Search Results

Search found 25324 results on 1013 pages for 'folder security'.

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

Page 200/1013 | < Previous Page | 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207  | Next Page >

  • Could it be that "chkrootkit" just doesn't like .hmac, .packlist, and .relocation-tag files?

    - by Danijel
    I just cleaned up my hacked CentOS server (due to not updating since versino 5.3). But still, "chkrootkit" says this: Possible t0rn v8 \(or variation\) rootkit installed /usr/lib/.libfipscheck.so.1.1.0.hmac /usr/lib/.libgcrypt.so.11.hmac /usr/lib/.libfipscheck.so.1.hmac /lib/.libcrypto.so.0.9.8e.hmac /lib/.libssl.so.0.9.8e.hmac /lib/.libssl.so.6.hmac /lib/.libcrypto.so.6.hmac /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/Text/Iconv/.packlist /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/.packlist /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/HTML-Tree/.packlist /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/Font/AFM/.packlist /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/MLDBM/Sync/.packlist /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/MLDBM/.packlist /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/FreezeThaw/.packlist /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/Apache/ASP/.packlist /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/i386-linux-thread-multi/auto/HTML-Format/.packlist /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/immodules/.relocation-tag /usr/lib/python2.4/plat-linux2/.relocation-tag /usr/lib/python2.4/distutils/.relocation-tag /usr/lib/python2.4/config/.relocation-tag Could it be that "chkrootkit" just doesn't like .hmac, .packlist, and .relocation-tag files? Are these realy still infected?

    Read the article

  • Managing service passwords with Puppet

    - by Jeff Ferland
    I'm setting up my Bacula configuration in Puppet. One thing I want to do is ensure that each password field is different. My current thought is to hash the hostname with a secret value that would ensure each file daemon has a unique password and that password can be written to both the director configuration and the file server. I definitely don't want to use one universal password as that would permit anybody who might compromise one machine to get access to any machine through Bacula. Is there another way to do this other than using a hash function to generate the passwords? Clarification: This is NOT about user accounts for services. This is about the authentication tokens (to use another term) in the client / server files. Example snippet: Director { # define myself Name = <%= hostname $>-dir QueryFile = "/etc/bacula/scripts/query.sql" WorkingDirectory = "/var/lib/bacula" PidDirectory = "/var/run/bacula" Maximum Concurrent Jobs = 3 Password = "<%= somePasswordFunction =>" # Console password Messages = Daemon }

    Read the article

  • certutil -ping fails with 30 seconds timeout - what to do?

    - by mark
    Dear ladies and sirs. The certificate store on my Win7 box is constantly hanging. Observe: C:\1.cmd C:\certutil -? | findstr /i ping -ping -- Ping Active Directory Certificate Services Request interface -pingadmin -- Ping Active Directory Certificate Services Admin interface C:\set PROMPT=$P($t)$G C:\(13:04:28.57)certutil -ping CertUtil: -ping command FAILED: 0x80070002 (WIN32: 2) CertUtil: The system cannot find the file specified. C:\(13:04:58.68)certutil -pingadmin CertUtil: -pingadmin command FAILED: 0x80070002 (WIN32: 2) CertUtil: The system cannot find the file specified. C:\(13:05:28.79)set PROMPT=$P$G C:\ Explanations: The first command shows you that there are –ping and –pingadmin parameters to certutil Trying any ping parameter fails with 30 seconds timeout (the current time is seen in the prompt) This is a serious problem. It screws all the secure communication in my app. If anyone knows how this can be fixed - please share. Thanks. P.S. 1.cmd is simply a batch of these commands: certutil -? | findstr /i ping set PROMPT=$P($t)$G certutil -ping certutil -pingadmin set PROMPT=$P$G

    Read the article

  • Is SSL to the proxy good enough?

    - by Josh Smeaton
    We are currently trying to decide on how best to do SSL traffic in our environment. We have an externally facing Apache proxy server that is responsible for directing all traffic into our environment. It is also doing the SSL work for the majority of our servers. There are one or two IIS servers in particular that are doing their own SSL, but they are also behind the proxy. I'm wondering, is SSL to the proxy good enough? It would mean that traffic within our network is identifiable, but is that such a big deal?

    Read the article

  • Window 2003 Server - Logon Failure error message in Event Viewer

    - by user45192
    Hi guys, I received alot of event logged in the event viewer with this message. I notice is always the same user id which encounters this error. The user id is use by an application to access the database. However, this account does not exits on this server. How do I trace the services/program use by this user id which causes these error messages? Reason=Unknown user name or bad password&&User Name=&&Domain=&&Logon Type=3&&Logon Process=NtLmSsp&&Authentication Package=NTLM&&Workstation Name=&&Caller User Name=-&&Caller Domain=-&&Caller Logon ID=-&&Caller Process ID=-&&Transited Services=-&&Source Network Address=-&&Source Port=-&&User=SYSTEM&&ComputerName=

    Read the article

  • Hide/Replace Nginx Location Header?

    - by Steven Ou
    I am trying to pass a PCI compliance test, and I'm getting a single "high risk vulnerability". The problem is described as: Information on the machine which a web server is located is sometimes included in the header of a web page. Under certain circumstances that information may include local information from behind a firewall or proxy server such as the local IP address. It looks like Nginx is responding with: Service: https Received: HTTP/1.1 302 Found Cache-Control: no-cache Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Location: http://ip-10-194-73-254/ Server: nginx/1.0.4 + Phusion Passenger 3.0.7 (mod_rails/mod_rack) Status: 302 X-Powered-By: Phusion Passenger (mod_rails/mod_rack) 3.0.7 X-Runtime: 0 Content-Length: 90 Connection: Close <html><body>You are being <a href="http://ip-10-194-73-254/">redirect ed</a>.</body></html> I'm no expert, so please correct me if I'm wrong: but from what I gathered, I think the problem is that the Location header is returning http://ip-10-194-73-254/, which is a private address, when it should be returning our domain name (which is ravn.com). So, I'm guessing I need to either hide or replace the Location header somehow? I'm a programmer and not a server admin so I have no idea what to do... Any help would be greatly appreciated! Also, might I add that we're running more than 1 server, so the configuration would need to be transferable to any server with any private address.

    Read the article

  • Attack from anonymous proxy

    - by mmgn
    We got attacked by some very-bored teenagers registering in our forums and posting very explicit material using anonymous proxy websites, like http://proxify.com/ Is there a way to check the registration IP against a black list database? Has anyone experienced this and had success?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay to use an administrator account for everyday use if UAC is on?

    - by Valentin Radu
    Since I switched to Windows 7 about 3 years ago, and now using Windows 8.1, I have become familiar with the concept of User Account Control and used my PC the following way: a standard account which I use for every day work and the built-in Administrator account activated and used only to elevate processes when they request so, or to ”Run as administrator” applications when I need to. However, recently after reading more about User Account Control, I started wondering if my way of working is good? Or should I use an administrator account for every day work, since an administrator account is not elevated until requested by apps, or until I request so via the ”Run as administrator” option? I am asking this because I read somewhere that the built-in Administrator account is a true administrator, by which I mean UAC doesn't pop up when logged in within it, and I am scared of not having problems when potential malicious software come into scene. I have to mention that I do not use it on a daily basis, just when I need to elevate some apps. I barely log in into it 10 times a year... So, how's better? Thanks for your answers! And Happy New Year, of course! P.S. I asked this a year ago (:P) and I think I should reiterate it: is an administrator account as safe these days as a standard account coupled with the built-in Administrator account when needed?

    Read the article

  • Trouble getting started with the STEALTH monitoring package

    - by dlanced
    Is anyone here familiar with the Linux-based STEALTH package (for monitoring FS integrity of client systems)? I'm trying to get started with a very simple configuration, but I'm running into trouble (this is running under Ubuntu 14.04): Config line `USE BASE/root/stealth/10.0.0.79' invalid STEALTH (2.11.02) started at Fri, 30 May 2014 15:25:00 +0000 Program terminated due to non-zero exit value for -type f -exec /usr/bin/sha1sum {} \; (EOC Fri May 30 15:25:00 2014 127) Stealth is creating a binary tmp file in the Stealth server root and generating a "report" file in the start directory, but not much else. Regarding the "USE BASE...invalid" error, and just to be sure, I manually created the directories in /root, but it didn't help. And, by the way, I am running stealth with sudo. Everything seems to be configured correctly: I'm able to ssh into root@client from the stealth machine without a password Here's my "policy" file (I've removed the email directives just for simplicity): DEFINE SSHCMD /usr/bin/ssh [email protected] -T -q exec /bin/bash --noprofile DEFINE EXECSHA1 -xdev -perm +u+s,g+s ( -user root -or -group root ) \ -type f -exec /usr/bin/sha1sum {} \; USE BASE/root/stealth/10.0.0.79 USE SSH ${SSHCMD} USE DD /bin/dd USE DIFF /usr/bin/diff USE PIDFILE /var/run/stealth- USE REPORT report USE SH /bin/sh GET /usr/bin/sha1sum /root/tmp LABEL \nchecking the client's /usr/bin/find program CHECK LOG = remote/binfind /usr/bin/sha1sum /usr/bin/find LABEL \nsuid/sgid/executable files uid or gid root on the / partition CHECK LOG = remote/setuidgid /usr/bin/find / ${EXECSHA1} LABEL \nconfiguration files under /etc CHECK LOG = remote/etcfiles \ /usr/bin/find /etc -type f -not -perm /6111 \ -not -regex "/etc/(adjtime\|mtab)"\ -exec /usr/bin/sha1sum {} \; Any ideas? Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Can't connect back to the wireless network after the password was changed

    - by 7777
    Family changed the network password and some other network settings after new computers were brought into the house because apparently they wouldn't work with what we had. Actually an off-site tech remotely changed it, and I have no idea what he did. My laptop detects the network (it shows up under available networks) but whenever I try to connect it says: Windows is unable to connect to the selected network. The network may no longer be in range. Please refresh the list of available networks, and try to connect again. I wish I could give more details, config settings, but frankly I have no idea what I'm looking for. This is XP (also, not a password issue, I know the password, it's just that I have no idea where to enter it, etc.)

    Read the article

  • Web Server Users - Best Practice

    - by Toby
    I was wondering what is considered best practice when several developers/administrators require access to the same web server. Should there be one non-root user with a secure username and password unqiue to the web server which everyone logs in as or should there be a username for each person. I am leaning towards a username for each person to aid in logging etc however then does the same user keep the same credentials over several servers, or should at least their password change depending on the server they are on? Should any non-root user of the system be added to the sudoers file or is it best practice to leave everyone off it and only let root perform certain tasks? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Web Server Users - Best Practice

    - by Toby
    I was wondering what is considered best practice when several developers/administrators require access to the same web server. Should there be one non-root user with a secure username and password unqiue to the web server which everyone logs in as or should there be a username for each person. I am leaning towards a username for each person to aid in logging etc however then does the same user keep the same credentials over several servers, or should at least their password change depending on the server they are on? Should any non-root user of the system be added to the sudoers file or is it best practice to leave everyone off it and only let root perform certain tasks? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Why some recovery tools are still able to find deleted files after I purge Recycle Bin, defrag the disk and zero-fill free space?

    - by Ivan
    As far as I understand, when I delete (without using Recycle Bin) a file, its record is removed from the file system table of contents (FAT/MFT/etc...) but the values of the disk sectors which were occupied by the file remain intact until these sectors are reused to write something else. When I use some sort of erased files recovery tool, it reads those sectors directly and tries to build up the original file. In this case, what I can't understand is why recovery tools are still able to find deleted files (with reduced chance of rebuilding them though) after I defragment the drive and overwrite all the free space with zeros. Can you explain this? I thought zero-overwritten deleted files can be only found by means of some special forensic lab magnetic scan hardware and those complex wiping algorithms (overwriting free space multiple times with random and non-random patterns) only make sense to prevent such a physical scan to succeed, but practically it seems that plain zero-fill is not enough to wipe all the tracks of deleted files. How can this be?

    Read the article

  • Hardening Word and Reader against exploits

    - by satuon
    I have recently heard a lot about exploits for PDF and DOC files on Windows, which when opened in Reader or Word would infect the computer. I'm assuming most of those exploits rely on some kind of active content, I've heard that Reader allows JavaScript for example. I already have antivirus, but I've heard they often don't catch those types of exploits, so I want to try a little proactive defense. Is there a way to harden Reader and Word by disabling plugins or options that are often used by exploits?

    Read the article

  • Active Directory Permission Diag Tool

    - by Skit
    I'm trying to identify potential permission issues on areas of our AD tree. What I have in mind is something like SysInternals FileMon to monitor object access in Active Directory in real time. For example: Adding a computer to the domain. Is there anything like that in the wild? Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • How secure is a subnet?

    - by HorusKol
    I have an unfortunate complication in my network - some users/computers are attached to a completely private and firewalled office network that we administer (10.n.n.x/24 intranet), but others are attached to a subnet provided by a third party (129.n.n.x/25) as they need to access the internet via the third party's proxy. I have previously set up a gateway/router to allow the 10.n.n.x/24 network internet access: # Allow established connections, and those !not! coming from the public interface # eth0 = public interface # eth1 = private interface iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW ! -i eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing connections from the private interface iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT # Masquerade (NAT) iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE # Don't forward any other traffic from the public to the private iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j REJECT However, I now need to enable access to users on our 129.n.n.x/25 subnet to some private servers on the 10.n.n.x/24 network. I figured that I could do something like: # Allow established connections, and those !not! coming from the public interface # eth0 = public interface # eth1 = private interface #1 (10.n.n.x/24) # eth2 = private interface #2 (129.n.n.x/25) iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state NEW ! -i eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing connections from the private interfaces iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth0 -j ACCEPT # Allow the two public connections to talk to each other iptables -A FORWARD -i eth1 -o eth2 -j ACCEPT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth2 -o eth1 -j ACCEPT # Masquerade (NAT) iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth0 -j MASQUERADE # Don't forward any other traffic from the public to the private iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth1 -j REJECT iptables -A FORWARD -i eth0 -o eth2 -j REJECT My concern is that I know that the computers on our 129.n.n.x/25 subnet can be accessed via a VPN through the larger network operated by the provider - therefore, would it be possible for someone on the provider's supernet (correct term? inverse of subnet?) to be able to access our private 10.n.n.x/24 intranet?

    Read the article

  • How to defend agains botnet http requests

    - by Killercode
    I have a server with WHM + CPanel and 5 of my costumer got infected with zbot. This means that the domains they have are constantly receiving requests to certain destinations. I tried to use mod_security but seems that it can't filter every requests... I don't really know why? I still see in the access log the connection comming in and it's consuming a LOT of bandwidth and server load Those accounts have already been clean so all of those requests go to error 404 (the ones catched on mod_security I am dropping the connection). Is there anymore ways to defend against this requests?

    Read the article

  • Making Puppet manifests/modules available to a wide audience

    - by Kyle Smith
    Our team rolled puppet out to our systems over the last six months. We're managing all sorts of resources, and some of them have sensitive data (database passwords for automated backups, license keys for proprietary software, etc.). Other teams want to get involved in the development of (or at least be able to see) our modules and manifests. What have other people done to continue to have secure data moving through Puppet, while sharing the modules and manifests with a larger audience?

    Read the article

  • Setting permissions on user accounts

    - by Ron Porter
    We would like to lock a couple of accounts to prevent even domain admins from resetting the password without already knowing the current password. From what I can see in the permission sets, this looks possible. Anything I've found on the subject recommends against altering default permissions, but doesn't go into detail why. Assuming that domain admin retains the ability to reset passwords without knowing current passwords is it reasonable to prevent password resets on the domain admin account and maybe a couple of others? If not, why not?

    Read the article

  • How to protect custom shapes from being reused? Visio 2010

    - by Chris
    We are building a set of documentation for our business with Visio 2010. We need to make the Visio files accessible to external consultants for review, but we want to ensure that they cannot copy any of our custom shapes or formulas. How can we protect custom shapes/stencils so that they cannot be used outside of our documents? Or, if that's not possible, how can we mark our shapes in such a way that we could prove that they were created by us?

    Read the article

  • How to control remote access to Sonicwall VPN beyond passwords?

    - by pghcpa
    I have a SonicWall TZ-210. I want an extremely easy way to limit external remote access to the VPN beyond just username and password, but I do not wish to buy/deploy a OTP appliance because that is overkill for my situation. I also do not want to use IPSec because my remote users are roaming. I want the user to be in physical possession of something, whether that is a pre-configured client with an encrypted key or a certificate .cer/.pfx of some sort. SonicWall used to offer "Certificate Services" for authentication, but apparently discontinued that a long time ago. So, what is everyone using in its place? Beyond the "Fortune 500" expensive solution, how do I limit access to the VPN to only those users who have possession of a certificate file or some other file or something beyond passwords? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there a filesystem firewall?

    - by Jenko
    Ever since firewalls appeared on the scene, it became hard for rogue programs to access the internet. But you and I know that running applications get unrestricted access to the filesystem. They can read your files and send them to poppa. (programs such as web browsers and IM clients, which are allowed thru the internet firewall) Any way to know which programs are accessing your files? or limit their access to a specific partition?

    Read the article

  • SFTP: How to keep data out of the DMZ

    - by ChronoFish
    We are investigating solutions to the following problem: We have external (Internet) users who need access to sensitive information. We could offer it to them via SFTP which would offer a secure transport method. However, we don't want to maintain the data on server as it would then reside in the DMZ. Is there an SFTP server that has "copy on access" such that if the box in the DMZ were to be compromised, no actual data resided on that box? I am envisioning an SFTP Proxy or SFTP passthrough. Does such a product exist currently?

    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 | 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207  | Next Page >