Search Results

Search found 26207 results on 1049 pages for 'django users'.

Page 119/1049 | < Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >

• PHP/MySQL User system w/ groups.

  - by Ben C

  I have a user system set up in a 'users' table, and I have groups set up in a 'groups' table. Essentially, I want users to be able to join any and all the groups that they want, in the same was as one would on facebook. How would one go about structuring this in a mysql/php database system? Just a quick summary would be helpful! I've looked around, but I can only find info on creating 'groups' where the users just have a sort of 1, 2 or 3 permission rank. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Grant access for users on a separate domain to SharePoint

  - by Geo Ego

  Hello. I just completed development of a SharePoint site on a virtual server and am currently in the process of granting users from a different domain to the site. The SharePoint domain is SHAREPOINT, and the domain with the users I want to give access to is COMPANY. I have provided them with a link to the site and added them as users via SharePoint, which is all I thought I would need to do. However, when they go to the link, the site shows them a SharePoint error page. In the security event log, I am showing the following: Event Type: Failure Audit Event Source: Security Event Category: Object Access Event ID: 560 Date: 3/18/2010 Time: 11:11:49 AM User: COMPANY\ThisUser Computer: SHAREPOINT Description: Object Open: Object Server: Security Account Manager Object Type: SAM_ALIAS Object Name: DOMAINS\Account\Aliases\00000404 Handle ID: - Operation ID: {0,1719489} Process ID: 416 Image File Name: C:\WINDOWS\system32\lsass.exe Primary User Name: SHAREPOINT$ Primary Domain: COMPANY Primary Logon ID: (0x0,0x3E7) Client User Name: ThisUser Client Domain: PRINTRON Client Logon ID: (0x0,0x1A3BC2) Accesses: AddMember RemoveMember ListMembers ReadInformation Privileges: - Restricted Sid Count: 0 Access Mask: 0xF Then, four of these in a row: Event Type: Failure Audit Event Source: Security Event Category: Object Access Event ID: 560 Date: 3/18/2010 Time: 11:12:08 AM User: NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE Computer: SHAREPOINT Description: Object Open: Object Server: SC Manager Object Type: SERVICE OBJECT Object Name: WinHttpAutoProxySvc Handle ID: - Operation ID: {0,1727132} Process ID: 404 Image File Name: C:\WINDOWS\system32\services.exe Primary User Name: SHAREPOINT$ Primary Domain: COMPANY Primary Logon ID: (0x0,0x3E7) Client User Name: NETWORK SERVICE Client Domain: NT AUTHORITY Client Logon ID: (0x0,0x3E4) Accesses: Query status of service Start the service Query information from service Privileges: - Restricted Sid Count: 0 Access Mask: 0x94 Any ideas what permissions I need to grant to the user to get them access to SharePoint?

  Read the article

• VSFTPD does not allow upload with virtual users

  - by Mr. Squig

  I am attempting to setup VSFTPD with virtual users on a server running Ubuntu 12.04. I have configured the server to allow for virtual users to login, but I am having trouble getting it to allow uploads. My vsftpd.conf is as follows: listen=YES anonymous_enable=NO local_enable=YES write_enable=YES local_umask=022 anon_upload_enable=YES dirmessage_enable=YES use_localtime=YES xferlog_enable=YES connect_from_port_20=YES chroot_local_user=YES virtual_use_local_privs=YES guest_enable=YES guest_username=virtual user_sub_token=$USER local_root=/var/www/$USER hide_ids=YES secure_chroot_dir=/var/run/vsftpd/empty pam_service_name=vsftpd rsa_cert_file=/etc/ssl/private/vsftpd.pem /etc/pam.d/vsftpd contains: auth required pam_pwdfile.so pwdfile /etc/vsftpd.passwd crypt=hash account required pam_permit.so crypt=hash I have two virtual users set up, one of which has the same name as a local user. They each have a directory in /var/www/ owned by 'virtual'. As I understand it, when a virtual user logs in this way they will appear to the system as the user virtual. Using this configuration user can log on, but cannot upload files. The error given in /var/log/vsftpd.log is: Tue Nov 20 19:49:00 2012 [pid 2] CONNECT: Client "96.233.116.53" Tue Nov 20 19:49:07 2012 [pid 1] [zac] OK LOGIN: Client "96.233.116.53" Tue Nov 20 19:49:11 2012 [pid 2] CONNECT: Client "96.233.116.53" Tue Nov 20 19:49:11 2012 [pid 1] [zac] OK LOGIN: Client "96.233.116.53" Tue Nov 20 19:49:11 2012 [pid 3] [zac] FAIL CHMOD: Client "96.233.116.53", "/test.ppm 644" I have tried changing the permissions of these directories in all sorts of ways, but nothing seem to work. I have a feeling that it is something simple related to permissions. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Apache directive for authenticated users?

  - by Alex Leach

  Using Apache 2.2, I would like to use mod_rewrite to redirect un-authenticated users to use https, if they are on http.. Is there a directive or condition one can test for whether a user is (not) authenticated? For example, I could have set up the restricted /foo location on my server:- <Location "/foo/"> Order deny,allow # Deny everyone, until authenticated... Deny from all # Authentication mechanism AuthType Basic AuthName "Members only" # AuthBasicProvider ... # ... Other authentication stuff here. # Users must be valid. Require valid-user # Logged-in users authorised to view child URLs: Satisfy any # If not SSL, respond with HTTP-redirect RewriteCond ${HTTPS} off RewriteRule /foo/?(.*)$ https://${SERVER_NAME}/foo/$2 [R=301,L] # SSL enforcement. SSLOptions FakeBasicAuth StrictRequire SSLRequireSSL SSLRequire %{SSL_CIPHER_USEKEYSIZE} >= 128 </Location> The problem here is that every file, in every subfolder, will be encrypted. This is quite unnecessary, but I see no reason to disallow it. What I would like is the RewriteRule to only be triggered during authentication. If a user is already authorised to view a folder, then I don't want the RewriteRule to be triggered. Is this possible? EDIT: I am not using any front-end HTML here. This is only using Apache's built-in directory browsing interface and its in-built authentication mechanisms. My <Directory> config is: <Directory ~ "/foo/"> Order allow,deny Allow from all AllowOverride None Options +Indexes +FollowSymLinks +Includes +MultiViews IndexOptions +FancyIndexing IndexOptions +XHTML IndexOptions NameWidth=* IndexOptions +TrackModified IndexOptions +SuppressHTMLPreamble IndexOptions +FoldersFirst IndexOptions +IgnoreCase IndexOptions Type=text/html </Directory>

  Read the article

• Deployment and Ownership issues

  - by kylemac

  As an extreme newbie, I am having difficulty managing ownership and permissions on my first box. What I can't figure out is how to deploy using one user, we will call him deploy and operate my php application with www-data user. Currently as it stands, I know my server runs as www-data through this function <?php echo(exec("whoami")); ?> but I am having to chown between deploy and www-data every time I deploy. There has got to be an easier way to deploy with one user and still run as www-data. EDIT: Here is the output from ls- l on the folder in question. You will see user deploy and group www-pub, the group is from an attempt to add the two different users to a new group and chown one of them in the hopes that they both would have the permissions (newb alert) drwxrwxr-x 4 deploy www-pub 4096 Mar 7 01:41 example.com I am using capistrano for deployment under the user deploy then once its done i chown to www-data, otherwise I can't use php to manipulate files. I am also unsure how to even change which user apache is running.

  Read the article

• Autologin 2 Windows users OR Login another user from the desktop

  - by fpdragon

  I'm using two windows users on my HTPC at the same time. One is just for watching videos and one for administration via remote. This setup is quite ideal for me since windows can handle multiple concurrent logins and the win "rdp concurrent hack" (Google). The problem is, I want both users to be logged in automatically when the pc was started. It shall be possible to watch tv and also the admin user shall be automatically logged in to start my scripts and other tasks, even if I haven't logged in via remote desktop manually. Later, when I want to admin my htpc I can just rdp connect the admin user without interrupting the video playback on the actual HTPC's screen and check my cleanup tasks, downloads, ... witch already executed for this admin user. But right now I found no solution to automatically login user A from a user B desktop and I also found no solution to autologin both users immediately at startup. As a workaround I have to fire up my other notebook machine and login one time with the remote user via rdp. From this time on the remote admin user is running concurrent with the main user in the background of the machine. The other workaround would be... after startup switch user from main user to admin user and then back again. But that also requires manual steps. I'm on a Windows 8 System right now but all infos for Win7 or XP would be also interesting. thanks a lot for all ideas. PS: just to prevent useless posts... don't tell me that only one user can be logged in to windows. ;)

  Read the article

• Forcing users to change password on first login - Windows Server 2008 R2 Remote Desktop Services

  - by George Durzi

  I'm setting up a demo lab environment in which each demo lab user is assigned 4 accounts to use in the lab. Users access the lab via Remote Desktop to the "client" machine in the lab - exposed at demolab.mydomain.com. The Client machine is a Windows 2008 Server R2 Enterprise Edition server The Remote Desktop Services role is configured on this server Remote Connection settings are configured to allow users to connect with any version of the Remote Desktop Client All accounts are members of the local Administrators and Remote Desktop Users groups All accounts are configured to be forced to change the default password after first login The user is instructed to remote into the lab with an account designated as their main account, and establish 3 more remote desktop sessions within the lab using their 3 other assigned demo lab accounts. When establishing the initial remote desktop connection to the lab using their main account, the user sees the change password dialog as expected. However, after logging in and trying to establish remote desktop connections to the server with their three other accounts, they are prompted that they need to change the password after logging in but can't continue with the login process - they don't see the expected change password experience. After logging in with a primary accounts, it doesn't make a difference if I try establishing a Remote Desktop connection to the environment using the name of the server, e.g. Client, or demolab.mydomain.com. I experimented with changing the settings for Remote Connections to require NLA but that didn't make a different. Appreciate any tips. Thanks

  Read the article

• Users removing Administrator from files/folders permissions

  - by user64204

  We're running Windows Server 2003 R2 with Active Directory and are having an issue with network shares whereby users, in an attempt to secure their documents, remove everybody (including the Administrator account) from their files/folders permissions. Since the Administrator no longer has read permission to them, we can't even backup files manually as we get permission errors. One solution that we've found is to change the owner of the files and directories to the Administrator account. We can then change the permissions as we wish. The problem is that this has to be done manually so can't really be applied to an entire share. Another solution that we've tried is to use cacls as follows: cacls d:\path\to\share /C /T /E /G Administrator:F The problem with this is that we're still getting an ACCESS DENIED error on files/folders on which Administrator was removed. Q1: Is there a way to restore at least read access to all files/folders to the Administrator account in a recursive fashion? That would be for the short term. For the long term we're looking for a solution to prevent users from removing Administrator from files/folders permissions. Since we're going to migrate to Windows Server 2008 R2 soon we could wait until we've migrated to implement such solution if need be. Q2: Is there a way to prevent users from removing Administrator from files/folders permissions on Windows Server 2003/2008?

  Read the article

• How to reject messages to unknown user in sendmail cooperating with MS-Exchange?

  - by user71061

  Hi! I have an MS Exchange 2003 configured as a mail server for an organization. As this server is located in this organization internal network and I don't want to expose it directly over internet, I have second server - linux box with sendmail - configured as intelligent relay (it accept all messages from internet addressed to @my_domain, and forward it to internal Exchange serwer, and accepts all messages from this internal Exchange server and forward it over internet). This configuration work's fine, but I want to eliminate messages addressed to not exiting users as early as possible. Good solution could be Enabling on Exchange server function of filtering recipients together with "tar pitting", but in my case this dosn't solve problem, because before any message reach my Exchange server (which could eventually reject it), it has to be already accepted by sendmail server, sitting in front of this Exchange server. So, I want to configure my sendmail server in such a way, that during initial SMTP conversation it could query somehow my Exchange server checking whether recipient address is valid or not, and based on result of this query, accept or reject (possibly with some delay) incoming message in a very early phase. In fact, I have already solved this issue by writing my own, simple sendmail milter program which checks recipient address against text file with list of valid addresses. But this solution is not satisfying me any longer, because it requires frequent updates of this file, and due to lack of time/motivation/programming skills, I don't want to cope further with my source code, adding to it functionality of querying my Exchange server. Maybe I can achieve desired effect by configuring any component of already available linux software. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Preventing applications from performing run once tasks for multiple users

  - by JohnyV

  In our environment we have several applications that are installed that have a need to run a little prompt the first time they run eg Media player, Google earth etc. The problem is we have many users on many different computers. And the computers have deepfreeze running on them which removes the users profile once the computer is restarted. So next time that user logs in they have to go through the whole thing of run once again. I have managed to prevent IE runonce using group policy and office run once from using the office customisation tool. Is there a way to make this happen for other applications. On windows xp we used to copy a user that has run all the apps and place their default profile into the default profile so that new users get that profile template. Now with windows 7 the process of copy profiles is not as easy. Is there an easy way to copy profiles in win 7 or is there a better way (eg modify reg or app data) to prevent apps from performing an initial run. Thanks

  Read the article

• Users getting 'flooded' with not read notifications (NRNs) for old emails and meeting requests

  - by Exile

  I'm being placed under quite a lot of pressure from senior management over a relatively trivial issue. Basically the vast majority of users are complaining that they receive not read notifications (NRNs) for old emails and meeting requests in large numbers multiple times a day. I know something strange is happening because some are delivered at silly times in the morning (i.e 3AM or 4AM). The problem I have is that these some of these NRNs are from meeting requests and messages that are 120 days old, so some users have deleted the original message so I don’t actually know if the NRN is from an email or meeting request. This is typical of what users receive as a NRN: From: Sender Sent: 23 March 2012 04:16 To: Recepient Subject: Not read: Accepted: Status update Your message To: Sender Subject: Accepted: Status update Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 8:59:00 AM (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London was deleted without being read on Friday, March 23, 2012 4:15:32 AM (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London. ... From: Sender Sent: 18 March 2012 01:13 To: Recepient Subject: Not read: Gold delivery - Sourcing module Your message To: Sender Subject: Gold delivery - Sourcing module Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 9:37:58 AM (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London was deleted without being read on Sunday, March 18, 2012 1:12:37 AM (UTC) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London. I have done a search and found the following: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2544246 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2471964 But we already installed 'Update Rollup 6 for Exchange Server 2010 Service Pack 1' back in December, so I am not sure what we can do to fix this?

  Read the article

• UIDs for service users in Mac OS X

  - by LaC

  Some third-party servers should be run under a special user for security reasons (eg, PostgreSQL is typically run by "postgres"). Of course, these service users should not show up in the Mac OS X login windows. I know how to create hidden users using dscl or dsimport, but I'm wondering what the best policy is for assigning UIDs (and matching GIDs). Apple's documentation states that UIDs from 0 to 100 are reserved (pg. 69), but OS X comes with several special users and groups outside that range. I used to use ids from 401 onwards for services, but I noticed that OS X 10.6 has started using that range for groups created by the Sharing pane in System Preferences. What is the recommended ID range to use for third-party services, then? Perhaps I should just use IDs in the 500 range, since all that is needed to hide a user in Snow Leopard is setting his password to "*"? Also, most of Apple's services have names starting with an underscore, with an alias sans underscore; eg, _sandbox and sandbox. Is there any special significance to this? Should I do the same for my services?

  Read the article

• Configure Web app for external access (IIS7), allowing only certain users via AD group. All users need internal access

  - by White Island

  We have a Web app running in IIS7 (Server 2008 R2). I now need to allow external access with an SSL certificate, so certain users (e.g. the owner of the company) can use it remotely without VPN. They want to roll out the external access only to those specific users at first (thinking: a Windows credential prompt), BUT everyone will still need access internally (HTTP), without the prompt. I have the SSL cert installed on the server and public DNS configured. I've been trying to figure out how to work the authentication/authorization. I was thinking I need to disable Anonymous authn and set Windows authn, then I keep coming back to 'URL Authorization' in my research for the group setting; however, when I tried URL authz, (removed allow all, added allow rule for the special group), it broke the site internally (403.2 Forbidden, I believe it was). I thought maybe setting up a second site in IIS pointing to the same program would work, but the exact same thing happened (and again with a new app pool, just for kicks). So I guess my question is, how would you do this: allow external access, limited to users in a specific AD group, while still allowing internal access without a credentials prompt? How do I separate the external HTTPS and internal HTTP authorization requirements? Will I need to just copy the entire contents of the app in Windows Explorer to a new folder and create my external site from that? Is Windows authentication the correct option for this? I did come across this, which refers to creating a custom module. While it sounds like a solution, it's not one I'm familiar with, and I just wondered if there is a simpler way to get it to work: http://forums.iis.net/p/1182792/2000775.aspx Thanks!

  Read the article

• Should I include HTML markup in my JSON response?

  - by Mike M. Lin

  In an e-commerce site, when adding an item to a cart, I'd like to show a popup window with the options you can choose. Imagine you're ordering an iPod Shuffle and now you have to choose the color and text to engrave. I'd like the window to be modal, so I'm using a lightbox populated by an Ajax call. Now I have two options: Option 1: Send only the data, and generate the HTML markup using JavaScript What's nice about this is that it trims down the Ajax request to the bear minimum and doesn't mix the data with the markup. What's not so great about this is that now I need to use JavaScript to do my rendering, instead of having a template engine on the server-side do it. I might be able to clean up the approach a bit by using a client-side templating solution. Option 2: Send the HTML markup What's good about this is that I can have the same server-side templating engine I'm using for the rest of my rendering tasks (Django), do the rendering of the lightbox. JavaScript is only used to insert the HTML fragment into the page. So it clearly leaves the rendering to the rendering engine. Makes sense to me. But I don't feel comfortable mixing data and markup in an Ajax call for some reason. I'm not sure what makes me feel uneasy about it. I mean, it's the same way every web page is served up -- data plus markup -- right?

  Read the article

• Multi MVC processing vs Single MVC process

  - by lordg

  I've worked fairly extensively with the MVC framework cakephp, however I'm finding that I would rather have my pages driven by the multiple MVC than by just one MVC. My reason is primarily to maintain an a more DRY principle. In CakePHP MVC: you call a URL which calls a single MVC, which then calls the layout. What I want is: you call a URL, it processes a layout, which then calls multiple MVC's per component/block of html on the page. When you compare JavaScript components, AJAX, and server side HTML rendering, it seems the most consistent method for building pages is through blocks of components or HTML views. That way, the view block could be situated either on the server or the client. This is technically my ONLY disagreement with the MVC model. Outside of this, IMHO MVC rocks! My question is: What other RAD frameworks follow the same principles as MVC but are driven rather by the View side of MVC? I've looked at Django and Ruby on Rails, yet they seems to be more Controller driven. Lift/Scala appears to be somewhat of a good fit, but i'm interested to see what others exist.

  Read the article

• Should one generally develop a client library for REST services to help prevent API breakages?

  - by BestPractices

  We have a project where UI code will be developed by the same team but in a different language (Python/Django) from the services layer (REST/Java). The code for each layer exits in different code repositories and which can follow different release cycles. I'm trying to come up with a process that will prevent/reduce breaking changes in the services layer from the perspective of the UI layer. I've thought to write integration tests at the UI layer level that we'll run whenever we build the UI or the services layer (we're using Jenkins as our CI tool to build the code which is in two Git repos) and if there are failures then something in the services layer broke and the commit is not accepted. Would it also be a good idea (is it a best practice?) to have the developer of the services layer create and maintain a client library for the REST service that exists in the UI layer that they will update whenever there is a breaking change in their Service API? Conceivably, we would then have the advantage of a statically-typed API that the UI code builds against. If the client library API changes, then the UI code won't compile (so we'll know sooner that there was a breaking change). I'd also still run the integration tests upon building the UI or services layer to further validate that the integration between UI and the service(s) still works.

  Read the article

• Merge two different API calls into One

  - by dhilipsiva

  I have two different apps in my django project. One is "comment" and an other one is "files". A comment might save some file attached to it. The current way of creating a comment with attachments is by making two API calls. First one creates an actual comment and replies with the comment ID which serves as foreign key for the Files. Then for each file, a new request is made with the comment ID. Please note that file is a generic app, that can be used with other apps too. What is the cleanest way of making this into one API call? I want to have this as a single API call because I am in a situation where I need to send user an email with all the files as attachment when a comment is made. I know Queueing is the ideal way to do it. But I don't have the liberty to add queing to our stack now. So this was the only way I could think of.

  Read the article

• Should I use mod_wsgi embedded mode if I have full control of Apache?

  - by mgibsonbr

  I'm managing a bunch of sites and applications in a shared hosting, using Django via mod_wsgi. I had planned to use daemon mode from the beginning (to avoid restart problems), but ended up purchasing a plan that allows me to run a dedicated Apache instance. I kept using daemon mode for convenience, but I'm afraid it's consuming more server resources than it should (I have different projects for each site, each with its own process and process group), so I'm considering switching to embedded mode. Would that be a sensible thing to do? I'd still be able to restart Apache anytime I need to, and I wouldn't need so many child processes and sockets (so I hope the resource usage would decrease). But I'm unsure whether or not doing so would make it more difficult to manage those sites (if I need to update one, I have to restart all) or maybe the applications won't be properly isolated from one another. Are these problems really significant (or only a minor nuisance), are there other drawbacks I coudn't foresee? I'm looking for advice in any aspect of this setup - mainainability, performance, security etc. Tips for improving the current setup are also welcome (I know how to correctly configure a basic mod_wsgi setup, but I'm clueless about sensible values for threads, processes etc).

  Read the article

• 'Buy the app' landing page implementations: redirect or javascript popup?

  - by benwad

  My site (using Django) has an app that I'm trying to push - I currently have a piece of middleware that redirects the user to a page advertising the app if they're accessing the page on the iPhone, then setting a cookie so that the user isn't bugged by the message every time they visit the site. This works fine, however checking the page with the mobile Googlebot checker shows that the Googlebot gets stuck in the redirect (since it doesn't store cookies) and therefore won't index the proper content. So, I'm trying to think of an alternative implementation that won't hurt the site's Google ranking and won't have any other adverse effects. I've considered a couple of options: Redirect (the current solution), but don't redirect if the user agent matches the Googlebot's UA string. This would be ideal, however I'm not sure if Google like their bot being treated differently from other users, and I'm afraid the site's ranking may be somehow penalised if I go ahead with this. Use a Javascript popup instead of a redirect. This would make sure the Googlebot finds the content it needs, however I envision this approach causing compatibility issues with the myriad mobile devices/browsers out there, and may affect the page load time. How valid are these options? And is there a better option for implementing this feature out there? I've tried researching this topic but surprisingly can't find any reputable-looking blog posts that explore this topic.

  Read the article

• Storing editable site content?

  - by hmp

  We have a Django-based website for which we wanted to make some of the content (text, and business logic such as pricing plans) easily editable in-house, and so we decided to store it outside the codebase. Usually the reason is one of the following: It's something that non-technical people want to edit. One example is copywriting for a website - the programmers prepare a template with text that defaults to "Lorem ipsum...", and the real content is inserted later to the database. It's something that we want to be able to change quickly, without the need to deploy new code (which we currently do twice a week). An example would be features currently available to the customers at different tiers of pricing. Instead of hardcoding these, we read them from database. The described solution is flexible but there are some reasons why I don't like it. Because the content has to be read from the database, there is a performance overhead. We mitigate that by using a caching scheme, but this also adds some complexity to the system. Developers who run the code locally see the system in a significantly different state compared to how it runs on production. Automated tests also exercise the system in a different state. Situations like testing new features on a staging server also get trickier - if the staging server doesn't have a recent copy of the database, it can be unexpectedly different from production. We could mitigate that by committing the new state to the repository occasionally (e.g. by adding data migrations), but it seems like a wrong approach. Is it? Any ideas how best to solve these problems? Is there a better approach for handling the content that I'm overlooking?

  Read the article

• 'Buy the app' landing page implementations

  - by benwad

  My site (using Django) has an app that I'm trying to push - I currently have a piece of middleware that redirects the user to a page advertising the app if they're accessing the page on the iPhone, then setting a cookie so that the user isn't bugged by the message every time they visit the site. This works fine, however checking the page with the mobile Googlebot checker shows that the Googlebot gets stuck in the redirect (since it doesn't store cookies) and therefore won't index the proper content. So, I'm trying to think of an alternative implementation that won't hurt the site's Google ranking and won't have any other adverse effects. I've considered a couple of options: Redirect (the current solution), but don't redirect if the user agent matches the Googlebot's UA string. This would be ideal, however I'm not sure if Google like their bot being treated differently from other users, and I'm afraid the site's ranking may be somehow penalised if I go ahead with this. Use a Javascript popup instead of a redirect. This would make sure the Googlebot finds the content it needs, however I envision this approach causing compatibility issues with the myriad mobile devices/browsers out there, and may affect the page load time. How valid are these options? And is there a better option for implementing this feature out there? I've tried researching this topic but surprisingly can't find any reputable-looking blog posts that explore this topic. EDIT: I posted this on SF because it seemed unsuitable for SO, but if there's another site that would be better for this issue then I'd be happy to move the question elsewhere.

  Read the article

• Open Source Web Frameworks : Security

  - by trappedIntoCode

  How secure are popular open source web frameworks? I am particularly interested in popular frameworks like Rails and DJango. If I am building a site which is going to do heavy e-commerce, is it Ok to use frameworks like DJango and Satchmo? Is security compromised because their open architecture ? I know being OS does not mean being down right open to hackers, Linux uses superb authentication mechanism, but web is a different game. What can be done in this regard? UPDATE: Thanks for answers guys. I understand that I will have to find a suitable hosting service for a secure e-commerce application and that additional layers of security will be needed. I understand that Django and Rails have been designed keeping security aspects in mind, the most common form attacks like XSS, Injections etc. (Django book has a ch on Security) I was expecting comments from security Gurus. If you are a security Guru, would you recommend an important site, which is likely going to be popular, to be built on DJango or Rails?

  Read the article

• Serve static media on "nginx"

  - by MMRUSer

  My django application hosted on Apache, and now I want to serve its static media through nginx, I don't have any prior experience in nginx...plus currently the static media is serve through Apache.. expecting some helping hand. Apache 2.2 mod_wsgi nignx-0.7.65 Django 1.1.1 Thanks..

  Read the article

• How do I change the Django default test database?

  - by BryanWheelock

  The production database is named: project_db The default test db is: test_project_db My production server provider requires the database name start with the account name. So I could go with: projects_db_test or some variant.

  Read the article

• Django form linking 2 models by many to many field.

  - by Ed

  I have two models: class Actor(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=30, unique = True) event = models.ManyToManyField(Event, blank=True, null=True) class Event(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=30, unique = True) long_description = models.TextField(blank=True, null=True) I want to create a form that allows me to identify the link between the two models when I add a new entry. This works: class ActorForm(forms.ModelForm): class Meta: model = Actor The form includes both name and event, allowing me to create a new Actor and simultaneous link it to an existing Event. On the flipside, class EventForm(forms.ModelForm): class Meta: model = Event This form does not include an actor association. So I am only able to create a new Event. I can't simultaneously link it to an existing Actor. I tried to create an inline formset: EventFormSet = forms.models.inlineformset_factory(Event, Actor, can_delete = False, extra = 2, form = ActorForm) but I get an error <'class ctg.dtb.models.Actor'> has no ForeignKey to <'class ctg.dtb.models.Event'> This isn't too surprising. The inlineformset worked for another set of models I had, but this is a different example. I think I'm going about it entirely wrong. Overall question: How can I create a form that allows me to create a new Event and link it to an existing Actor?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126  | Next Page >