Search Results

Search found 1104 results on 45 pages for 'authorization'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 7/45 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • Setting custom HTTP request headers in an URL object doesn't work.

    - by Blagovest Buyukliev
    I am trying to fetch an image from an IP camera using HTTP. The camera requires HTTP basic authentication, so I have to add the corresponding request header: URL url = new URL("http://myipcam/snapshot.jpg"); URLConnection uc = url.openConnection(); uc.setRequestProperty("Authorization", "Basic " + new String(Base64.encode("user:pass".getBytes()))); // outputs "null" System.out.println(uc.getRequestProperty("Authorization")); I am later passing the url object to ImageIO.read(), and, as you can guess, I am getting an HTTP 401 Unauthorized, although user and pass are correct. What am I doing wrong? I've also tried new URL("http://user:pass@myipcam/snapshot.jpg"), but that doesn't work either.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2 Authorization Regex

    - by Hurricanepkt
    What i currently have is the following: namespace AzureCCCMVC.Controllers { [Authorize(Roles="Admin")] public class AdminController : Controller { //Stuff } } what I want to do is have roles for each client such as Roles { "DEMOAdmin", "GOOGAdmin" , "MSFTAdmin" } and be able to Authorize The Client name (from URL) and in that role I know I am doing a horrible job of explaining this... It is possible that I can have users that are users of several clients but only admin's of one ...

    Read the article

  • Does Apache allow to authorize an HTTP request based on a result of a subrequest?

    - by Jan Wrobel
    I'm looking for an equivalent of nginx http auth request module but for Apache. For each incoming HTTP requests, the module sends a subrequests to authentication/authorization back-end. Th auth request carries a path and all headers of the original request. Based on the result of the auth request, the original requests is allowed (HTTP code 200), denied (HTTP code 403) or login is requested (HTTP code 401). Such a generic mechanism allows to build really flexible authentication and authorization schemes. Is something like this possible in Apache (likely with a help of some third party module)?

    Read the article

  • silverlight 3: long running wcf call triggers 401.1 (access denied)

    - by sympatric greg
    I have a wcf service consumed by a silverlight 3 control. The Silverlight client uses a basicHttpBindinging that is constructed at runtime from the control's initialization parameters like this: public static T GetServiceClient<T>(string serviceURL) { BasicHttpBinding binding = new BasicHttpBinding(Application.Current.Host.Source.Scheme.Equals("https", StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase) ? BasicHttpSecurityMode.Transport : BasicHttpSecurityMode.None); binding.MaxReceivedMessageSize = int.MaxValue; binding.MaxBufferSize = int.MaxValue; binding.Security.Mode = BasicHttpSecurityMode.TransportCredentialOnly; return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(T), new object[] { binding, new EndpointAddress(serviceURL)}); } The Service implements windows security. Calls were returning as expected until the result set increased to several thousand rows at which time HTTP 401.1 errors were received. The Service's HttpBinding defines closeTime, openTimeout, receiveTimeout and sendTimeOut of 10 minutes. If I limit the size of the resultset the call suceeds. Additional Observations from Fiddler: When Method2 is modified to return a smaller resultset (and avoid the problem), control initialization consists of 4 calls: Service1/Method1 -- result:401 Service1/Method1 -- result:401 (this time header includes element "Authorization: Negotiate TlRMTV..." Service1/Method1 -- result:200 Service1/Method2 -- result:200 (1.25 seconds) When Method2 is configured to return the larger resultset we get: Service1/Method1 -- result:401 Service1/Method1 -- result:401 (this time header includes element "Authorization: Negotiate TlRMTV..." Service1/Method1 -- result:200 Service1/Method2 -- result:401.1 (7.5 seconds) Service1/Method2 -- result:401.1 (15ms) Service1/Method2 -- result:401.1 (7.5 seconds)

    Read the article

  • Why is it not good to use $_SESSION in Restful Implementations?

    - by keisimone
    Original Question: i read that for RESTful websites. it is not good to use $_SESSION. Why is it not good? how then do i properly authenticate users without looking up database all the time to check for the user's roles? I read that it is not good to use $_SESSION. http://www.recessframework.org/page/towards-restful-php-5-basic-tips I am creating a WEBSITE, not web service in PHP. and i am trying to make it more RESTful. at least in spirit. right now i am rewriting all the action to use Form tags POST and add in a hidden value called _method which would be "delete" for deleting action and "put" for updating action. however, i am not sure why it is recommended NOT to use $_SESSION. i would like to know why and what can i do to improve. To allow easy authorization checking, what i did was to after logging in the user, the username is stored in the $_SESSION. Everytime the user navigates to a page, the page would check if the username is stored inside $_SESSION and then based on the $_SESSION retrieves all the info including privileges from the database and then evaluates the authorization to access the page based on the info retrieved. Is the way I am implementing bad? not RESTful? how do i improve performance and security? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • i read that for RESTful websites. it is not good to use $_SESSION. Why is it not good? how then do i

    - by keisimone
    I read that it is not good to use $_SESSION. http://www.recessframework.org/page/towards-restful-php-5-basic-tips I am creating a WEBSITE, not web service in PHP. and i am trying to make it more RESTful. at least in spirit. right now i am rewriting all the action to use Form tags POST and add in a hidden value called _method which would be "delete" for deleting action and "put" for updating action. however, i am not sure why it is recommended NOT to use $_SESSION. i would like to know why and what can i do to improve. To allow easy authorization checking, what i did was to after logging in the user, the username is stored in the $_SESSION. Everytime the user navigates to a page, the page would check if the username is stored inside $_SESSION and then based on the $_SESSION retrieves all the info including privileges from the database and then evaluates the authorization to access the page based on the info retrieved. Is the way I am implementing bad? not RESTful? how do i improve performance and security? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • DB access denied with ASP.Net MVC application after switching to windows authentication mode

    - by myotherme
    I have a MVC application that I am now trying to add authentication and authorization to. I want to allow users to get to the site and be automatically authenticated. So I set authentication mode="Windows" in the web.config, and enabled NTLM in the project options. The site now shows my domain name in the top right when I run it, but when I hit a action than needs DB access, it tells me access is denied for my user-name? What step am I missing?

    Read the article

  • All permissions with declarative_authorization

    - by pablorc
    Hi, I have a Rails application using Restful authentication and declarative authorization. I have some roles with an admin. Is there any method to have automatically granted all permissions to this role, instead of hardcode every controller in the authorization_rules? Something like: role :admin do has_permission_on :everything, :to => :manage end Or a uglier approach with introspection, maybe? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • IIS 7.5 Windows Authentication Not Working in Chrome

    - by Sam
    On a new installation of IIS 7.5 I have setup Windows Authentication on my Intranet. The providers I have used are 'NTLM' and negotiate in that order. This works fine in IE and Firefox but in chrome I get the following This web page is not available The web page at http://mysite.com/myintranet.php might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address. Error 338 (net::ERR_INVALID_AUTH_CREDENTIALS): Unknown error. I've tried looking online for a solution without any success. I'm running the latest version of Chrome 21.0.1180.60

    Read the article

  • Active Directory, Linux, and User Private Groups

    - by larsks
    We're in the process of moving from NIS on our Linux systems to binding everything to Active Directory. The NIS environment follows the common standard used by many Linux distributions that a user's primary group is a group of the same name as the user (and of which the user is typically the only member). I have been informed that in the Active Directory environment, you may not have a group name with the same name as a user (specifically, that no two AD security objects may have the same name). This would seem to complicate the process of moving our group definitions into AD. It looks like we could maintain the NIS group information in AD using only POSIX attributes (e.g., not an actual AD security object), but that seems like a suboptimal fix (because we do really want to have the same view of group membership in both the Unix and AD worlds). Have you moved a large legacy NIS environment into Active Directory? How did you handle this situation?

    Read the article

  • Set up FTP user with ProFTPD on Ubuntu

    - by kidrobot
    I want to set up a user "ftp" so they can upload and download files in my /home/httpd/mysite/public_html directory. All files in public_html are owned by user ftp and in group www-data so the ftp user looks like so: uid=108(ftp) gid=33(www-data) groups=33(www-data),65534(nogroup) When I try to connect via an FTP client I get 530 Login incorrect. ftp: Login failed. What do I need to uncomment/add to the proftpd.conf file to make this work?

    Read the article

  • Getting apache to use ldap group and filesystem group information

    - by Angelo
    We have an Apache server which serves out of a particular directory, and just supplies a listing of files. From this directory, each subdirectory is owned by a certain group of users (at the filesystem level). User groups are determined by a posixGroup in ldap. Is there any simple way I can tell Apache to authorize access based on filesystem permissions, just like if the users were to access the filesystem from a shell? I would like to be able to simply add users/groups/directories without having to add another Directory or Location directive in Apache's conf?

    Read the article

  • Facebook Chat through XMPP protocol on Pidgin Portable - Will not Authorize

    - by Sara Neff
    I heard you can use facebook chat on desktops now. Thats awsome! What i didn't hear is that it is a pain in the butt! Not awsome! I've followed six nearly identical sets of instructions from six different websides, including the one that facebook generates for you, to get facebook chat connected through Pidgin. Its the latest portable version, so from what i hear the plugin is out of the question. Whenever I go to try and connect i get a message saying "Not Authorized" and buttons to either modify the account info, or retry. NOTHING i have done has fixed this, and I can't find anything remotely usefull anywhere. I am running windows xp, and running pidgin (portable) off of a flash drive. Someone please tell me what i have to do. I read about authorizing the chat on my actual facebook page. I'd have tried that if i could find out how to do it, but if its there they hid it good. HELP?!

    Read the article

  • Grant Sharepoint Access to all employees

    - by Satish
    What's the easiest way to grant access to all the employees of our company to sharepoint portal. There are some general sites which all employees have read access. So Do I have to create an AD group for all employees and add to the site or is there some better way to manage this?

    Read the article

  • How to do a database backup in DB2 in Vista?

    - by Daziplqa
    How to do a database backup in DB2 in Vista? Whenever I issued this command (login in Vista as Administrator): restore database myDB from D: taken at 20081013134446 the command line processor return the following error message: SQL1092N "ADMINISTRATOR" does not have the authority to perform the requested command. SQLSTATE=00000 So, How can I solve this problem?

    Read the article

  • Subversion all or nothing access to repo tree

    - by Glader
    I'm having some problems setting up access to my Subversion repositories on a Linux server. The problem is that I can only seem to get an all-or-nothing structure going. Either everyone gets read access to everything or noone gets read or write access to anything. The setup: SVN repos are located in /www/svn/repoA,repoB,repoC... Repositories are served by Apache, with Locations defined in etc/httpd/conf.d/subversion.conf as: <Location /svn/repoA> DAV svn SVNPath /var/www/svn/repoA AuthType Basic AuthName "svn repo" AuthUserFile /var/www/svn/svn-auth.conf AuthzSVNAccessFile /var/www/svn/svn-access.conf Require valid-user </Location> <Location /svn/repoB> DAV svn SVNPath /var/www/svn/repoB AuthType Basic AuthName "svn repo" AuthUserFile /var/www/svn/svn-auth.conf AuthzSVNAccessFile /var/www/svn/svn-access.conf Require valid-user </Location> ... svn-access.conf is set up as: [/] * = [/repoA] * = userA = rw [/repoB] * = userB = rw But checking out URL/svn/repoA as userA results in Access Forbidded. Changing it to [/] * = userA = r [/repoA] * = userA = rw [/repoB] * = userB = rw gives userA read access to ALL repositories (including repoB) but only read access to repoA! so in order for userA to get read-write access to repoB i need to add [/] userA = rw which is mental. I also tried changing Require valid-user to Require user userA for repoA in subversion.conf, but that only gave me read access to it. I need a way to default deny everyone access to every repository, giving read/write access only when explicitly defined. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong here? I have spent a couple of hours testing and googling but come up empty, so now I'm doing the post of shame.

    Read the article

  • How can I disable Kerberos authentication for only the root of my site?

    - by petRUShka
    I have Kerberos-based authentication and I want to disable it on only root url: http://mysite.com/. And I want it to continue to work fine on any other page like http://mysite.com/page1. I have such things in my .htaccess: AuthType Kerberos AuthName "Domain login" KrbAuthRealms DOMAIN.COM KrbMethodK5Passwd on Krb5KeyTab /etc/httpd/httpd.keytab require valid-user I want to turn it off only for root URL. As workaround it is possible to turn off using .htaccess in virtual host config. Unfortunately I don't know how to do it. Part of my vhost.conf: <Directory /home/user/www/current/public/> Options -MultiViews +FollowSymLinks AllowOverride All Order allow,deny Allow from all </Directory> UPD. I'm using Apache/2.2.3 (Linux/SUSE) I tried to use such version of .htaccess: SetEnvIf Request_URI ^/$ rootdir=1 Allow from env=rootdir Satisfy Any AuthType Kerberos AuthName "Domain login" KrbAuthRealms DOMAIN.COM KrbMethodK5Passwd on Krb5KeyTab /etc/httpd/httpd.keytab require valid-user Unfortunately such config turn Kerberos AuthType for all URLs. I tried to place first 3 lines SetEnvIf Request_URI ^/$ rootdir=1 Allow from env=rootdir Satisfy Any after main block, but it didn't help me.

    Read the article

  • X11 for apache user

    - by fuenfundachtzig
    We are using inkscape to convert SVG images uploaded to our server via a web form. For this inkscape offers a batch mode via the -z option, but this batch mode has a flaw: When inkscape is run by the apache user, it breaks saying $ inkscape -z -W drawing.svg X11 connection rejected because of wrong authentication. The application 'inkscape' lost its connection to the display localhost:11.0; most likely the X server was shut down or you killed/destroyed the application. If you do the same as a normal user you also get errors: Xlib: connection to "localhost:11.0" refused by server Xlib: PuTTY X11 proxy: MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 data did not match (inkscape:24050): Gdk-CRITICAL **: gdk_display_list_devices: assertion `GDK_IS_DISPLAY (display)' failed 301.27942 But at least inkscape gives the correct answer (here the number stating the width of the image). Does somebody know how to make this also work for the apache user? Does it make sense to authorize apache to use X (if so how)? In any case it doesn't feel like the right solution...

    Read the article

  • LDAP RBAC model

    - by typo
    Hi does anybody can tell me about best practice to model RBAC on LDAP ? I'm very confused, not sure if I should think about LDAP groups as role, or just user in some custom OU. Any real-life examples with tasks-operations\roles\user scheme (one user, multiple roles per user, multiple operations-tasks per role) ? BTW:Target systems are .net, java and iSeries

    Read the article

  • Why does Facebook Chat through XMPP protocol on Pidgin Portable not authorize?

    - by Sara Neff
    I heard you can use facebook chat on desktops now. Thats awsome! What i didn't hear is that it is a pain in the butt! Not awsome! I've followed six nearly identical sets of instructions from six different websides, including the one that facebook generates for you, to get facebook chat connected through Pidgin. Its the latest portable version, so from what i hear the plugin is out of the question. Whenever I go to try and connect i get a message saying "Not Authorized" and buttons to either modify the account info, or retry. NOTHING i have done has fixed this, and I can't find anything remotely usefull anywhere. I am running windows xp, and running pidgin (portable) off of a flash drive. Someone please tell me what i have to do. I read about authorizing the chat on my actual facebook page. I'd have tried that if i could find out how to do it, but if its there they hid it good. HELP?!

    Read the article

  • Access Denied on LAN IIS Access via Integrated Authentication

    - by Pharao2k
    I have an IIS 7.5 (Win2k8R2) Webserver, which publishes an UNC Share (on a Fileserver) with restricted access. The AppPool Identity is a Domain User-Account with read access to mentioned UNC path. Authentication modes are set to Anonymous and Integration Authentication. When I access the path via localhost from the Webserver itself, it works, but if I try the Hostname or IP from either the Webserver or a Client, I get three authentication prompts (does not accept my credentials) and a 401.3 Unauthorized error message (but it states that I am logged in as my normal credentials which definitely have access rights to the UNC path and its files). Security Zone is set to Local Intranet. Sysiniternals Process Monitor lists CreateFile operations on the UNC path (and other existing files in it) with Access Denied and Impersonating on the correct credentials. I don't understand why it is not working, it seems to use the correct credentials on every step on the way but fails with is operations.

    Read the article

  • IIS 6 Denies access to the default document

    - by Jim
    I've got Windows Server 2k3 with IIS6 hosting a couple ASP.NET MVC 2 applications (.NET 4), all in the Default Web Site. Most of them simply use Integrated authentication, but a couple use forms as well. All the applications work properly and are correctly accessible. The problem I'm trying to resolve is access to the default document. It is currently specified as index.htm. Both index.htm and the Default Web Site are configured to allow anonymous access (with none of the authenticated acces boxes checked). However, access is denied to the file. Accessing via server.domain.tld/ and server.domain.tld/index.htm both yield 401 errors. However, server.domain.tld/default.htm (file does not exist) properly returns a 404. If I alter the file security on index.htm to allow integrated authentication, then requesting /index.htm directly works properly for users with domain accounts, but anonymous users get a login prompt/401. How can I configure IIS to allow all users to view index.htm via server.domain.tld/?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >