Search Results

Search found 13810 results on 553 pages for 'security roles'.

Page 106/553 | < Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >

• VPN on a ubuntu server limited to certain ips

  - by Hultner

  I got an server running Ubuntu Server 9.10 and I need access to it and other parts of my network sometimes when not at home. There's two places I need to access the VPN from. One of the places to an static IP and the other got an dynamic but with DynDNS setup so I can always get the current IP if I want to. Now when it comes to servers people call me kinda paranoid but security is always my number one priority and I never like to allow access to the server outside the network therefor I have two things I have to have on this VPN. One it shouldn't be accessiable from any other IP then these 2 and two it has to use a very secure key so it will be virtually impossible to bruteforce even from the said IP´s. I have no experience what so ever in setting up VPNs, I have used SSH tunneling but never an actuall VPN. So what would be the best, most stable, safest and performance effiecent way to set this up on a Ubuntu Server? Is it possible or should I just set up some kind of SSH Tunnel instead? Thanks on beforehand for answers.

  Read the article

• Isolating a computer in the network

  - by Karma Soone

  I've got a small network and want to isolate one of the computers from the whole network. My Network: <----> Trusted PC 1 ADSL Router --> Netgear dg834g <----> Trusted PC 2 <----> Untrusted PC I want to isolate this untrusted PC in the network. That means the network should be secure against : * ARP Poisoning * Sniffing * Untrusted PC should not see / reach any other computers within the network but can go out the internet. Static DHCP and switch usage solves the problem of sniffing/ARP poisoning. I can enable IPSec between computers but the real problem is sniffing the traffic between the router and one of the trusted computers. Against getting a new IP address (second IP address from the same computer) I need a firewall with port security (I think) or I don't think my ADSL router supports that. To summarise I'm looking for a hardware firewall/router which can isolate one port from the rest of the network. Could you recommend such a hardware or can I easily accomplish that with my current network?

  Read the article

• Simple way to set up port knocking on Linux?

  - by Ace Paus

  There are well known benefits of Port Knocking utilities when utilized in combination with firewall IP table modification. Port Knocking is best used to provide an additional layer of security over other tools such as the OpenSSH server. I would like some help setting it up on a ubuntu server. I looked at some port knocking implementations here: PORTKNOCKING - A system for stealthy authentication across closed ports. IMPLEMENTATIONS http://www.portknocking.org/view/implementations fwknop looked good. I found an Android client here. And fwknop (both client and server) is in the ubuntu repos. Unfortunately, setting it up (on the server) looks difficult. I do not have iptables set up. My proficiency with iptables is limited (but I understand the basics). I'm looking for a series of simple steps to set it up. I only want to open the SSH port in response to a valid knock. Alternatively, I would consider other port knocking implementations, if they are much simpler to set up and the desired Linux and Android clients are available.

  Read the article

• unable to copy file to folder, permission denied without explanation

  - by ValekHalfHeart

  Recently Norton Internet security deleted ml.exe (an assembler I use to program in masm32) off of my computer, thinking that one of the programs I had written with it was a virus (it was most certainly not). Fortunately, I had a copy of ml.exe backed up in an external hard drive, and tried to copy it over to my computer. The old ml.exe was located in C:\masm32\bin, so I tried to copy the new one to that location. After disabling Norton (which had opened the folder and preventing me from accessing it), I am still unable to copy the new file to C:\masm32\bin. When I tried, Windows announced that I would need Administrator permission to copy the file. Since I'm an admin, I figured this wouldn't be a problem although it was unexpected, as I have never had to provide administrator permission to access this folder before. However, instead of prompting me to enter my password, Windows simply refuses to copy the file: I repeat, I was not asked to provide a password. It simply says that I do not have permission. Does anyone know what's happening and how to fix it? Is Norton still causing problems, or it something else?

  Read the article

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

  - by Ryan

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

  Read the article

• Patch management on multiple systems

  - by Pierre

  I'm in charge of auditing the security configuration of an important farm of Unix servers. So far, I came up with a way to assess the basic configuration but not the installed updates. The very problem here is that I just can't trust the package management tools on those machine. Indeed some of them did not sync with the repository for a long time (So I can't do a "yum check-updates" on Redhat for example). Some of those servers are not even connected to the internet and use an company repository. Another problem is that I have multiple target systems: AIX, Debian, Centos/Redhat, etc... So the version could be different (AIX) and the tools available will be different. And, last but not least, I can't install anything on the target system. So I need to use a script to retrieve the information and either: process it directly or save the information to be able to process it later on a server (Which may happen to run a different distribution than the one on which the information have been retrieved). The best ideas I could come up with were: either retrieve the list of installed packages on the machine (dpkg -l for example on debian) and process it on a dedicated server (Directly parsing the "Packages" file of debian repositories). Still, the problem remains the same for AIX and Redhat... or use Nessus' scripts to assess vulnerability on the installed packages, but I find this a bit dirty. Does anyone know any better/efficient way of doing this ? P.S: I already took time to review some answers to similar problems. Unfortunately Chef, puppet, ... don't meet the requirements I have to meet. Edit: Long story short. I need to have the list of missing updates on a Unix system just like MBSA on Windows. I'm not authorized to install anything on this system as it's not mine. All I have are scripts languages. Thanks.

  Read the article

• SQL Server 2008 login problem with ASP.NET application: Failed to open the explicitly specified database

  - by eulerfx

  I am running SQL Server 2008 Express Edition on Windows Server 2008 with an ASP.NET application which must access the server. The ASP.NET application is associated with an application pool that runs on the NetworkService account. This account in turn has a Login and User record on SQL Server in the required database. When I attempt to run the ASP.NET website I get a blank page and when viewed in the error log, I seem to be getting this information event record: Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE'. Reason: Failed to open the explicitly specified database. [CLIENT: myLocalMachine] The connection string has Trusted_Connection=True; and the required database specified. When I explicitly specify the user name and password I get another login error stating the password is incorrect, even though the same un/pw combination works through SQL Server Management studio. The NETWORK SERVICE account seems to have all the required privileges for the database. Also, I made a test ASP.NET website project which does a simple select from a table in that database, and using the same config file I am not getting the error and it seems to work. Is it something to do with trust levels then, because the original ASP.NET web app references various DLLs including open source libraries. Also, the application does not seem to be able to write to the event log itself, throwing a security exception, even though everything in the config files, including machine.config states the app is in full trust.

  Read the article

• Understanding Authorized Access to your Google Account

  - by firebush

  I'm having trouble understanding what I'm am granting to sites when they have "Authorized Access to my Google Account." This is how I see what has authorized access: Log into gmail. Click on the link that is my name in the upper-right corner, and from the drop-down select Account. From the list of links to the left, select Security. Click on Edit next to Authorized applications and sites. Authenticate again. At the top of the page, I see a set of sites that have authorized access to my account in various ways. I'm having trouble finding out information about what is being told to me here. There's no "help" link anywhere on the page and my Google searches are coming up unproductive. From the looks of what I see there, Google has access to my Google calendar. I feel comfortable about that, I think. But other sites have authorization to "Sign in using your Google account". My question is, what exactly does that authorization mean? What do the sites that have authorization to "Sign in using my Google account" have the power to do? I hope that this simply means that they authorize using the same criterion that gmail does. I assume that this doesn't grant them the ability to access my email. Can someone please calm my paranoia by describing (or simply pointing me to a site that describes) what these terms mean exactly? Also, if you have any thoughts about the safety of this feature, please share. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Windows 7 hangs with 100% disk activity but only when online

  - by jeremy

  I have the same problem as seemingly many other people here, and I think we might all be experiencing the same issue: a compatibility issue in Windows 7 between hard drive and network controller or drivers. I've tried firmware updates of my entire board, wiping my drive and reinstalling from scratch. And yet the problem persists, which suggests it is an operating system error, as the hard drive checks out 100% physically. Additionally, the only time it does not occur is when in safe mode WITHOUT networking. With networking, there are spikes in disc access every so often and a huge flow of processes accessing the disc simultaneously that literally "stick" the disc, and physically jolting my computer unsticks it. Again, this has been tested for hours in a professional service environment, and without network access on, things are fine. As soon as there's network access available, the disc access occasionally cranks up to 100% and sticks everything. I'm using Microsoft Security Essentials, but this also happened under Norton, then McAfee. Again, this happened again after a complete wipe, so the likelihood of malware causing it seems low. I don't visit unsecure sites anyway, as far as I know. This, to me, narrows it down to a Windows 7 process that is somehow repeatedly corrupted, perhaps a corrupt .dll or driver, causing a conflict at the operating system level and temporary hard drive failure. I would encourage anyone who knows more about this stuff (which is probably most people!) to take a shot at this one, and I would encourage anyone else with a sticking hard drive in windows 7 64-bit to check on whether it occurs during safe mode without networking.

  Read the article

• Trouble Downloading from some sites

  - by Fletch

  I am trying to download the new Microsoft Security Essentials but when I click on the Download button instead of getting the Download box popup nothing comes up. The progess bar at the bottom shows it doing something then when it reaches 100% nada. I can down load from HP (Drivers) and sites like Majorgeeks with no problem. I also have this problem on the Adobe download page when trying to get the shockwave and flash player. I am fixing my Granddaughters laptop that she got from someone else. There were over 26 Trojans listed on it when I installed AVG and they would not go away. I used CCleaner and HiJack This and deleted everything I could and wiped the freespace. Then ran AVG again and this time after finding a few Trojans and deleting them the system was reported as clean. IE8 then would not connect to the net so I used my computer to DL a copy and put it on the laptop, after that I was able to use the laptop to connect to the net and download a driver to get the sound working again. Laptop HP dv4000 XP Pro

  Read the article

• Does Guest WiFi on an Access Point make any sense? [migrated]

  - by Jason

  I have a Belkin WiFi Router which offers a feature of a secondary Guest Access WiFi network. Of course, the idea is that the Guest network doesn't have access to the computers/devices on the main network. I also have a Comcast-issues Cable Modem/Router device with mutliple wired ports, but no WiFi-capabilities. I prefer to only run one router/DHCP/NAT instead of both the Comcast Router and the Belkin Router, so I can disable the Routing functions of the Belkin and allow the Comcast Router to But if I disable the Routing functions of the Belkin device, the Guest WiFi network is still available. Is this configuration just as secure as when the Belkin acts as a Router? I guess the question comes down to this: Do Guest WiFi's provide security by 1) only allowing requests to IPs found in-front of the device, or do they work by 2) disallowing requests to IPs on the same subnet? 1) Would mean that Guest WiFi on an access point provides no benefit 2) Would mean that the Guest WiFi functionality can work even if the device is just an access point. Or maybe something else entirely?

  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

• 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

• SFTP access without hassle

  - by enobayram

  I'm trying to provide access to a local folder for someone over the internet. After googling around a bit, I've come to the conclusion that SFTP is the safest thing to expose through the firewall to the chaotic and evil world of the Internet. I'm planning to use the openssh-server to this end. Even though I trust that openssh will stop a random attacker, I'm not so sure about the security of my computer once someone is connected through ssh. In particular, even if I don't give that person's user account any privileges whatsoever, he might just be able to "su" to, say, "nobody". And since I was never worried about such things before, I might have given some moderate privileges to nobody at some point (not sudo rights surely!). I would of course value your comments about giving privileges to nobody in the first place, but that's not the point, really. My aim is to give SFTP access to someone in such a sandboxed state that I shouldn't need to worry about such things (at least not more so than I should have done before). Is this really possible? Am I speaking nonsense or worried in vain?

  Read the article

• How to disable Utility Manager (Windows Key + U)

  - by Skizz

  How do I disable the Windows + U hotkey in Windows XP? Alternatively, how do I stop the utility manager from being active? The two are related. The utilty manager is currently providing a potential security hole and I need to remove it[1]. The system I'm developing uses a custom Gina to log in and start a custom shell. This removes most Windows Key hotkeys but the Win + U still pops up the manager app. Update: Things I've tried and don't work: NoWinKeys registry setting - this only affects explorer hotkeys; Renaming utilman.exe - program reappears next login; Third party software - not really an option, these machines are audited by the clients and additional, third party software would be unlikely to be accepted. Also, the proedure needs to be reasonably straightforward - this has to be done by field service engineers to existing machines (machines currently in Russia, Holland, France, Spain, Ireland and USA). [1] The hole is via the internet options in the help viewer the utility app links to.

  Read the article

• What can inexperienced admin expect after server setup completed seemingly fine? [closed]

  - by Miloshio

  Inexperienced person seems to have done everything fine so far. This is his very first time that he is the only one in charge for LAMP server. He has installed OS, network, Apache, PHP, MySQL, Proftpd, MTA & MDA software, configured VirtualHosts properly (facts because he calls himself admin), done user management and various configuration settings with respect to security recommendations and... everything is fine for now... For now. If you were directing horror movie for server admin above mentioned what would you make up for boogieman that showed up and started to pursue him? Omitting hardware disaster cases for which one cannot do anything 'from remote', what is the most common causes of server or part-of-server or server-related significant failure when managed by inexperienced admin? I have in mind something that is newbie admins very often missing which is leading to later intervention of someone with experience? May that be some uncontrolled CPU-eating leftover process, memory-related glitch, widely-used feature that messes up something unexpected on anything like that? Newbie admin for now only monitors disk-space and RAM usage, and number of running processes. He would appreciate any tips regarding what's probably going to happen to his server over time.

  Read the article

• Pull network or power? (for contianing a rooted server)

  - by Aleksandr Levchuk

  When a server gets rooted (e.g. a situation like this), one of the first things that you may decide to do is containment. Some security specialists advise not to enter remediation immediately and to keep the server online until forensics are completed. Those advises are usually for APT. It's different if you have occasional Script kiddie breaches. However, you may decide to remediate (fix things) early and one of the steps in remediation is containment of the server. Quoting from Robert Moir's Answer - "disconnect the victim from its muggers". A server can be contained by pulling the network cable or the power cable. Which method is better? Taking into consideration the need for: Protecting victims from further damage Executing successful forensics (Possibly) Protecting valuable data on the server Edit: 5 assumptions Assuming: You detected early: 24 hours. You want to recover early: 3 days of 1 systems admin on the job (forensics and recovery). The server is not a Virtual Machine or a Container able to take a snapshot capturing the contents of the servers memory. You decide not to attempt prosecuting. You suspect that the attacker may be using some form of software (possibly sophisticated) and this software is still running on the server.

  Read the article

• Watchguard Firebox "split" fibre optic line into 2 interfaces

  - by fRAiLtY-

  We have a requirement on our Watchguard Firebox XTM505 to be able to split our incoming external interface, in this case a fibre optic dedicated leased line, 100/100. We use the line in our office of approx 30 machines however we also re-sell to an external company who utilise it to provide wireless internet solutions to the public. The current infrastructure is as follows: Data in (Leased Line) - Juniper SRX210 managed by ISP - 1 cable out into unmanaged Netgear switch - 1 cable into our firewall and office network, 1 cable to our external providers core router managed by them. We have been informed that having the unmanaged switch in the position it is poses a security risk and that a good option would be to get our Watchguard Firewall to perform the split, by separating our office onto a trusted interface, and by "passing through" the external line to their managed router. It is alleged that the Watchguard is capable of doing this and also rate limiting the interfaces, i.e. 20mbps for the trusted interface and 80mbps for the "pass-through", however Watchguard technical support don't seem to be able to understand what we're trying to achieve. Can anyone provide any advice on whether this is possible on a Watchguard device and how or perhaps if there's a better way of achieving this, perhaps with a managed switch instead of unmanaged? Cheers

  Read the article

• Need a helpful/managed VPS to help transition from shared hosting

  - by Xeoncross

  I am looking for a VPS that can help me transition out of a shared hosting environment. My main OS is Ubuntu, although I am still new to the linux world. I spend most of my day programming PHP applications using a git over SSH workflow. I want PHP, SSH, git, MySQL/PostgreSQL and Apache to work well. Someday after I figure out server management I'll move on to http://nginx.org/ or something. I don't really understand 1) linux firewalls, 2) mail servers, or 3) proper daily package/lib update flow. I need a host that can help with these so I don't get hit with a security hole. (I monitor apache access logs so I think I can take it from there.) I want to know if there is a sub $50/m VPS that can help me learn (or do for me) these three main things I need to run a server. I can't leave my shared hosts (plural shows my need!) until I am sure my sites will be safe despite my incompetence. To clarify again, I need the most helpful, supportive, walk-me-through, check-up-on-me, be-there-when-I-need you VPS I can get. Learning isn't a problem when there is someone to turn too. ;)

  Read the article

• What is the risk of introducing non standard image machines to a corporate environment

  - by Troy Hunt

  I’m after some feedback from those in the managed desktop or network security space on the risks of introducing machines that are not built on a standard desktop image into a large corporate environment. This particular context relates to the standard corporate image (32 bit Win XP) in a large multi-national not being suitable for a particular segment of users. In short, I’m looking at what hurdles we might come across by proposing the introduction of machines which are built and maintained by a handful of software developers and not based on the corporate desktop image (proposing 64 bit Win 7). I suspect the barriers are primarily around virus definition updates, the rollout of service packs and patches and the compatibility of existing applications with the newer OS. In terms of viruses and software updates, if machines were using common virus protection software with automated updates and using Windows Update for service packs and patches, is there still a viable risk to the corporate environment? For that matter, are large corporate environments normally vulnerable to the introduction of a machine not based on a standard image? I’m trying to get my head around how real the risk of infection and other adverse events are from machines being plugged into the network. There are multiple scenarios outside of just the example above where this might happen (i.e. a vendor plugging in a machine for internet access during a presentation). Would a large corporate network normally be sufficiently hardened against such innocuous activity? I appreciate the theory as to why policies such as standard desktop images exist, I’m just interested in the actual, practical risk and how much a network should be protected by means other than what is managed on individual PCs.

  Read the article

• UNC shared path not accessible though necessary permissions are set

  - by Vysakh

  I have 2 environments A and B. A is an original environment whereas B is a clone of A, exactly except AD servers. AD server of B has been assigned a trust relationship with A, so that all the service and user accounts of A can be used in B too. And trusting works fine, perfect!! But I encounter some issues accessing UNC paths(\server2\shared) with these service accounts. I had a check in A environment and all the permissions set in that environment is done in B too (already set since it is a clone of A),but the issue is with B environment only. And FYI, the user is an owner of that folder in both the environments. I tried creating a folder inside the share(\server2\shared) using command prompt, but failed with error "access denied". What I done a workaround is that I added that user in "security" tab of folder permissions and after that it worked fine. But this was not done in the original environment. Is this something related to trust relationship? Why the share to the same location for the same user works differently in 2 environments, though they've been set with the same permissions. FYI, these are windows 2003 servers. Can someone please help.

  Read the article

• How do I set up Tomcat 7's server.xml to access a network share with an different url?

  - by jneff

  I have Apache Tomcat 7.0 installed on a Windows 2008 R2 Server. Tomcat has access to a share '\server\share' that has a documents folder that I want to access using '/foo/Documents' in my web application. My application is able to access the documents when I set the file path to '//server/share/documents/doc1.doc'. I don't want the file server's path to be exposed on my link to the file in my application. I want to be able to set the path to '/foo/Documents/doc1.doc'. In http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/home/ehchua/programming/howto/Tomcat_More.html under 'Setting the Context Root Directory and Request URL of a Webapp' item number two says that I can rename the path by putting in a context to the server.xml file. So I put <Host name="localhost" appBase="webapps" unpackWARs="true" autoDeploy="true"> <!-- SingleSignOn valve, share authentication between web applications Documentation at: /docs/config/valve.html --> <!-- <Valve className="org.apache.catalina.authenticator.SingleSignOn" /> --> <!-- Access log processes all example. Documentation at: /docs/config/valve.html Note: The pattern used is equivalent to using pattern="common" --> <Valve className="org.apache.catalina.valves.AccessLogValve" directory="logs" prefix="localhost_access_log." suffix=".txt" pattern="%h %l %u %t &quot;%r&quot; %s %b" /> <Context path="/foo" docBase="//server/share" reloadable="false"></Context> </Host> The context at the bottum was added. Then I tried to pull the file using '/foo/Documents/doc1.doc' and it didn't work. What do I need to do to get it to work correctly? Should I be using an alias instead? Are there other security issues that this may cause?

  Read the article

• Port 80 not accessible Amazon ec2

  - by Jasper

  I have started a Amazon EC2 instance (Linux Redhat)... And Apache as well. But when i try: http://MyPublicHostName I get no response. I have ensured that my Security Group allows access to port 80. I can reach port 22 for sure, as i am logged into the instance via ssh. Within the Amazon EC2 Linux Instance when i do: $ wget http://localhost i do get a response. This confirms Apache and port 80 is indeed running fine. Since Amazon starts instances in VPC, do i have to do anything there... Infact i cannot even ping the instance, although i can ssh to it! Any advice? EDIT: Note that i had edited /etc/hosts file earlier to make 389-ds (ldap) installation work. My /etc/hosts file looks like this(IP addresses as shown as w.x.y.z ) 127.0.0.1   localhost.localdomain localhost w.x.y.z   ip-w-x-y-z.us-west-1.compute.internal w.x.y.z   ip-w-x-y-z.localdomain

  Read the article

• Why is /dev/urandom only readable by root since Ubuntu 12.04 and how can I "fix" it?

  - by Joe Hopfgartner

  I used to work with Ubuntu 10.04 templates on a lot of servers. Since changing to 12.04 I have problems that I've now isolated. The /dev/urandom device is only accessible to root. This caused SSL engines, at least in PHP, for example file_get_contents(https://... to fail. It also broke redmine. After a chmod 644 it works fine, but that doesnt stay upon reboot. So my question. why is this? I see no security risk because... i mean.. wanna steal some random data? How can I "fix" it? The servers are isolated and used by only one application, thats why I use openvz. I think about something like a runlevel script or so... but how do I do it efficiently? Maby with dpkg or apt? The same goes vor /dev/shm. in this case i totally understand why its not accessible, but I assume I can "fix" it the same way to fix /dev/urandom

  Read the article

• Can't reach server without proxy (website down from my home)

  - by user2128576

  I have a website hosted on Hostinger However I am experiencing problems with my wordpress site. This is really annoying. If I understood the situation right, The server is blocking me or denying access to my own website. When I visit the site with google chrome, it returns: Oops! Google Chrome could not find Same thing happens to firefox! Firefox can't find the server but when I do a check if my site is online and working through http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/ it says that the site is working and up. Another thing, I access the website through a proxy, both on chrome and in firefox, and t works. Why is this? I have also recently installed the plugin Better Wp Security 5 days ago. Could the plugin have caused it? but I don't remember setting any IP's to be blocked. Also, this happens at random times, sometimes I can access it, sometimes it fails to reach the server. I am currently developing the site live. Was I blocked by the server for frequently refreshing the page? (duh, I'm a developer and I need to refresh to see changes.) or is this a problem with my ISP's DNS server? How can I resolve? and what are the possible fixes? Thanks in advance! -Jomar

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113  | Next Page >