Search Results

Search found 18347 results on 734 pages for 'generate password'.

Page 108/734 | < Previous Page | 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115  | Next Page >

• What's the best way to generate an API reference document using a Rails routes.rb file?

  - by RNHurt

  I am trying to document the API for my Rails application and I can't help but wonder if there is a better way to generate an XML file based on my routes.rb file. I'm envisioning something similar to the output of rake routes but in a more friendly, XML type format. Corey has some interesting ideas about using reflection/introspection on the routes file here but it's not quite what I need. Please tell me this is a solved problem and I'm not the first one to think of this. :)

  Read the article

• Maven2: How do I generate a file that contains the names of the project's dependencies?

  - by Jin Kim

  I would like to place the names of the dependencies in a text file that is distributed inside a package that is built with Maven. I am planning to use the maven assembly plugin to generate the tarball package, and use filtering to put the names in the text file. The only problem is, I don't know how to reference the dependencies in the first place.

  Read the article

• How to log into a website using webbrowser control and username & password stored in variables.

  - by David Cutting

  Hi I want to be able to log into a website via C# webbrowser without any user input. I want to get the username and password from local variables. I hope someone can help me. Please give clear C# code examples.

  Read the article

• How do I make build rules in cmake to preprocess lazy C++ .lzz files that generate .h and .cpp files

  - by jjacksonRIAB

  What I'd like to do is write just Lazy C++ .lzz files and then have lzz run before a build to generate .cpp and .h files that will be built into the final application, sort of like how moc works with Qt. Is there any way to do this?

  Read the article

• How to generate unique serial number of machine in Delphi?

  - by noxwow

  Hi, I have question how to generate unique serial number of machine in Delphi? I tried to do this using the ID the motherboard or processor, but unfortunately it's unfortunately supported. Partition serial numbers, etc. fall off, because it is changing after the formatted. I'm looking for something that doesn't change after the formatted. Has anyone any idea?

  Read the article

• MySQL: what data type to use for hashed password field and what length?

  - by z-boss

  I'm not sure how password hashing works (will be implementing it later), but need to create database schema now. I'm thinking of limiting passwords to 4-20 characters, but as I understand after encrypting hash string will be of different length. So, how to store these passwords in the database?

  Read the article

• What's the limit of BONITA Platform ? Can a Business Analyst generate a whole Java Web App with just

  - by asksuperuser

  I'm studying some systems that allow faster App dev cycles. So I stumbled upon BONITA. It seems that by preparing some connectors you can allow a Business to generate a whole App. What's the limit of Bonita and what is needed to improve it ?

  Read the article

• How do I generate Entity Framework 4.0 classes from the command line that have different names than

  - by Josh Kodroff

  I want to generate Entity Framework 4.0 classes from a (legacy) database from a command line, but I have 2 transformations I want: Tables/columns are lowerCamelCase and I want my classes/members to be UpperCamelCase. I want to suffix my classes with "Dto". Any idea how this might be accomplished? I'm a total newbie to EF, but I have a decent understanding of Linq to Sql and was able to accomplish the same task by doing: sqlmetal - dbml - xml mapping file and .cs file.

  Read the article

• How can I generate a PDF from HTML without the PDFlib library?

  - by Syom

  I need to dinamicaly generate a PDF from HTML, but I have PDF Support disabled on my hosting, so is it possible to do without PDFlib GmbH library? Thanks

  Read the article

• Problem carrying Session over to other pages

  - by AAA

  I am able to login a user, but while processing to the next page (memebers area) I can't display any user info let alone print the $_SESSION[email]. I am not sure what's up. Below is the login code and the testing members are page. Login page: session_start(); //also in a real app you would get the id dynamically $sql = "select `email`, `password` from `accounts` where `email` = '$_POST[email]'"; $query = mysql_query($sql) or die ("Error: ".mysql_error()); while ($row = mysql_fetch_array($query)){ $email = $row['email']; $secret = $row['password']; //we will echo these into the proper fields } mysql_free_result($query); // Process the POST variables $email = $_POST["email"]; //Variables $_SESSION["email"] = $_POST["email"]; $secret = $info['password']; //Checks if there is a login cookie if(isset($_COOKIE['ID_my_site'])) //if there is, it logs you in and directes you to the members page { $email = $_COOKIE['ID_my_site']; $pass = $_COOKIE['Key_my_site']; $check = mysql_query("SELECT email, password FROM accounts WHERE email = '$email'")or die(mysql_error()); while($info = mysql_fetch_array( $check )) { if (@ $info['password'] != $pass) { } else { header("Location: home.php"); } } } //if the login form is submitted if (isset($_POST['submit'])) { // if form has been submitted // makes sure they filled it in if(!$_POST['email'] | !$_POST['password']) { die('You did not fill in a required field.'); } // checks it against the database if (!get_magic_quotes_gpc()) { $_POST['email'] = addslashes($_POST['email']); } $check = mysql_query("SELECT email,password FROM accounts WHERE email = '".$_POST['email']."'")or die(mysql_error()); //Gives error if user dosen't exist $check2 = mysql_num_rows($check); if ($check2 == 0) { die('That user does not exist in our database. <a href=add.php>Click Here to Register</a>'); } while($info = mysql_fetch_array( $check )) //gives error if the password is wrong if (@ $_POST['password'] != $info['password']) { die('Incorrect password, please try again'); } else { // if login is ok then we add a cookie $_POST['email'] = stripslashes($_POST['email']); $hour = time() + 3600; setcookie(ID_my_site, $_POST['email'], $hour); setcookie(Key_my_site, $_POST['password'], $hour); //then redirect them to the members area header("Location: home.php"); } } } else { // if they are not logged in ?> <?php } ?> home.php session_start(); if(!isset($_SESSION['email'])) { header('Location: login_test3.php'); die('<a href="login_test3.php">Login first!</a>'); } //Variables $_SESSION["email"] = $email; print $_SESSION['name']; UPDATE Just realized the existing code gets in to the home.php file but will not echo anything. But as soon as you hit refresh the session is gone.

  Read the article

• How do I generate a RouteLink to a route in a different area?

  - by Max Schmeling

  I have two different areas, and I have a route in one of those areas that is specific to that area, but I need to generate a link to that route using Html.RouteLink from another area (it's how you get over into the new area) but it won't work... It doesn't seem possible to use RouteLink to routes in a different area. What is the best way around this? Should I just define a new route in the other area and name it differently?

  Read the article

• Python code to create a password encrypted zip file?

  - by MikeN

  What is the Python code to create a password encrypted zip file? I'm fine with using some apt-get'able utilities using system on the command line.

  Read the article

• I need to generate a string of 7 chars that is based on the id of the row.

  - by Totty

  I need to generate a string of 7 chars that is based on the id of the row. So knowing the id of the image and a secret key, i should get the generated string. the string must contain chars from "a" to "z" and numbers from 0 to 9. I have a dir that contains photos like this dir/p3/i2/s21/thumb.jpg the generated string is p3i2s21, then is used to calculate the path of the image.

  Read the article

• Can emacs generate a table of comments and number sections of a document?

  - by mp3foley

  I'm writing a plain text document with numbered sections or chapters and am wondering if emacs can help with numbering and re-numbering sections. And of course would be great if it could then generate a table of contents as well. I have had a search on google and looked through the emacs wiki but did not come up with anything other than for latex stuff and possibly muse mode, but I would like to keep this as a plain text README style document. Thanks for any help or suggestions.

  Read the article

• Any better way to generate a tuple of all possible tuples in form of (x1,y1,x2,y2)?

  - by zhanwu

  I want to generate a tuple of tuple in form of ((x1,y1,x2,y2),...(x1,y1,x2,y2)) where x1,y1,x2,y2 are all in range of (0,8). Is there any other way rather than the following? S = list() for x1 in range(0, 8): for y1 in range(0, 8): for x2 in range(0, 8): for y2 in range(0, 8): S.append([x1,y1,x2,y2]) S = tuple(S) thanks

  Read the article

• Configuring Fed Authentication Methods in OIF / IdP

  - by Damien Carru

  In this article, I will provide examples on how to configure OIF/IdP to map OAM Authentication Schemes to Federation Authentication Methods, based on the concepts introduced in my previous entry. I will show examples for the three protocols supported by OIF: SAML 2.0 SSO SAML 1.1 SSO OpenID 2.0 Enjoy the reading! Configuration As I mentioned in my previous article, mapping Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes is protocol dependent, since the methods are defined in the various protocols (SAML 2.0, SAML 1.1, OpenID 2.0). As such, the WLST commands to set those mappings will involve: Either the SP Partner Profile and affect all Partners referencing that profile, which do not override the Federation Authentication Method to OAM Authentication Scheme mappings Or the SP Partner entry, which will only affect the SP Partner It is important to note that if an SP Partner is configured to define one or more Federation Authentication Method to OAM Authentication Scheme mappings, then all the mappings defined in the SP Partner Profile will be ignored. WLST Commands The two OIF WLST commands that can be used to define mapping Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes are: addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() to define a mapping on an SP Partner Profile, taking as parameters: The name of the SP Partner Profile The Federation Authentication Method The OAM Authentication Scheme name addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() to define a mapping on an SP Partner , taking as parameters: The name of the SP Partner The Federation Authentication Method The OAM Authentication Scheme name Note: I will discuss in a subsequent article the other parameters of those commands. In the next sections, I will show examples on how to use those methods: For SAML 2.0, I will configure the SP Partner Profile, that will apply all the mappings to SP Partners referencing this profile, unless they override mapping definition For SAML 1.1, I will configure the SP Partner. For OpenID 2.0, I will configure the SP/RP Partner SAML 2.0 Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP and is integrated with a remote SAML 2.0 SP partner identified by AcmeSP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Use BasicScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map BasicSessionScheme  to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password Federation Authentication Method Use OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. Also the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> BasicScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner Profile to BasicScheme instead of LDAPScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner Profile referenced by AcmeSP (which is saml20-sp-partner-profile in this case: getFedPartnerProfile("AcmeSP", "sp") ): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "BasicScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will now be challenged via HTTP Basic Authentication defined in the BasicScheme for AcmeSP. Also, as noted earlier, the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via HTTP Basic Authentication, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping BasicScheme To change the Federation Authentication Method mapping for the BasicScheme to urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password instead of urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport for the saml20-sp-partner-profile SAML 2.0 SP Partner Profile (the profile to which my AcmeSP Partner is bound to), I will execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password", "BasicScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via HTTP Basic Authentication, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the AuthnContextClassRef was changed from PasswordProtectedTransport to Password): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner Profile to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme instead of BasicScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner Profile referenced by AcmeSP (which is saml20-sp-partner-profile in this case: getFedPartnerProfile("AcmeSP", "sp") ): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will now be challenged via FORM defined in the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme for AcmeSP. Contrarily to LDAPScheme and BasicScheme, the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme is not mapped by default to any Federation Authentication Methods. As such, OIF/IdP will not be able to find a Federation Authentication Method and will set the method in the SAML Assertion to the OAM Authentication Scheme name. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthnContextClassRef set to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme To add the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport mapping, I will execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to PasswordProtectedTransport): <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                   urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> SAML 1.1 Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP and is integrated with a remote SAML 1.1 SP partner identified by AcmeSP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Use OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map LDAPScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. Also the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme instead of LDAPScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerDefaultScheme("AcmeSP", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will be challenged via FORM defined in the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme for AcmeSP. Contrarily to LDAPScheme, the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme is not mapped by default to any Federation Authentication Methods (in the SP Partner Profile). As such, OIF/IdP will not be able to find a Federation Authentication Method and will set the method in the SAML Assertion to the OAM Authentication Scheme name. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthenticationMethod set to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme To map the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password for this SP Partner only, I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeSP", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to password): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme I will now show that by defining a Federation Authentication Mapping at the Partner level, this now ignores all mappings defined at the SP Partner Profile level. For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for this SP Partner back to LDAPScheme, and the Assertion issued by OIF/IdP will not be able to map this LDAPScheme to a Federation Authentication Method anymore, since A Federation Authentication Method mapping is defined at the SP Partner level and thus the mappings defined at the SP Partner Profile are ignored The LDAPScheme is not listed in the mapping at the Partner level I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for this SP Partner: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerDefaultScheme("AcmeSP", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthenticationMethod set to LDAPScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="LDAPScheme">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping LDAPScheme at Partner Level To fix this issue, we will need to add the LDAPScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password mapping for this SP Partner only. I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeSP", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from LDAPScheme to password): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OpenID 2.0 In the OpenID 2.0 flows, the RP must request use of PAPE, in order for OIF/IdP/OP to include PAPE information. For OpenID 2.0, the configuration will involve mapping a list of OpenID 2.0 policies to a list of Authentication Schemes. The WLST command will take a list of policies, delimited by the ',' character, instead of SAML 2.0 or SAML 1.1 where a single Federation Authentication Method had to be specified. Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP/OP and is integrated with a remote OpenID 2.0 SP/RP partner identified by AcmeRP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map LDAPScheme to  the http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant and http://openid-policies/password-protected policies Federation Authentication Methods (the second one is a custom for this use case) LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. No Federation Authentication Method is defined OOTB for OpenID 2.0, so if the IdP/OP issue an SSO response with a PAPE Response element, it will specify the scheme name instead of Federation Authentication Methods After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an SSO Response similar to: https://acme.com/openid?refid=id-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0&openid.mode=id_res&openid.op_endpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid&openid.claimed_id=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.identity=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid%3Frefid%3Did-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.response_nonce=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A06Zid-YPa2kTNNFftZkgBb460jxJGblk2g--iNwPpDI7M1&openid.assoc_handle=id-6a5S6zhAKaRwQNUnjTKROREdAGSjWodG1el4xyz3&openid.ns.ax=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0&openid.ax.mode=fetch_response&openid.ax.type.attr0=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fcount&openid.ax.value.attr0=1&openid.ax.type.attr1=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fschema%2FnamePerson%2Ffriendly&openid.ax.value.attr1=My+name+is+Bobby+Smith&openid.ax.type.attr2=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fax%2Fapi%2Fuser_id&openid.ax.value.attr2=bob&openid.ax.type.attr3=http%3A%2F%2Faxschema.org%2Fcontact%2Femail&openid.ax.value.attr3=bob%40oracle.com&openid.ax.type.attr4=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fipaddress&openid.ax.value.attr4=10.145.120.253&openid.ns.pape=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fextensions%2Fpape%2F1.0&openid.pape.auth_time=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A05Z&openid.pape.auth_policies=LDAPScheme&openid.signed=op_endpoint%2Cclaimed_id%2Cidentity%2Creturn_to%2Cresponse_nonce%2Cassoc_handle%2Cns.ax%2Cax.mode%2Cax.type.attr0%2Cax.value.attr0%2Cax.type.attr1%2Cax.value.attr1%2Cax.type.attr2%2Cax.value.attr2%2Cax.type.attr3%2Cax.value.attr3%2Cax.type.attr4%2Cax.value.attr4%2Cns.pape%2Cpape.auth_time%2Cpape.auth_policies&openid.sig=mYMgbGYSs22l8e%2FDom9NRPw15u8%3D Mapping LDAPScheme To map the LDAP Scheme to the http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant and http://openid-policies/password-protected policies Federation Authentication Methods, I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method (the policies will be comma separated): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeRP", "http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant,http://openid-policies/password-protected", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from LDAPScheme to the two policies): https://acme.com/openid?refid=id-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0&openid.mode=id_res&openid.op_endpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid&openid.claimed_id=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.identity=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid%3Frefid%3Did-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.response_nonce=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A06Zid-YPa2kTNNFftZkgBb460jxJGblk2g--iNwPpDI7M1&openid.assoc_handle=id-6a5S6zhAKaRwQNUnjTKROREdAGSjWodG1el4xyz3&openid.ns.ax=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0&openid.ax.mode=fetch_response&openid.ax.type.attr0=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fcount&openid.ax.value.attr0=1&openid.ax.type.attr1=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fschema%2FnamePerson%2Ffriendly&openid.ax.value.attr1=My+name+is+Bobby+Smith&openid.ax.type.attr2=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fax%2Fapi%2Fuser_id&openid.ax.value.attr2=bob&openid.ax.type.attr3=http%3A%2F%2Faxschema.org%2Fcontact%2Femail&openid.ax.value.attr3=bob%40oracle.com&openid.ax.type.attr4=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fipaddress&openid.ax.value.attr4=10.145.120.253&openid.ns.pape=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fextensions%2Fpape%2F1.0&openid.pape.auth_time=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A05Z&openid.pape.auth_policies=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fpape%2Fpolicies%2F2007%2F06%2Fphishing-resistant+http%3A%2F%2Fopenid-policies%2Fpassword-protected&openid.signed=op_endpoint%2Cclaimed_id%2Cidentity%2Creturn_to%2Cresponse_nonce%2Cassoc_handle%2Cns.ax%2Cax.mode%2Cax.type.attr0%2Cax.value.attr0%2Cax.type.attr1%2Cax.value.attr1%2Cax.type.attr2%2Cax.value.attr2%2Cax.type.attr3%2Cax.value.attr3%2Cax.type.attr4%2Cax.value.attr4%2Cns.pape%2Cpape.auth_time%2Cpape.auth_policies&openid.sig=mYMgbGYSs22l8e%2FDom9NRPw15u8%3D In the next article, I will cover how OIF/IdP can be configured so that an SP can request a specific Federation Authentication Method to challenge the user during Federation SSO.Cheers,Damien Carru

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 32 bit & windows 7 professional SP1

  - by Harry

  I'm testing my new Windows Server 2008 32 bit edition (2 servers) as a server and Windows 7 professional 32 bit as a client. Let say one is a primary domain controller (PDC) and the other is a backup domain controller (BDC) like the old time to ease. Every setup were done in the PDC and just replicate to BDC. Didn't setup anything, just install the server with AD, DNS, DHCP, that's all. Then I use my windows 7 pro 32 bit to join the domain. It worked. After that I tried to change the password of a the user (not administrator) but it always failed said it didn't meet the password complexity setup while in fact there's no setup at all either in account policy, default domain policy or even local policy. Tried to disable the password complexity in the default domain policy instead of didn't set all then test again but still failed. Browse and found suggestion to setup the minimum and maximum password age to 0 but it also failed. Tried to restart the server and the client then change password, still failed with the same error, didn't meet password complexity setup. Tried to see in the rsop.msc but didn't found anything. In fact, if I see the setup in another system with windows server 2003 and windows xp, using rsop.msc I can see there's setup for computer configuration windows settings security settings account policies password policy. I also have a windows 7 pro 32 bit in a windows server 2003 32 bit environment but unable to find the same setting using rsop but this windows 7 works fine. anyone can give suggestion what's the problem and what to do so I can change my windows 7 pro laptop password in a windows server 2008 environment? another thing, is it the right assumption that we can see all the policies setting in windows 7 whether it's in a windows server 2003 or 2008 environment? thanks.

  Read the article

• probems using ssh from cron

  - by Travis

  I am attempting to automate a script that executes commands on remote machines via ssh. I have public key authentication setup between the machines using ssh-agent. The script runs fine when executed from the command prompt. I suspect my problem is that cron isn't starting the ssh-agent due to it's minimalist environment. Here is the output when I add the -v flag to ssh: debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,gssapi-with-mic,password debug1: Next authentication method: gssapi-with-mic debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,gssapi-with-mic,password debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,gssapi-with-mic,password debug1: Next authentication method: publickey debug1: Offering public key: /home/<user>/.ssh/id_rsa debug1: Server accepts key: pkalg ssh-rsa blen 149 debug1: PEM_read_PrivateKey failed debug1: read PEM private key done: type <unknown> debug1: Trying private key: /home/<user>/.ssh/id_dsa debug1: Next authentication method: password debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,gssapi-with-mic,password Permission denied, please try again. debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,gssapi-with-mic,password Permission denied, please try again. debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,gssapi-with-mic,password debug1: No more authentication methods to try. Permission denied (publickey,gssapi-with-mic,password). How can I make this work? Thanks!

  Read the article

• 1and1 ssh - connection refused

  - by kitensei

  I'm having troubles connecting through SSH to my 1&1 account. When I try to connect with command userXXX@host -p22 -vv I have the following output: OpenSSH_5.8p1 Debian-7ubuntu1, OpenSSL 1.0.0e 6 Sep 2011 debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config debug1: Applying options for * debug2: ssh_connect: needpriv 0 debug1: Connecting to mySite.com [ip_here] port 22. debug1: connect to address ip_here port 22: Connection refused Moreover, once I try to connect through SSH and it fails, even the HTTP access is dead, I cannot access the website through explorer anymore :/ please help < I'm running ubuntu 11.10 EDIT: don't know if it can help, here's the .htaccess of the 1and1 server Options +Indexes Satisfy any Order Deny,Allow Allow from 212.227.X.X Deny from all RemoveType .html .gif AuthType Basic AuthName "Access to /logs" AuthUserFile /kunden/homepages/43/d376072470/htpasswd Require user "user_here" and sftp.log: Mar 26 09:21:24 193.251.X USER_HERE Connection from 193.251.X port 51809 Mar 26 09:21:30 193.251.X USER_HERE Failed password for USER_HERE from 193.251.X port 51809 ssh2 Mar 26 09:23:39 193.251.X USER_HERE Failed password for USER_HERE from 193.251.X port 51809 ssh2 Mar 26 09:23:41 193.251.X USER_HERE Failed password for USER_HERE from 193.251.X port 51809 ssh2 Mar 26 09:23:45 193.251.X USER_HERE Failed password for USER_HERE from 193.251.X port 51809 ssh2 Mar 26 09:23:57 193.251.X USER_HERE Failed password for USER_HERE from 193.251.X port 51809 ssh2 Mar 26 10:53:36 212.227.X tmp64459736-3228 Connection from 212.227.X port 23275 Mar 26 10:53:36 212.227.X tmp64459736-3228 Accepted password for tmp64459736-3228 from 212.227.X port 23275 ssh2 Mar 26 11:53:37 212.227.X tmp64459736-3228 Connection closed by 212.227.X Mar 26 18:58:17 212.227.X tmp64459736-5363 Connection from 212.227.X port 23353 Mar 26 18:58:17 212.227.X tmp64459736-5363 Accepted password for tmp64459736-5363 from 212.227.X port 23353 ssh2 Mar 26 19:53:36 212.227.X tmp64459736-8525 Connection from 212.227.X port 5166 Mar 26 19:53:36 212.227.X tmp64459736-8525 Accepted password for tmp64459736-8525 from 212.227.X port 5166 ssh2 Mar 26 19:58:17 212.227.X tmp64459736-5363 Connection closed by 212.227.X

  Read the article

• Using IIS6 to run kill process. Executable hangs

  - by David

  I'm using the following code (any tried many variations) in a web page that is supposed to kill a process on the server: Process scriptProc = new Process(); SecureString password = new SecureString(); password.AppendChar('p'); password.AppendChar('s'); password.AppendChar('s'); password.AppendChar('w'); password.AppendChar('d'); scriptProc.StartInfo.UserName = "mylocaluser"; scriptProc.StartInfo.Password = password; scriptProc.StartInfo.FileName = @"C:\WINDOWS\System32\WScript.exe"; scriptProc.StartInfo.Arguments = @"c:\windows\system32\killMyApp.vbs"; scriptProc.StartInfo.UseShellExecute = false; scriptProc.Start(); scriptProc.WaitForExit(); scriptProc.Close(); The VBS file is supposed to kill a w3wp.exe process, but never works. There are no errors in the application log. It works locally. I noticed WScript.exe is in task manager every time I run the page, and never goes away. The process WScript.exe (and I tried others such a psexec.exe) is being run as a local user with admin rights (and I tried other types of users including domain admins) when run from IIS, but it works when run from the command line on the server.

  Read the article

• Active Directory: how to be SURE users can change their own passwords?

  - by Latro

  Working on some project where a tool we have has to authenticate against AD connecting via LDAPS and perform password changes if required or requested. IN THEORY, the tool does that, and we have seen it work in other projects. IN PRACTICE, against this particular directory, it fails. Been driving me crazy. The particulars of the situation: Windows 2003 AD Defined a "technical user" for the LDAP connection with rights to change users passwords When password change is required - in this case, because pwdLastSet is 0 - the tool uses the technical account to go, bind to the controller and change the user password. If password change is not required but the user request it, then the bind is done with the user account. That last condition is the one that doesnt work. With the technical user the password change is possible, but with the user itself, it isnt. We get an error like this: LDAP access failed: javax.naming.directory.InvalidAttributeValueException: [LDAP: error code 19 - 0000052D: AtrErr: DSID-03190F00, #1: 0: 0000052D: DSID-03190F00, problem 1005 (CONSTRAINT_ATT_TYPE), data 0, Att 9005a (unicodePwd) no idea what DSID-03190F00 means cause it doesnt seem to be anywhere in google :-/ Been looking at several MS documentation pages and frankly, I'm not understanding one bit of it. There is some "control access right" called User-Change-Password that may, or may not, control what objects have the right to change their own password, which may, or may not, have to do with ACE and ACLs... There is GPO. There is maybe the password policy but it is only set to ask for passwords of 6 chars or more... Can anybody explain to me in easy-to-check steps how can I go and tell the AD admin guy (who is as lost as me) what to do to ensure that users in the AD directory (objectClass top,person,organizationalPerson and user) are able to change their own passwords by themselves? Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• Exchange 2003: Accounts with only OWA access unable to change passwords when expired or forced

  - by radioactive21

  We have accounts whith only OWA access, because they are generic accounts and we do not want the accounts to be used as machine logins. We have a password policy that users must change their passwords every 6 months. The problem we are having is that since the accounts are not loging into the machines, when the password policy kicks in it is preventing users with OWA only access from changing their password. Also, when we select "User must change the password at next logon" it also causes the same issue. We have two exchange servers the main one and a front end one. what we have been doing with these generic account is in properties, under the "account" tab we restricted "log on to" to the front end server. Just to clarify, when we have no restrictions, users can change their passwords via the web without any issues. It is only when we force them to only login via OWA that they cant change passwords. I tried adding our domain controler and main exchange server to the "This user can log on to The following computers" in the account tab, but still it is not allowing them to change passwords. Currently I have to manually reset the passwords for OWA only accounts. Is there anyway to allow OWA acconts to change passwords? EDIT: Users restricted to only OWA can change their password via the web browser without any issues when there are no restrictions. In other words normally they can just log into outlook via the web and change their password, but when the password policy expires or we force them to change their password at next login, they are unable to.

  Read the article

• Ruby - encrypted_strings

  - by Tom Andersen

  A bit of a Ruby newbie here - should be an easy question: I want to use the encrypted_strings gem to create a password encrypted string: (from http://rdoc.info/projects/pluginaweek/encrypted_strings) Question is: Everything works fine, but how come I don't need the password to decrypt the string? Say I want to store the string somewhere for a while,like the session. Is the password also stored with it? (which would seem very strange?). And no, I'm not planning on using 'secret-key' or any similar hack as a password. I am planning on dynamically generating a class variable @@password using a uuid, which I don't store other than in memory, and can change from one running of the program to the next. Symmetric: >> password = 'shhhh' => "shhhh" >> crypted_password = password.encrypt(:symmetric, :password => 'secret_key') => "qSg8vOo6QfU=\n" >> crypted_password.class => String >> crypted_password == 'shhhh' => true >> password = crypted_password.decrypt => "shhhh"

  Read the article

• Using pam_python in a script running with mod_python

  - by markys

  Hi ! I would like to develop a web interface to allow users of a Linux system to do certain tasks related to their account. I decided to write the backend of the site using Python and mod_python on Apache. To authenticate the users, I thought I could use python_pam to query the PAM service. I adapted the example bundled with the module and got this: # out is the output stream used to print debug def auth(username, password, out): def pam_conv(aut, query_list, user_data): out.write("Query list: " + str(query_list) + "\n") # List to store the responses to the different queries resp = [] for item in query_list: query, qtype = item # If PAM asks for an input, give the password if qtype == PAM.PAM_PROMPT_ECHO_ON or qtype == PAM.PAM_PROMPT_ECHO_OFF: resp.append((str(password), 0)) elif qtype == PAM.PAM_PROMPT_ERROR_MSG or qtype == PAM.PAM_PROMPT_TEXT_INFO: resp.append(('', 0)) out.write("Our response: " + str(resp) + "\n") return resp # If username of password is undefined, fail if username is None or password is None: return False service = 'login' pam_ = PAM.pam() pam_.start(service) # Set the username pam_.set_item(PAM.PAM_USER, str(username)) # Set the conversation callback pam_.set_item(PAM.PAM_CONV, pam_conv) try: pam_.authenticate() pam_.acct_mgmt() except PAM.error, resp: out.write("Error: " + str(resp) + "\n") return False except: return False # If we get here, the authentication worked return True My problem is that this function does not behave the same wether I use it in a simple script or through mod_python. To illustrate this, I wrote these simple cases: my_username = "markys" my_good_password = "lalala" my_bad_password = "lololo" def handler(req): req.content_type = "text/plain" req.write("1- " + str(auth(my_username,my_good_password,req) + "\n")) req.write("2- " + str(auth(my_username,my_bad_password,req) + "\n")) return apache.OK if __name__ == "__main__": print "1- " + str(auth(my_username,my_good_password,sys.__stdout__)) print "2- " + str(auth(my_username,my_bad_password,sys.__stdout__)) The result from the script is : Query list: [('Password: ', 1)] Our response: [('lalala', 0)] 1- True Query list: [('Password: ', 1)] Our response: [('lololo', 0)] Error: ('Authentication failure', 7) 2- False but the result from mod_python is : Query list: [('Password: ', 1)] Our response: [('lalala', 0)] Error: ('Authentication failure', 7) 1- False Query list: [('Password: ', 1)] Our response: [('lololo', 0)] Error: ('Authentication failure', 7) 2- False I don't understand why the auth function does not return the same value given the same inputs. Any idea where I got this wrong ? Here is the original script, if that could help you. Thanks a lot !

  Read the article

• BCrypt says long, similar passwords are equivalent - problem with me, the gem, or the field of crypt

  - by PreciousBodilyFluids

  I've been experimenting with BCrypt, and found the following. If it matters, I'm running ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-04-30 trunk 27557) [i686-linux] require 'bcrypt' # bcrypt-ruby gem, version 2.1.2 @long_string_1 = 'f287ed6548e91475d06688b481ae8612fa060b2d402fdde8f79b7d0181d6a27d8feede46b833ecd9633b10824259ebac13b077efb7c24563fce0000670834215' @long_string_2 = 'f6ebeea9b99bcae4340670360674482773a12fd5ef5e94c7db0a42800813d2587063b70660294736fded10217d80ce7d3b27c568a1237e2ca1fecbf40be5eab8' def salted(string) @long_string_1 + string + @long_string_2 end encrypted_password = BCrypt::Password.create(salted('password'), :cost => 10) puts encrypted_password #=> $2a$10$kNMF/ku6VEAfLFEZKJ.ZC.zcMYUzvOQ6Dzi6ZX1UIVPUh5zr53yEu password = BCrypt::Password.new(encrypted_password) puts password.is_password?(salted('password')) #=> true puts password.is_password?(salted('passward')) #=> true puts password.is_password?(salted('75747373')) #=> true puts password.is_password?(salted('passwor')) #=> false At first I thought that once the passwords got to a certain length, the dissimilarities would just be lost in all the hashing, and only if they were very dissimilar (i.e. a different length) would they be recognized as different. That didn't seem very plausible to me, from what I know of hash functions, but I didn't see a better explanation. Then, I tried shortening each of the long_strings to see where BCrypt would start being able to tell them apart, and I found that if I shortened each of the long strings to 100 characters or so, the final attempt ('passwor') would start returning true as well. So now I don't know what to think. What's the explanation for this?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115  | Next Page >