Search Results

Search found 7851 results on 315 pages for 'incoming mail'.

Page 245/315 | < Previous Page | 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252  | Next Page >

  • How do I set up an email server that automatically maintains a list of previous recipients?

    - by hsivonen
    I want to set up an email server with the following characteristics. What software (besides bogofilter and clamav that I'm naming) should I use and what HOWTOs should I read? The server should run some flavor of Linux that's as low-maintenance as possible and self-updates for security patches in a timely fashion. (Debian stable?) When email is sent, all the recipients are stored in the list of previous recipients maintained by the server. Scan incoming messages with clamav and treat as spam if it contains viruses. When email arrives (if it passed clamav), if the sender is on the list of previous recipients, bypass spam filter. If the List-Id header names a mailing list on a manually maintained list of known-clean mailing lists, bypass spam filter and deliver into a mailbox depending on the mailing list name. Email that wasn't from previous recipients, manually white listed domains or mailing lists gets filtered by bogofilter. Spam goes into a spam mailbox. Email considered to be ham should automatically be fed to bogofilter training as ham. Email considered to be spam (incl. messages with viruses) should be automatically fed to bogofilter training as spam. There should be mailboxes for false ham and false spam that an IMAP client can move email into so that the server retrains bogofilter appropriately. Email sending requires SMTP over SSL. Email reading requires IMAPS. Should I also want to use SpamAssassin in addition to bogofilter?

    Read the article

  • How to access a port via OpenVpn only

    - by Andy M
    I've set up an openvpn server alongside an apache website that can only be accessed on port 8100 on the same machine. My /etc/openvpn/server.conf file looks like this: port 1194 proto tcp dev tun ca ./easy-rsa2/keys/ca.crt cert ./easy-rsa2/keys/server.crt key ./easy-rsa2/keys/server.key # This file should be kept secret dh ./easy-rsa2/keys/dh1024.pem # Diffie-Hellman parameter server 10.8.0.0 255.255.255.0 ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt # make sure clients can still connect to the internet push "redirect-gateway def1 bypass-dhcp" keepalive 10 120 comp-lzo persist-key persist-tun status openvpn-status.log verb 3 Now I tried to let only clients connected to the vpn network access the website on apache via port 8100. So I defined a few iptables rules: #!/bin/sh # My system IP/set ip address of server SERVER_IP="192.168.0.2" # Flushing all rules iptables -F iptables -X # Setting default filter policy iptables -P INPUT DROP iptables -P OUTPUT DROP iptables -P FORWARD DROP # Allow incoming access to port 8100 from OpenVPN 10.8.0.1 iptables -A INPUT -i tun0 -p tcp --dport 80 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o tun0 -p tcp --sport 80 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # outgoing http iptables -A OUTPUT -o tun0 -p tcp --dport 80 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i tun0 -p tcp --sport 80 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT Now when I connect to the server from my client computer and try to access the website on 192.168.0.2:8100, my browser can't open it. Will I have to forward traffic from tun0 to eth0? Or is there anything else I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • Postgresql connection refused

    - by Jonathan
    I'm trying to remotely connect to my postgresql database. I have two virtual machines set up both running ubuntu 14.04. I am trying to connect to the second vm using the first vm using psql -h 10.0.1.23 -U postgres -d postgres But I receive the error: Could not connect to server: Connection refused Is the server running on host "10.0.1.23" and accepting TCP/IP connections on port 5432? I have changed the pg_hba.conf and added host all all 10.0.1.64/24 md5 host all all * md5 host all all 0.0.0.0/0 md5 And changed the postgresql.conf listen_address=" * " In an attempt to allow all incoming connections. I have also tried to change the firewall settings, but I am unsure of whether or not the ports are properly listening for the connection. Edit: Output of netstat -an | grep -E '^tcp[^6].*LISTEN' tcp 0 0 127.0.1.1:53 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:22 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:631 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:23 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN tcp 0 0 127.0.0.1:5432 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN

    Read the article

  • How to set up a easy-to-use proxy for the whole system with WinXP client and server?

    - by Pekka
    I am working together intensively with a colleague on the Canary Islands. We speak through live messenger and work together using a RDP software. She has frequent problems with connections to certain big-name and small-name sites (amongst others live.com, google.com, gmx.de) very likely to be caused by the spanish provider (the connections simply time out, this has been going on for weeks already). I have been thinking about setting up my computer as a proxy to make these connections work. I have a DSL connection and am behind a NAT capable router that I control. Does anybody know a simple, "one-click" way to transport ALL network traffic through a remote proxy? Without having to set proxy settings for each application that uses the internet? VPN is not an option, because I am behind a firewall that supports protocol 47 and such, but I have never succeeded in getting an incoming VPN connection to work. I can however redirect normal traffic using NAT. A VPN solution that does not need strange protocols would also be an option.

    Read the article

  • Can I use iptables on my Varnish server to forward HTTPS traffic to a specific server?

    - by Dylan Beattie
    We use Varnish as our front-end web cache and load balancer, so we have a Linux server in our development environment, running Varnish with some basic caching and load-balancing rules across a pair of Windows 2008 IIS web servers. We have a wildcard DNS rule that points *.development at this Varnish box, so we can browse http://www.mysite.com.development, http://www.othersite.com.development, etc. The problem is that since Varnish can't handle HTTPS traffic, we can't access https://www.mysite.com.development/ For dev/testing, we don't need any acceleration or load-balancing - all I need is to tell this box to act as a dumb proxy and forward any incoming requests on port 443 to a specific IIS server. I suspect iptables may offer a solution but it's been a long while since I wrote an iptables rule. Some initial hacking has got me as far as iptables -F iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -m tcp --sport 443 -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 443 -j DNAT --to 10.0.0.241:443 iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p tcp -d 10.0.0.241 --dport 443 -j MASQUERADE iptables -A INPUT -j LOG --log-level 4 --log-prefix 'PreRouting ' iptables -A OUTPUT -j LOG --log-level 4 --log-prefix 'PostRouting ' iptables-save > /etc/iptables.rules (where 10.0.0.241 is the IIS box hosting the HTTPS website), but this doesn't appear to be working. To clarify - I realize there's security implications about HTTPS proxying/caching - all I'm looking for is completely transparent IP traffic forwarding. I don't need to decrypt, cache or inspect any of the packets; I just want anything on port 443 to flow through the Linux box to the IIS box behind it as though the Linux box wasn't even there. Any help gratefully received... EDIT: Included full iptables config script.

    Read the article

  • Splunk is fantastically expensive: What are the alternatives?

    - by samsmith
    This has been discussed, but it has been several months, so it may be time to revisit it: Earlier discussion RE Splunk alternatives For the record, Splunk rocks. But the pricing is simply beyond what we can consider (When I spoke with Splunk today, the cost for a system to index 5gb/day of data is over $30,000.) That is more than we spend on SQL Server (by a large multiple), more than we spend on a rack of servers (by a multiple), etc. etc. The splunk sales team is correct (that for $30K we get more value and functionality than if we spend the same building our own system), but it doesn't matter. The splunk cost is simply too high (by a multiple). Soooooo, we are looking around! Is anyone out there building a splunk like system? Our basic need: Able to listen for syslog messages on multiple udp ports Able to index the incoming data in an async way Some kind of search engine Some kind of UI An API to the search engine (to embed in our console) We currently need to index 3-5gb/day, but need to be able to scale to 10gb/day or more. We do not need a lot of history (30 days is fine). We use Windows 2008 and 2003 servers. Thanks for your thoughts!

    Read the article

  • Window 7 Host does not answer to ping

    - by gencha
    Today I tried printing on a shared printer on one of our homegroup members. Sadly it did not work (printer marked as offline). Shortly after, I noticed I can't even ping the machine that owns the printer (I also can not remotely access it in any other way I've tried). Currently I'm trying to ping the machine from the router both computers are connected to (and my machine in question doesn't answer). I do receive the echo requests (as verified with WireShark). I also added a rule in the Windows Firewall to specifically allow ICMP echo requests, but that didn't change anything. I also tried netsh firewall set icmpsetting 8 enable, but that didn't change anything either. Completely disabling the Windows Firewall has no effect on the issue either. One has to wonder, where does Windows log when and why it ignored any incoming packets? How can I get to the bottom of this? Here are some ways I found to dig deeper into the issue: Enabling logging on the Windows Firewall Enabling Windows Filtering Platform Auditing Both methods at least give more insight into the issue. The plain log file is full of entries like this: 2011-11-11 14:35:27 DROP ICMP 192.168.133.1 192.168.133.128 - - 84 - - - - 8 0 - RECEIVE So the ICMP packets are being dropped as if that was intended. The Event Viewer now gives a little bit more details: The Windows Filtering Platform has blocked a packet. Application Information: Process ID: 4 Application Name: System Network Information: Direction: Inbound Source Address: 192.168.133.1 Source Port: 0 Destination Address: 192.168.133.128 Destination Port: 8 Protocol: 1 Filter Information: Filter Run-Time ID: 214517 Layer Name: Receive/Accept Layer Run-Time ID: 44 This same entry is always repeated with 2 points of information changing: Process ID: 420 Application Name: \device\harddiskvolume2\windows\system32\svchost.exe The service host with the PID 420 is the host for the following services: Windows Audio DHCP Client Windows Event Log HomeGroup Provider TCP/IP NetBIOS Helper Security Center Additionally, there is currently this problem with the same machine: Even though my network is set to be a "Home network", I am unable to create a new homegroup.

    Read the article

  • Anonymous FTP upload on CentOS 5.2

    - by Craig
    I need to allow users to upload files to an FTP server anonymously. They should not be able to see any other files, or download files. It is a CentOS 5.2 server. I have a separate partition for the the upload area (mounted at /ftp). I have tried to set up vsftpd, followed all the instructions/advice I could find. But, when a user logs in and tries to transfer a file it throws a "553 could not create file." error. If I do a 'pwd' it shows the directory as "/" rather than the anon_root of "/ftp/anonymous". Any attempt to change the remote directory ends with "550 Failed to change directory.". I have a subdirectory "/ftp/anonymous/incoming" that is writable for the uploads SELinux is in permissive mode. I am running version 2.0.5 release 16.el5 of vsftpd. Here is the vsftpd.conf file: anonymous_enable=YES local_enable=YES write_enable=YES local_umask=002 anon_umask=007 file_open_mode=0666 anon_upload_enable=YES anon_mkdir_write_enable=NO dirmessage_enable=YES xferlog_enable=YES connect_from_port_20=YES chown_uploads=YES chown_username=inftpadm xferlog_std_format=YES nopriv_user=nobody listen=YES pam_service_name=vsftpd userlist_enable=YES tcp_wrappers=YES ftp_username=inftpadm anon_root=/ftp/anonymous anon_other_write_enable=NO anon_mkdir_write_enable=NO anon_world_readable_only=NO dirlist_enable=YES Can anyone help?

    Read the article

  • Wake on Lan Remote not waking PC while the PC does receive the packet.

    - by Nycrea
    Over the last couple of weeks, I have been trying to set up WOL from a remote location. When I use my laptop to wake the machine locally, it works just fine. (for some reason, when I try to wake from my phone with an app called "WOL wake on lan" it does not work locally either, but I'll get to that later) Anyway, when the machine is turned on, and I let it 'listen' for incoming magic packets (with a program called "WOL magic packet sender") on my specified port, it does receive them, though when turned off, the machine does not wake. When sending from phone, either locally or via 3G remotely, it does receive but does not wake as well. Because the machine does receive them when turned on and listening, but does not wake when turned off, I am convinced the cause of the problem is my receiving PC, rather than the router or the sender. Some extra info: The receiving machine is a PC running Windows 7 64bit. My router is the Netgear JWNR2000v2. I have the port I use forwarded to my PC's static IP in the router. If anyone could help, or just share your own story with the same problem, maybe we can work this out. Thanks a lot in advance.

    Read the article

  • IIS 7.5 truncating POST body containing JSON data with ASP.NET MVC 3

    - by Guneet Sahai
    I'm facing a problem which I hope is a configuration thing with IIS but is right now giving a lot of trouble. Basically I have a controller that accepts a JSON and does some processing. While it generally works fine, but every now and then when the system has some load I get an error. After some painful debugging, we figured the incoming JSON gets truncated which causes the deserialzer to fail. To narrow down the problem - we wrote a simple controller that accepts a JSON and tries to deserialize it. In case it fails it just logs it. This works fine but when I hit it using a load testing tool (JMeter) it throws the same error (truncation) for a few requests. The # of failures increased when I increase parallel connections. It starts showing with 150 concurrent requests. We are running IIS 7 on windows 2008 server with ASP.Net MVC 3 with more or less default configuration of IIS. More information available in my question below http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12662282/content-length-of-http-request-body-size

    Read the article

  • OpenVZ with bridged interfaces and VLAN

    - by Deimosfr
    Hi, I've got a problem with OpenVZ with bridged VLAN. Here is my configuration: +------+ +-------+ +-----------+ +---------+ br0 |VE101 | | | | OpenBSD |----->| Debian |------->| | | WAN |--->| Router | | OpenVZ | +------+ | | | Firewall |----->| br0 br1 | br1 +------+ +-------+ +-----------+ +---------+------->|VE102 | |br0 | | |VLAN br0.110 +------+ v +---------+ |VE103.110| +---------+ I can't make VLAN work on br0 (br0.110) and I would like to understand why. I don't have any switch so no problem with unmanageable switch. I've configured a VLAN interface on OpenBSD in /etc/hostname.vlan110: inet 192.168.110.254 255.255.255.0 NONE vlan 110 vlandev sis1 And it seems to be working fine. I've also adapted my PF configuration to work with VLAN but I don't see any incoming traffic. On my Debian Lenny, here is my interfaces configuration : # The loopback network interface auto lo iface lo inet loopback # br0 auto br0 iface br0 inet static address 192.168.100.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.100.254 network 192.168.100.0 broadcast 192.168.100.255 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_fd 9 bridge_hello 2 bridge_maxage 12 bridge_stp off # VLAN 110 auto br0.110 iface br0.110 inet static address 192.168.110.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 network 192.168.110.0 gateway 192.168.110.254 broadcast 192.168.110.255 pre-up vconfig add br0 110 post-down vconfig rem br0.110 It looks OK, but when I start my VE, here is the message: ... Configure veth devices: veth103.0 Adding interface veth103.0 to bridge br0.110 on CT0 for VE103 can't add veth103.0 to bridge br0.110: Operation not supported VE start in progress... So I've got one error here. I've followed this documentation http://wiki.openvz.org/VLAN but it doesn't work. I've certainly missed something but I don't know why. Someone could help me please? Thanks

    Read the article

  • fwbuilder/iptables manually scripted + autogenerated rules at startup?

    - by Jakobud
    Fedora 11 Our previous IT-guy setup iptable rules on our firewall in a way that is confusing me and he didn't document any of it. I was hoping someone could help me make some sense of it. The iptables service is obviously starting at startup, but the /etc/sysconfig/iptables file was untouched (default values). I found in /etc/rc.local he was doing this: # We have multiple ISP connections on our network. # The following is about 50+ rules to route incoming and outgoing # information. For example, certain internal hosts are specified here # to use ISP A connection while everyone else on the network uses # ISP B connection when access the internet. ip rule add from 99.99.99.99 table Whatever_0 ip rule add from 99.99.99.98 table Whatever_0 ip rule add from 99.99.99.97 table Whatever_0 ip rule add from 99.99.99.96 table Whatever_0 ip rule add from 99.99.99.95 table Whatever_0 ip rule add from 192.168.1.103 table ISB_A ip rule add from 192.168.1.105 table ISB_A ip route add 192.168.0.0/24 dev eth0 table ISB_B # etc... and then near the end of the file, AFTER all the ip rules he just declared, he has this: /root/fw/firewall-rules.fw He's executing the firewall rules file that was auto-generated by fwbuilder. Some questions Why is he declaring all these ip rules in rc.local instead of declaring them in fwbuilder like all the other rules? Any advantage or necessity to this? Or is this just a poorly organized way to implement firewall rules? Why is he declaring ip rules BEFORE executing the fwbuilder script? I would assume that one of the first things the fwbuilder script does it get rid of any existing rules before declaring all the new ones. Am I wrong about this? If that was the case, the fwbuilder script would basically just delete all the ip rules that were defined in rc.local. Does this make any sense? Why is he executing all this stuff at startup in rc.local instead of just using iptables-save to keep the firewall settings at /etc/sysconfig/iptables that will get implemented at runtime?

    Read the article

  • Thomson router reboots unexpectedly with an apparent remote connection attempt

    - by ChrisF
    I've got a weird problem. Every so often my rooter (a Thomson TG585 v8 running version 8.2.7.8 of it's firmware) reboots itself. It seems to be associated with this message in the event log: FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 183.178.144.177 Dst ip: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is my external IP address 183.178.144.177 resolves to 183178144177.ctinets.com We've got a student from Hong Kong staying with us at the moment and the reboots seem coincidental with him starting up his laptop. I say this because a check on ctinets.com shows it to be based in Hong Kong, though our guest's laptop doesn't appear to have any software related to this company installed. I say "apparently" as he is running the Chinese version of Windows and his English doesn't cover technical subjects like this. I know this is an incoming message but I was assuming that it was in response to something on the student's laptop which is why the first thought was malware, but we've got anti virus on all the other machines and have run malwarebytes on his with a negative result so I don't think the problem is due to a virus or (known) trojan. What else can I do to stop this and identify the cause?

    Read the article

  • Running HTTP and HTTPS connections for a single domain (say, www.example.com) through a Cisco ACE SS

    - by Paddu
    My web application config has a Cisco ACE load balancing across a server farm and I want to use the ACE as an SSL endpoint as well. To make this work, the network architect has come up with a design where all secure pages have to be served from secure.my-domain.com, while non-secure pages are served up from www.my-domain.com. The reason for this is apparently that the configuring the Cisco ACE to accept HTTPS requests on port 443 for a particular public IP prevents the simultaneous acceptance of HTTP requests on port 80 for the same IP. While I'm not a networking (or Cisco) expert, this seems to be intuitively wrong, as it would prevent any website using the Cisco ACE to serve pages on http://www.my-domain.com and https://www.my-domain.com simultaneously. In this situation, my questions are: Is this truly a limitation of the Cisco ACE when used as an SSL endpoint? If not, then can I assume that we can set up the ACE to accept connections for a particular IP on ports 80 and 443, and function as an SSL endpoint for the incoming requests on 443? Links to appropriate documentation most welcome here. Assuming the setup in the previous question, can I then redirect both sets of requests to the same server farm on the same port?

    Read the article

  • Route return traffic to correct gateway depending on service

    - by Marnix van Valen
    On my office network I have two internet connections and one CentOS server running a website (HTTPS on port 443). The website should be publicly accessible through the public IP of the first internet connection (ISP-1). The other internet connection, ISP-2, id the default gateway on the network. Both internet connections have routers (the household-kind) with NAT, SPI firewalls etc. The router on ISP-2 is a Netgear WNDR3700 (aka N600) with original firmware. The problem is that the website is unreachable. Looks like incoming traffic on ISP-1 will reach the server but the returning traffic is routed through ISP-2, effectively making the site unreachable. As far as I can tell I can't do port based routing on the WNDR3700. What are my options to make this work? I've been looking at implementing an iptables / routing based solution on the server itself but haven't been able to make that work. Update: Note that the server has one network interface connecting it to both routers.

    Read the article

  • xauth, ssh and missing home directory

    - by flolo
    We have several servers, and normaly everything works fine, except now... we get a new aircondition installed. This takes 36 hours and for this time almost all servers got shutdown, only 2 remaining servers run for the most important tasks (i.e. accepting incoming email, delivering some important websites, login-server). Everybody was informed that when they need appropiate data from the homedirs they should fetch it before take down. Long story short: Someone realized that he have run a certain program on one of the servers. No Problem, he can remote login into our login server and run the programm there without home directory (binaries are local and necessary information can be copied to the /tmp). That works like a charm until... ... the user needs to run a GUI programm. I find no easy way to make it running, usually ssh -Y honk@loginserver is enough but now the homedirectory is missing and ssh is not able to copy the cookies into ~/.Xauthority (as the file server with the home directories is down). Paranoid as all systemadmins all X-Server just listen locally not on tcp ports, so no remote X connection possible SSH config is waterproof - i.e. no way to set environment variables. My Problem is, that the generated proxy MIT cookie from ssh get lost as the .Xauthority doesnt exist. If I could retrieve it somehow I could reenter it a .Xauthority in /tmp. The only other option (besides changing the config) which came to my mind is, makeing a tunnel (netcat, or better ssh) from the remote host to the loginserver and copy the cookie manually (not sure if it the tcp-unix domain socket stuff works as expected). Any good suggestions (for the future - now our servers are already up)?

    Read the article

  • Domain Trust 2008 to 2003

    - by nick3216
    I'm having trouble setting up the trust relationship between a Windows Server 2003 and a Windows Server 2008 AD. Domain a is Windows Server 2003 Forest functional level. Domain b is a Windows Server 2008 Forest functional level. I can set up the incoming side of the trust relationship on domain "a" so that it trusts domain "b". Try as I might on domain "b" I can't set up the outgoing side of the trust relationship to domain "a". The GUI interface gives an unhelpful 'The request is not supported'. I'm not sure netdom is being more or less helpful as it refers me to FilterSIDs netdom trust /add b /uo:b\admin /po:* /d:a /ud:a\admin /pd:* /oneside:trusting To improve the security of this external trust, security identifier (SID) filtering is enabled, however, if users have been migrated to the trusted domain and their SID histories have been preserved, you may choose to turn off this feature. For more information about SID filtering and how to turn it off, see the help for netdom trust /FilterSids or see Help and Support. The request is not supported. The command failed to complete succesfully. I say 'less helpful' because Windows Server 2008 doesn't support the /FilterSIDs option. How can we force creation of this trust? Edit: Just to clarify I've checked that the [Computer Configuration\Windows Settings\Security Settings\Local Policies\Security Options] "Network access: Allow anonymous SID/Name translation” is enabled on both sides of the trust as per http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en/winserverDS/thread/cc61fc25-3569-4413-bbfd-92390eb31118

    Read the article

  • Network structure --> Server 2k8r2 <--> Livebox <--> Router <--> Other PCs

    - by Yusuf
    I have a Livebox connection to the Internet and I have set up my network as follows: - Livebox <--> Win2k8R2 Server - Livebox <--> Netgear N150 Router - Router <--> Other PCs Therefore, in my LAN, - the Livebox has IP address 192.168.1.1, - the Router 192.168.1.12 (when accessed from the Livebox or the server), - the Router 10.0.0.1 (when accessed from the PCs connected to the Router), - the server 192.168.1.2, - the PCs 10.0.0.x I was using a previous configuration, which was as follows: - Livebox <--> Netgear N150 Router - Router <--> Win2k8R2 Server - Router <--> Other PCs Everything was simple, and I just had to forward all ports for incoming connection on the Livebox to the Router, and then forward the specific ports to the Server as needed (it must be however noted that any server I use is found on the Win2k8R2 server itself). In this previous configuration, the IP addresses were as follows: - Livebox 192.168.1.1 - Router 192.168.1.12 (when seen from Livebox) - Router 10.0.0.1 (when seen from server & PCs connected to it) - Server 10.0.0.2 - PCs 10.0.0.x So now of course, my port-forwarding does not work anymore since the server is not connected (directly) to the Router. What I would like to know is how do I configure the Livebox and Router to still have the features like before? From what I understand of networks (which is very limited, btw), I see these options: Make the router assign IPs like 192.168.1.x (but then I want the forwarding to be done from the router itself, is it possible?) The forwarding on the router to the server uses IP address 10.0.0.2. I could change it to 192.168.1.2 (Is that even possible, does it work?) Forward all ports from the Livebox itself to the server, and then manage them there (Is software-based port-forwarding as secure as hardware-based?)

    Read the article

  • Openvpn - stuck on Connecting

    - by user224277
    I've got a problem with openvpn server... every time when I trying to connect to the VPN , I am getting a window with login and password box, so I typed my login and password (login = Common Name (user1) and password is from a challenge password from the client certificate. Logs : Jun 7 17:03:05 test ovpn-openvpn[5618]: Authenticate/Decrypt packet error: packet HMAC authentication failed Jun 7 17:03:05 test ovpn-openvpn[5618]: TLS Error: incoming packet authentication failed from [AF_INET]80.**.**.***:54179 Client.ovpn : client #dev tap dev tun #proto tcp proto udp remote [Server IP] 1194 resolv-retry infinite nobind persist-key persist-tun ca ca.crt cert user1.crt key user1.key <tls-auth> -----BEGIN OpenVPN Static key V1----- d1e0... -----END OpenVPN Static key V1----- </tls-auth> ns-cert-type server cipher AES-256-CBC comp-lzo yes verb 0 mute 20 My openvpn.conf : port 1194 #proto tcp proto udp #dev tap dev tun #dev-node MyTap ca /etc/openvpn/keys/ca.crt cert /etc/openvpn/keys/VPN.crt key /etc/openvpn/keys/VPN.key dh /etc/openvpn/keys/dh2048.pem server 10.8.0.0 255.255.255.0 ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt #push „route 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0? #push „route 192.168.10.0 255.255.255.0? keepalive 10 120 tls-auth /etc/openvpn/keys/ta.key 0 #cipher BF-CBC # Blowfish #cipher AES-128-CBC # AES #cipher DES-EDE3-CBC # Triple-DES comp-lzo #max-clients 100 #user nobody #group nogroup persist-key persist-tun status openvpn-status.log #log openvpn.log #log-append openvpn.log verb 3 sysctl : net.ipv4.ip_forward=1

    Read the article

  • Manual NAT on Checkpoint (Redirect all http requests to a local web server)

    - by B. Kulakli
    We have a proxy server in our internal network and I want to redirect all internet http requests to a web server in local network. It'll be like a Network Billboard that says "No direct connection is available. Set up your proxy etc." For example: A user starts the computer Opens the browser Tries to open www.google.com Should see web server output on local network Tries another web site on internet Should see web server output on local network Sets up proxy Tries to connect to a web site Web site should be loaded I have added a simple manual NAT rule to address translation in Checkpoint firewall but it simply does not work. Here is my address translation rule Source Destination Service T.Source T.Destination T.Service MY_PC A_GOOGLE_IP ALL ORIGINAL INT_WEB_SRV ORIGINAL Then when I ping A_GOOGLE_IP, replies come from INT_WEB_SRV, as I expected. However, when I try to connect A_GOOGLE_IP from browser (http://A_GOOGLE_IP), no replies come from SYN_SENT and falls into timeout. When I look at the firewall log of INT_WEB_SRV, I can see the incoming connection requests from MY_PC is accepted and NO denies. By the way, there is no problem to see INT_WEB_SRV (http://INT_WEB_SRV) from browser. My understanding is, my NAT rule at checkpoint NGX R60 does not include return packets. I definitely need some help.

    Read the article

  • How to manage multiple email addresses on multiple domains in Exchange

    - by CAD bloke
    Using Hosted Exchange Server, mostly because I use an iPhone, webmail & Outlook on 2 laptops. I want to keep everything consistent and unfragmented. Also, I want push notifications. I have 2 domains, a professional one & a personal one. Each domain has about 5 (give or take) email addresses I use for various purposes. Each domain also has a few parked domains (.net, .org, .info) aliased to the .com domain. I would like to keep emails from the 2 domains separated. Do I need an extra mail box, meaning extra expense or can I create another Exchange user on the same mailbox and create an extra account in Outlook? In either case I will have to wait for iOS4 on the iPhone to manage 2 Exchange accounts. Or am I better off just using a set of rules and folders? The aliased domains are another joy to behold entirely. It looks like I will have to add each email address variant individually. Alternatively, I reckon I may just leave the aliased domains at the pop3 host and let Outlook gather those as edge-cases. Surely I can't be the only one making my life this difficult. Anyone out there done this? From the left field - is this (much) easier in gMail? I'm not committed to Exchange (yet). Previously I used Outlook as a pop3 client with a set of filters to direct incoming traffic to folders. This worked with the aliased domains because my host directed all the aliased TLDs to the same mailbox.

    Read the article

  • The best way to hide data Encryption,Connection,Hardware

    - by Tico Raaphorst
    So to say, if i have a VPS which i own now, and i wanted to make the most secure and stable system that i can make. How would i do that? Just to try: I installed debian 7 with LVM Encryption via installation: You get the 2 partitions a /boot and a encrypted partition. When booting you will be prompted to fill in the password to unlock the encryption of the encrypted partition, Which then will have more partitions like /home /usr and swapspace which will automatically mount. Now, i do need to fill in the password over a VNC-SSL connection via the control panel website of the VPS hoster, so they can see my disk encryption password if they wanted to, they have the option if they wanted to look at what i have as data right? Data encryption on VPS , Is it possible to have a 100% secure virtual private server? So lets say i have my server and it is sitting well locked next to me, with the following examples covered bios (you have to replace bios) raid (you have to unlock raid-config) disk (you have to unlock disk encryption) filelike-zip-tar (files are stored in encrypted archives) which are in some other crypted file mounted as partition (archives mounted as partitions) all on the same system So it will be slow but it would be extremely difficult to crack the encryption. So to say if you stole the server. Then i only need to make the connection like ssh safer with single use passwords, block all incoming and outgoing connections but give one "exception" for myself. And maybe one for if i somehow lose my identity for the "exeption" What other overkill but realistic security options are available, i have heard about SElinux?

    Read the article

  • Reverse Proxy issues IIS on Windows Server 2012

    - by ahwm
    I've tried searching, but nothing seems to be working. I have a feeling it might be due to our custom Rewrite module. Here is the excerpt from the web.config that sets it up: <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true"> <add name="UrlRewriteModule" type="EShop.UrlRewriteModule"/> </modules> EShop.UrlRewriteModule is a custom class in App_Code which handles incoming requests. I have set up the rewrite rules but it doesn't seem to want to work. I'm inclined to think that our rewrite class is interfering earlier than the proxy rules and saying that the page doesn't exist. Here's what we're trying to accomplish: We are working on a new site for a client, but they have a forum that they're not likely to want to move. I set up a new subdomain to point to the new server while the site is being completed (before we go live) and want the reverse proxy to forward test.domain.com/forum to www.domain.com/forum. After the site goes live, we'll need to forward using an IP address instead. I've set up a reverse proxy successfully with nginx, but we didn't want to set up another server if we didn't need to. Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Possible Solution for Setting up a Linux VPN Server to Encrypt WLAN Traffic of Macs and iPhones on

    - by GorillaPatch
    I would like to set up a VPN server on debian linux to encrypt wireless traffic coming from my Mac or iOS device. I would like to use a certificate-based solution. Setting up a PKI infrastructure and managing certificates is OK for me. 1. Which server to pick? By looking through the internet and here on stackoverflow I found the following possible solutions: strongSwan IPSec and racoon Which solution is feasible for a linode running debian squeeze? 2. How to configure the network? If I understood correctly a VPN has a virtual network interface as an endpoint on the server side. Naively I would think that I need a DHCP server running on the server to assign a dynamic private IP (like of the class C network 192.168.xxx.xxx) to the connecting clients. Next I think I would need to set up masquerading to NAT the incoming VPN traffic to the real interface directly connected to the internet. Is this the right way to go? Do you have any configuration examples? I often saw VPN configurations used to connect to your home network, but that is not what I am looking for. I have a server up in the internet and want to use it as a proxy to encrypt traffic in insecure network environments like public WLANs.

    Read the article

  • Multi- authentication scenario for a public internet service using Kerberos

    - by StrangeLoop
    I have a public web server which has users coming from internet (via HTTPS) and from a corporate intranet. I wish to use Kerberos authentication for the intranet users so that they would be automatically logged in the web application without the need to provide any login/password (assuming they are already logged to the Windows domain). For the users coming from internet I want to provide traditional basic/form- based authentication. User/password data for these users would be stored internally in a database used by the application. Web application will be configured to use Kerberos authentication for users coming from specific intranet ip networks and basic/form- based authentication will be used for the rest of the users. From a security perspective, are there some risks involved in this kind of setup or is this a generally accepted solution? My understanding is that server doesn't need access to KDC (see Kerberos authentication, service host and access to KDC) and it can be completely isolated from AD and corporate intranet. The server has a keytab file stored locally that is used to decrypt tickets sent by the users coming from intranet. The tickets only contain username and domain of the incoming user. Server never sees the passwords of authenticated users. If the server would be hacked and the keytab file compromised, it would mean that attacker could forge tickets for any domain user and get access to the web application as any user. But typically this is the case anyway if hacker gains access to the keytab file on the local filesystem. The encryption key contained in the keytab file is based on the service account password in AD and is in hashed form, I guess it is very difficult to brute force this password if strong Kerberos encryption like AES-256-SHA1 is used. As the server has no network access to intranet, even the compromised service account couldn't be directly used for anything.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252  | Next Page >