Search Results

Search found 30932 results on 1238 pages for 'rogue security software'.

Page 268/1238 | < Previous Page | 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275  | Next Page >

• Open source system for swipe card access?

  - by Moduspwnens

  We're looking at replacing our campus-wide magnetic swipe card system with something more robust. The "programmer" side of me says there's got to be an open-source, scalable solution that already does this, but all I've been able to find are proprietary vendor-specific solutions. Ideally, it'd have the following: Based on some open standard that allows us to select from a wide selection of card readers (like IMAP or HTTP) Support different kinds of card access (magnetic strip, RFIDs, etc.) Future-proof (to the extent possible) The lack of information I'm finding leads me to believe I'm not searching for the right things... or such a solution doesn't exist. Is there not some basic, open-source solution to this (like MySQL for databases, or Moodle for an LMS, or Apache for a web server)?

  Read the article

• Encrypt LAN and wifi traffic on small private network

  - by Grimlockz

  I need some advice about encrypt all traffic on a small private network running wi-fi and LAN traffic on 192.168.0.x network. The network would comprise of client laptops connecting to the wi-fi router (192.168.0.254) via ethernet connection or wireless. The main purpose of the server is for the client laptops to talk to two servers on different IP's (192.168.0.200 and 192.168.0.201) on ports 80 and 433. My main concern is having packet sniffers and what not getting access to the data. The only ways I see at the moment is to have VPN running on the network or use IPSec policy's to do this. Any other ways guys?

  Read the article

• Does WD Drive Lock encrypt the data?

  - by ssg

  I wonder if WD Drive Lock ineed encrypts the data on a Western Digital My Book Essential device or just puts a firmware-level password on the device. If it's just a password the data surely could be retrieved by a third party. I could not find anything on about that on user manuals. I found a blog saying "data is secured with AES256" bla bla but that doesn't say anything about if the password could be compromised or not. Because I don't see any delays when I add/remove the password. On the other hand when I enable BitLocker, it takes hours before it encrypts everything with my password.

  Read the article

• Information about recent code injection from http://superiot.ru

  - by klennepette

  Hello, I manage the hosting for a few dozen websites. Since about a week I've been finding this code in 12 different websites in theindex.php files: <script type="text/javascript" src="http://superiot.ru/**.js"></script> // The name of the actual javascript file differs <!-- some hash here--> Some of the websites are on different servers, some aren't. I'm just wondering if anyone else has been seeing this too. Edit with some more information: All servers are centOS 5.3 PHP versions are either 5.2.9 or 5.2.4 Apache versions are either 2.2.3 or 1.3.39

  Read the article

• Which trojan is this?

  - by omgHelpMe

  Could you identify this trojan/keylogger based on the set of files? I've been able to find out that the file names are random except rp.dll. Also, the icons are always the same. Thanks guys.

  Read the article

• Network vulnerability and port scanning services

  - by DigitalRoss

  I'm setting up a periodic port scan and vulnerability scan for a medium-sized network implementing a customer-facing web application. The hosts run CentOS 5.4. I've used tools like Nmap and OpenVAS, but our firewall rules have special cases for connections originating from our own facilities and servers, so really the scan should be done from the outside. Rather than set up a VPS or EC2 server and configuring it with various tools, it seems like this could just be contracted out to a port and vulnerability scanning service. If they do it professionally they may be more up to date than something I set up and let run for a year... Any recommendations or experience doing this?

  Read the article

• How to securely store and update backup on remote server via ssh/rsync

  - by Sergey P. aka azure

  I have about 200 Gb of pictures (let's say about 1 mb/file, 200k files) on my desktop. I have access (including root access) to remote linux server. And I want to have updateable backup of my pictures on remote server. rsync seems to be the right tool for such kind of job. But other people also have access (including root access) to this server and I want to keep my pictures private. So the question is: what is the best way to keep private files on remote "shared" linux server securely?

  Read the article

• "Must have" Ubuntu packages

  - by blntechie

  Inspired by this question What are the must have packages for Ubuntu? List one in each answer. Scope is for Ubuntu only. Debian can have an another thread.

  Read the article

• How to handle user accounts for many sites running on same server

  - by Simon Courtenage

  Background to this question: I want to host multiple e-commerce sites on the same server, each with their own separate customer login application. Each site's login application needs to be secured by SSL. I'm unsure how best to handle this. For example, do I need to acquire a separate SSL certificate for each site (in which case, how do I do this dynamically, as the sites are created), or do I handle this using ONE login gateway-style application, which handles it on behalf of all the sites via a kind of transparent redirect? I'd be grateful for any pointers or advice. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Trusted Root certificates regularly disappear on Windows 7

  - by Evgeny

  I've installed several self-signed certificates on my Windows 7 Ultimate x64 machine for development purposes. One was installed into Trusted Root CAs and 2 were installed into My Certificates and Trusted People. Every day or two the certificate installed into Trusted Root CAs disappears and I have to re-install it! This is annoying the hell out of me. Why is it happening and how do I stop it? The other certificates (installed into other stores) do not disappear. My first thought was some kind of Group Policy, but my machine is not part of a domain - though it does obtains its IP address from a corporate DHCP server, so I'm not sure if they can somehow still manage to apply Group Policy to me.

  Read the article

• How to stop registration attempts on Asterisk

  - by Travesty3

  The main question: My Asterisk logs are littered with messages like these: [2012-05-29 15:53:49] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:50] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:55] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:55] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:53:57] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device <sip:[email protected]>;tag=cb23fe53 [2012-05-29 15:53:57] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device <sip:[email protected]>;tag=cb23fe53 [2012-05-29 15:54:02] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 15:54:03] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '37.75.210.177' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 21:20:36] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '"55435217"<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '65.218.221.180' - No matching peer found [2012-05-29 21:20:36] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Registration from '"1731687005"<sip:[email protected]>' failed for '65.218.221.180' - No matching peer found [2012-05-30 01:18:58] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=dEBcOzUysX [2012-05-30 01:18:58] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=9zUari4Mve [2012-05-30 01:19:00] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=sOYgI1ItQn [2012-05-30 01:19:02] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=2EGLTzZSEi [2012-05-30 01:19:04] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=j0JfZoPcur [2012-05-30 01:19:06] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=Ra0DFDKggt [2012-05-30 01:19:08] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=rR7q7aTHEz [2012-05-30 01:19:10] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=VHUMtOpIvU [2012-05-30 01:19:12] NOTICE[5578] chan_sip.c: Sending fake auth rejection for device "unknown" <sip:[email protected]>;tag=JxZUzBnPMW I use Asterisk for an automated phone system. The only thing it does is receives incoming calls and executes a Perl script. No outgoing calls, no incoming calls to an actual phone, no phones registered with Asterisk. It seems like there should be an easy way to block all unauthorized registration attempts, but I have struggled with this for a long time. It seems like there should be a more effective way to prevent these attempts from even getting far enough to reach my Asterisk logs. Some setting I could turn on/off that doesn't allow registration attempts at all or something. Is there any way to do this? Also, am I correct in assuming that the "Registration from ..." messages are likely people attempting to get access to my Asterisk server (probably to make calls on my account)? And what's the difference between those messages and the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages? Further detail: I know that the "Registration from ..." lines are intruders attempting to get access to my Asterisk server. With Fail2Ban set up, these IPs are banned after 5 attempts (for some reason, one got 6 attempts, but w/e). But I have no idea what the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages mean or how to stop these potential intrusion attempts. As far as I can tell, they have never been successful (haven't seen any weird charges on my bills or anything). Here's what I have done: Set up hardware firewall rules as shown below. Here, xx.xx.xx.xx is the IP address of the server, yy.yy.yy.yy is the IP address of our facility, and aa.aa.aa.aa, bb.bb.bb.bb, and cc.cc.cc.cc are the IP addresses that our VoIP provider uses. Theoretically, ports 10000-20000 should only be accessible by those three IPs.+-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ | Order | Source Ip | Protocol | Direction | Action | Destination Ip | Destination Port | +-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ | 1 | cc.cc.cc.cc/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 2 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 80 | | 3 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2749 | | 4 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 443 | | 5 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 53 | | 6 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1981 | | 7 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1991 | | 8 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2001 | | 9 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 137-138 | | 10 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 139 | | 11 | yy.yy.yy.yy/255.255.255.255 | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 445 | | 14 | aa.aa.aa.aa/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 17 | bb.bb.bb.bb/255.255.255.255 | udp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 10000-20000 | | 18 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1971 | | 19 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 2739 | | 20 | any | tcp | inbound | permit | xx.xx.xx.xx/255.255.255.255 | 1023-1050 | | 21 | any | all | inbound | deny | any on server | 1-65535 | +-------+-----------------------------+----------+-----------+--------+-----------------------------+------------------+ Set up Fail2Ban. This is sort of working, but it's reactive instead of proactive, and doesn't seem to be blocking everything (like the "Sending fake auth rejection ..." messages). Set up rules in sip.conf to deny all except for my VoIP provider. Here is my sip.conf with almost all commented lines removed (to save space). Notice at the bottom is my attempt to deny all except for my VoIP provider:[general] context=default allowguest=no allowoverlap=no bindport=5060 bindaddr=0.0.0.0 srvlookup=yes disallow=all allow=g726 allow=ulaw allow=alaw allow=g726aal2 allow=adpcm allow=slin allow=lpc10 allow=speex allow=g726 insecure=invite alwaysauthreject=yes ;registertimeout=20 registerattempts=0 register = user:pass:[email protected]:5060/700 [mysipprovider] type=peer username=user fromuser=user secret=pass host=sip.mysipprovider.com fromdomain=sip.mysipprovider.com nat=no ;canreinvite=yes qualify=yes context=inbound-mysipprovider disallow=all allow=ulaw allow=alaw allow=gsm insecure=port,invite deny=0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 permit=aa.aa.aa.aa/255.255.255.255 permit=bb.bb.bb.bb/255.255.255.255 permit=cc.cc.cc.cc/255.255.255.255

  Read the article

• Disable mod_security on Dreamhost, for a single cgi script

  - by Hippyjim

  Hi I've searched around a lot, and tried various tweaks to .htaccess files to try to turn off mod_security for a particular cgi script (uber uploader) but it doesn't seem to have any effect. The most popular one I see rehashed all over the web is: # Turn off mod_security filtering. SecFilterEngine Off # The below probably isn't needed, # but better safe than sorry. SecFilterScanPOST Off Which looks relative simple to me - if "SecFilterEngine" is in some way related to mod_security of course. Shame it has absolutely no effect! Does anyone have a suggested way I can simply disable it for a request to any file in my cgi-bin directory?

  Read the article

• Transfer photos to iPod photo without iTunes?

  - by Oded

  I want to manage the photos on my iPod photo, but any iPod app I have tried will either not be able to transfer photos or corrupt the photos (they look posterized on the iPod). Does anyone use an app that will do this?

  Read the article

• Bad ways to secure wireless network.

  - by Moshe

  I was wondering if anybody had any thoughts on this, as I recently saw a Verizon DSL network set up where the WEP key was the last 8 characters of the router's MAC address. (It's bad enough that hey were using WEP in the first place...)

  Read the article

• Creating limited user account on Windows 7

  - by serena

  I'm sharing my PC (Win 7 x64 Home Premium) with a friend, and I wanna create a guest user for her. I don't want her to reach my files, Windows settings, program adjustments etc. She should just surf the net, create/edit her own Word, Excel documents, and simple things like these. How can I create this user account and make the necessary arrangements for limitations?

  Read the article

• How to disable mod_security2 rule (false positive) for one domain on centos 5

  - by nicholas.alipaz

  Hi I have mod_security enabled on a centos5 server and one of the rules is keeping a user from posting some text on a form. The text is legitimate but it has the words 'create' and an html <table> tag later in it so it is causing a false positive. The error I am receiving is below: [Sun Apr 25 20:36:53 2010] [error] [client 76.171.171.xxx] ModSecurity: Access denied with code 500 (phase 2). Pattern match "((alter|create|drop)[[:space:]]+(column|database|procedure|table)|delete[[:space:]]+from|update.+set.+=)" at ARGS:body. [file "/usr/local/apache/conf/modsec2.user.conf"] [line "352"] [id "300015"] [rev "1"] [msg "Generic SQL injection protection"] [severity "CRITICAL"] [hostname "www.mysite.com"] [uri "/node/181/edit"] [unique_id "@TaVDEWnlusAABQv9@oAAAAD"] and here is /usr/local/apache/conf/modsec2.user.conf (line 352) #Generic SQL sigs SecRule ARGS "((alter|create|drop)[[:space:]]+(column|database|procedure|table)|delete[[:space:]]+from|update.+set.+=)" "id:1,rev:1,severity:2,msg:'Generic SQL injection protection'" The questions I have are: What should I do to "whitelist" or allow this rule to get through? What file do I create and where? How should I alter this rule? Can I set it to only be allowed for the one domain, since it is the only one having the issue on this dedicated server or is there a better way to exclude table tags perhaps? Thanks guys

  Read the article

• WEP/WPA/WPA2 and wifi sniffing

  - by jcea

  Hi, I know that WEP traffic can be "sniffed" by any user of the WIFI. I know that WPA/WPA2 traffic is encrypted using a different link key for each user, so they can't sniff traffic... unless they capture the initial handshake. If you are using a PSK (preshared key) schema, then you recover the link key trivially from this initial handshake. If you don't know the PSK, you can capture the handshake and try to crack the PSK by bruteforce offline. Is my understanding correct so far?. I know that WPA2 has AES mode and can use "secure" tokens like X.509 certificates and such, and it is said to be secure against sniffing because capturing the handshake doesn't help you. So, is WPA2+AES secure (so far) against sniffing, and how it actually works?. That is, how is the (random) link key negociated?. When using X.509 certificates or a (private and personal) passphrase. Do WPA/WPA2 have other sniffer-secure modes beside WPA2+AES? How is broadcast traffic managed to be received by all the WIFI users, if each has a different link key?. Thanks in advance! :).

  Read the article

• What is the easiest video editing program to use on Windows

  - by Rob Allen

  I am looking for suggestions for video editing programs like iMovie, which are dead simple to use. We just need basic editing and titling features for making videos of our kids slightly more watchable. Nothing too fancy. The major requirement is that it needs to be extremely easy to use even without prior editor experience. We're running Windows XP on some machines and Vista the rest. Free is preferred however ease-of use trumps price.

  Read the article

• How do I remove the ServerSignature added by mod_fcgid?

  - by matthew

  I'm running Mod_Security and I'm using the SecServerSignature to customize the Server header that Apache returns. This part works fine, however I'm also running mod_fcgid which appends "mod_fcgid/2.3.5" to the header. Is there any way I can turn this off? Setting ServerSignature off doesn't do anything. I was able to get it to go away by changing the ServerTokens but that removed the customization I had added.

  Read the article

• Prevent registry changes by users

  - by graf_ignotiev

  Background: I run a small computer lab of 10 computers using Windows 7 x64 Enterprise. Our users are set up as limited users. For additional restrictions, I set up local group policy for non-administrators using the microsoft management console. Problem: Recently, I found out that some of these restrictions had been removed. Reviewing the settings MMC and in ntuser.pol showed that the settings should still be in place. However, the related registry settings were missing in ntuser.dat. I already have registry editing disabled in the GPO (though not in silent mode). Question: What is the best way to deal with this situation? Should I look into preventing registry setting changes? Should I set up registry auditing to found out how these keys are getting changed in the first place? Or should I give up the ghost and write some kind of logon script that enforces registry values if they've been change? Any other ideas?

  Read the article

• RAID Read/Write Speed Gradually Slows

  - by Nalandial

  This is actually a server at home, but I felt it was sufficiently complicated as to not have it on SuperUser and could easily apply to a professional situation. I have a file server running Debian (Lenny 5.0.4), and it has an XFS LVM on top of a RAID 5 with the OS drive separate from the RAID. It's also running apache, samba, and postgresql. Side note: before anyone asks, I'm using RAID5 because I get more bang for the buck on raw drive space, and still have some fault tolerance. When the box is started (via shutdown or reboot) reading/writing to it's samba share maxes out the gigabit network connection. Over time, this slowly degrades eventually becoming < 10MB/s; however, when rebooted the speed returns to maxing out the connection. Why is this happening, and is there a way to 'clear' out whatever's causing it without taking the server down? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Media player for Windows with recommendation system like in Amarok

  - by raj

  I'm looking for a media player for Windows which supports automatic recommendations like in Amarok, something other than Amarok.

  Read the article

• stunnel crashing

  - by Jay

  I'm trying to use stunnel to secure a legacy application's communications. I can't seem to get it setup and working. Can anyone provide any hints where I'm going wrong? Here's what I'm trying to accomplish: A windows service on a client machine connects to a server on port 7000 using TCP. I'd like to encrypt the communication between client and server. Here's what I've tried: Created a new server that accepts ssl connections on port 7443. Got a certificate for the server and installed it. That seems to work with my test setup. Installed stunnel on my windows machine (version 7.43 from the distribution archive file). Installed libssl32.dll and libeay32.dll in the same directory as stunnel.exe ( from the openssl-0.9.8h-1 binary distribution). Installed it as a service using "stunnel -install" Configured stunnel as follows: debug=7 output=C:\p4\internal\Utility\Proxy\proxy.log service=Proxy taskbar=no [exchange] accept=7000 client=yes connect=proxy.blah.com:7443 I changed my hosts file to trick the old application into connecting through stunnel: server.blah.com 127.0.0.1 # when client looks up server it goes to stunnel proxy.blah.com IP-address-of-server.blah.com # stunnel connects to new server "server.blah.com" now resolves to the machine it's running on (i.e. stunnel). "proxy.blah.com" goes to the real server. stunnel should connect to the server. I start the stunnel service and try to connect. It looks like it's working but the stunnel service just shuts down with no message. 2010.04.19 13:16:21 LOG5[4924:3716]: stunnel 4.33 on x86-pc-mingw32-gnu with OpenSSL 0.9.8h 28 May 2008 2010.04.19 13:16:21 LOG5[4924:3716]: Threading:WIN32 SSL:ENGINE Sockets:SELECT,IPv6 2010.04.19 13:16:49 LOG5[4924:3748]: Service exchange accepted connection from 127.0.0.1:4134 2010.04.19 13:16:49 LOG6[4924:3748]: connect_blocking: connecting x.80.60.32:7443 2010.04.19 13:16:49 LOG5[4924:3748]: connect_blocking: connected x.80.60.32:7443 2010.04.19 13:16:49 LOG5[4924:3748]: Service exchange connected remote server from x.253.120.19:4135 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG5[3668:3856]: Reading configuration from file stunnel.conf 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: Snagged 64 random bytes from C:/.rnd 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: Wrote 1024 new random bytes to C:/.rnd 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: RAND_status claims sufficient entropy for the PRNG 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: PRNG seeded successfully 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: SSL context initialized for service exchange 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG5[3668:3856]: Configuration successful 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG5[3668:3856]: No limit detected for the number of clients 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: FD=312 in non-blocking mode 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: Option SO_REUSEADDR set on accept socket 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: Service exchange bound to 0.0.0.0:7000 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG7[3668:3856]: Service exchange opened FD=312 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG5[3668:3856]: stunnel 4.33 on x86-pc-mingw32-gnu with OpenSSL 0.9.8h 28 May 2008 2010.04.19 13:20:24 LOG5[3668:3856]: Threading:WIN32 SSL:ENGINE Sockets:SELECT,IPv6 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:4556]: Service exchange accepted FD=372 from 127.0.0.1:4156 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:4556]: Creating a new thread 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:4556]: New thread created 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: Service exchange started 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: FD=372 in non-blocking mode 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG5[3668:3756]: Service exchange accepted connection from 127.0.0.1:4156 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: FD=396 in non-blocking mode 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG6[3668:3756]: connect_blocking: connecting x.80.60.32:7443 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: connect_blocking: s_poll_wait x.80.60.32:7443: waiting 10 seconds 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG5[3668:3756]: connect_blocking: connected x.80.60.32:7443 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG5[3668:3756]: Service exchange connected remote server from x.253.120.19:4157 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: Remote FD=396 initialized 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): before/connect initialization 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 write client hello A 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 read server hello A 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 read server certificate A 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 read server done A 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 write client key exchange A 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 write change cipher spec A 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 write finished A 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 flush data 2010.04.19 13:21:02 LOG7[3668:3756]: SSL state (connect): SSLv3 read finished A The client thinks the connection is closed: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it 127.0.0.1:7000 at System.Net.Sockets.Socket.DoConnect(EndPoint endPointSnapshot, SocketAddress socketAddress) at System.Net.Sockets.Socket.Connect(EndPoint remoteEP) at Service.ConnUtility.Connect() Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2012 - SSL Cypher Suite Order Not Long Enough

  - by Sam

  I want to re-order the cypher suites on our new Windows Server 2012 box to help mitigate the BEAST vulnerability for our clients. I went to Local Group Policy => Computer Configuration => Administrative Templates => Network => SSL Configuration Settings, opened SSL Cypher Suite Order, enabled it, and copied the values from the SSL Cypher Suites textbox. I pasted them into notepad, re-ordered them, then copied+pasted them back into the SSL Cypher Suites textbox. However, the box isn't long enough to hold them all, despite the fact that the length didn't change. I would have to drop the last 3 cyphers (SSL_CK_DES_192_EDE3_CBC_WITH_MD5,TLS_RSA_WITH_NULL_SHA256,TLS_RSA_WITH_NULL_SHA) in order for it to fit. Should I just drop them? Other ideas?

  Read the article

• e2fsck / resize2fs problems

  - by BlakBat

  I've got 6 drives (each 1.5T, all same model and firmware revision) that are part of a RAID5 array. The RAID5 makes a LVM volume group and a logical group. The latter contains only one ext3 partition. I've recently ran: e2fsck -f /dev/vg03/lv01 && resize2fs -M /dev/vg03/lv01 which exited without an error. Now when I try to mount /dev/vg03/lv01 I get: EXT3-fs error (device dm-0): ext3_check_descriptors: Block bitmap for group 30533 not in group (block 1000532368)! EXT3-fs: group descriptors corrupted! How do I get out of this predicament? This is all the info I can currently give you: fdisk -l /dev/sd[cdefgh] shows (correctly) that they are "Linux raid autodetect" but fdisk now shows: fdisk -l /dev/md0 Disk /dev/md0: 7501.5 GB, 7501495664640 bytes ... Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table (instead of a LVM type partition) fdisk -l /dev/vg03/lv01 Disk /dev/vg03/lv01: 7501.5 GB, 7501491732480 bytes ... Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/vg03/lv01 doesn't contain a valid partition table (instead of a ext3 type partition) I've tried: e2fsck -fy /dev/vg03/lv01 e2fsck 1.41.12 (17-May-2010) e2fsck: Group descriptors look bad... trying backup blocks... Block bitmap for group 30533 is not in group. (block 1000532368) Relocate? yes Inode bitmap for group 30533 is not in group. (block 1000532369) Relocate? yes Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes Relocating group 30533's block bitmap to 1000524246... Error allocating 1 contiguous block(s) in block group 30533 for inode bitmap: Could not allocate block in ext2 filesystem e2fsck: aborted Extra information I can give you: cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active (auto-read-only) raid5 sdg1[0] sdh1[5] sdf1[4] sde1[3] sdc1[2] sdd1[1] 7325679360 blocks level 5, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [6/6] [UUUUUU] bitmap: 1/175 pages [4KB], 4096KB chunk unused devices: Lastly, all smartctl tests (short and extendend) showed no errors on any of the disks. Should I try to resize2fs to grow /dev/vg03/lv01 and redo a e2fsck ? Should I cfdisk /dev/md0 and /dev/vg03/lv01 back to their real types? Thanks in advance for all and any help. 2011-09-20 UPDATE I issued the following commands and was able to remount the partition, but by viewing the size (df) of before and after, it seems that 1Tb of data have gone missing. By checking the MD5SUMS (from an old backup) of some files with the "same" files from the remounted partition, some errors have been detected. Commands issued to remount the partition were: dumpe2fs /dev/vg03/lv01 Block count: 1000491435<br /> Block size: 4096<br /> tune2fs -O ^has_journal /dev/vg03/lv01 resize2fs -p /dev/vg03/lv01 dumpe2fs /dev/vg03/lv01 Block count: 1831418880<br /> Block size: 4096<br /> mount -o ro,noatime /dev/vg03/lv01 /mnt/raid OK... but files have been damaged / gone missing.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275  | Next Page >