)

    Read the article

  • 500 error after creating htpasswd and edit htaccess

    - by bacord
    I just edited the htaccess file to include: AuthType Basic AuthName "My Protected Area" AuthUserFile /home/path/to/public_html/ Require valid-user I then created a htpasswd file via the htpasswd command. I have enabled the module: LoadModule authn_file_module modules/mod_authn_file.so in the Apache configuration. Now, when I load the page I now get a 500 error and apache log says "configuration error: couldn't check user. No user file?: /"

    Read the article

  • How to manage large number of desktop VMs?

    - by symcbean
    I'm looking at the feasibility of providing remote access to multiple virtual machines. The VMs themselves will provide user desktops. To make best use of the available resources, I'd like the VMs to hibernate when the user disconnects. Which implies being able to start them up when a user connects. Ideally each user would 'own' a VM image - but if not then I'd require that the session was terminated. Obviously this would require the remote access protocol to be tied into the VM management. Is there anything out there to provide such functionality? (extra credit for open protocols! ;)

    Read the article

  • NIC is receiving, but not transmitting at all?

    - by Shtééf
    I'm trying to fix a very strange problem remotely on a machine at a customer site. The machine is a Dell PowerEdge, I believe a 1950 (haven't verified, but the lspci output matches specs I found.) The machine has two similar NICs, identified as Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme II BCM5708 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 12) by lspci, and using the bnx2 driver. (I suspect these are on-board and on the same controller, which is what I'm accustomed to for this type of machine.) The primary interface eth0 works perfectly, and is in fact how I am ssh'd in. However, the secondary interface eth1 is not transmitting. I can see this in ifconfig output, for example, where the TX field is always 0. However, it is receiving, and tcpdump shows ARP requests coming from the ISP's gateway on the other side. The interface is physically connected to a Siemens BSTU4 modem, configured by the ISP. The link is properly set to 10MBps and full duplex, without negotation, as the ISP requested. A small /30 subnet is configured. For the sake of anonimity, let's say the machine is 3.3.3.2/30, and the ISP's gateway .1. The machine has no firewall settings whatsoever. Even running something like arping -I eth1 3.3.3.1, and running tcpdump alongside, shows no traffic whatsoever being transmitted on the interface. (But the other side keeps steadily sending ARP requests, and that is all that can be seen.) What could be causing this? Here's some output, anonymized, which may hopefully help: $ ethtool eth1 Settings for eth1: Supported ports: [ TP ] Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full 100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 1000baseT/Full Supports auto-negotiation: Yes Advertised link modes: Not reported Advertised auto-negotiation: No Speed: 10Mb/s Duplex: Full Port: Twisted Pair PHYAD: 1 Transceiver: internal Auto-negotiation: off Supports Wake-on: d Wake-on: d Link detected: yes $ ip link show eth1 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:15:c5:xx:xx:xx brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff $ ip -4 addr show eth1 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 inet 3.3.3.2/30 brd 3.3.3.3 scope global eth1 $ ip -4 route show match 3.3.3.0/30 3.3.3.0/30 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 3.3.3.2 default via 10.0.0.5 dev eth0

    Read the article

  • Strange RDP / Remote Desktop problem

    - by John Landheer
    I'll try to be as specific as I can be: Server is running SBS 2008 R2 (with all updates) Server is connected to the internet Server has 2 NIC's, one is disabled Server is running RDP Service (accessible directly from the internet, I know, not as secure as it should be) Computers A and B are on the same local net. Computers A and B are both Windows 7. Users X and Y are both admins on the server Computer A can connect as user X to the server with mstsc Computer A can connect as user Y to the server with mstsc Computer B can connect as user X to the server with mstsc computer B CANNOT connect as user Y to the server with mstsc! The last point is the problem, I get an authentication error. This used to work flawlessly for the last year. The server and desktops have been rebooted. I find it very strange....

    Read the article

  • NGINX: dynamic locations stored in DB

    - by chimpanzee
    Is there a possibility to store nginx locations in DB instead of the config to serve them dynamically? The task is to create dynamic URLs for video files based on user's IP and video ID. The idea is when the user visits my website such an dynamic URL is created and added to the db as a new nginx location that exists just for this user and not for others. Or nginx doesn't fit my task and I need to use another tool? Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607  | Next Page >