Search Results

Search found 1682 results on 68 pages for 'mozilla weave'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 12/68 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • Location of Firefox throbber/spinner image

    - by Premasagar
    I'm trying to locate the "throbber" (or "spinner") image used in the Firefox 3.6x chrome to show that a request is being processed: I'm not familiar with the source code structure for Firefox, and a simple search hasn't yielded the answer. Does anyone know which file I'm looking for? (E.g. can you provide a link to the file in the Mercurial repository, or tell me how to find it?).

    Read the article

  • Using nsIZipWriter or other to compress a string as a string?

    - by Daniel
    I need to be able to take a javascript string, compress it using any fast and available means and get back a binary string/blob. Background: The extension I'm developing needs to send various large content to my server. It does this conveniently by dynamically creating a form, adding fields to the form and posting it. Some of these fields are just too big bandwidth wise for multiple use. I'd like to be able to compress them before adding them and then maybe base64'ing them if the characters cause a problem in the message. Any ideas? I could use nsiZipWriter with temporary files on disk but that is quite ugly and probably sluggish.

    Read the article

  • blocking bad bots with robots.txt in 2012 [closed]

    - by Rachel Sparks
    does it still work good? I have this: # Generated using http://solidshellsecurity.com services # Begin block Bad-Robots from robots.txt User-agent: asterias Disallow:/ User-agent: BackDoorBot/1.0 Disallow:/ User-agent: Black Hole Disallow:/ User-agent: BlowFish/1.0 Disallow:/ User-agent: BotALot Disallow:/ User-agent: BuiltBotTough Disallow:/ User-agent: Bullseye/1.0 Disallow:/ User-agent: BunnySlippers Disallow:/ User-agent: Cegbfeieh Disallow:/ User-agent: CheeseBot Disallow:/ User-agent: CherryPicker Disallow:/ User-agent: CherryPickerElite/1.0 Disallow:/ User-agent: CherryPickerSE/1.0 Disallow:/ User-agent: CopyRightCheck Disallow:/ User-agent: cosmos Disallow:/ User-agent: Crescent Disallow:/ User-agent: Crescent Internet ToolPak HTTP OLE Control v.1.0 Disallow:/ User-agent: DittoSpyder Disallow:/ User-agent: EmailCollector Disallow:/ User-agent: EmailSiphon Disallow:/ User-agent: EmailWolf Disallow:/ User-agent: EroCrawler Disallow:/ User-agent: ExtractorPro Disallow:/ User-agent: Foobot Disallow:/ User-agent: Harvest/1.5 Disallow:/ User-agent: hloader Disallow:/ User-agent: httplib Disallow:/ User-agent: humanlinks Disallow:/ User-agent: InfoNaviRobot Disallow:/ User-agent: JennyBot Disallow:/ User-agent: Kenjin Spider Disallow:/ User-agent: Keyword Density/0.9 Disallow:/ User-agent: LexiBot Disallow:/ User-agent: libWeb/clsHTTP Disallow:/ User-agent: LinkextractorPro Disallow:/ User-agent: LinkScan/8.1a Unix Disallow:/ User-agent: LinkWalker Disallow:/ User-agent: LNSpiderguy Disallow:/ User-agent: lwp-trivial Disallow:/ User-agent: lwp-trivial/1.34 Disallow:/ User-agent: Mata Hari Disallow:/ User-agent: Microsoft URL Control - 5.01.4511 Disallow:/ User-agent: Microsoft URL Control - 6.00.8169 Disallow:/ User-agent: MIIxpc Disallow:/ User-agent: MIIxpc/4.2 Disallow:/ User-agent: Mister PiX Disallow:/ User-agent: moget Disallow:/ User-agent: moget/2.1 Disallow:/ User-agent: mozilla/4 Disallow:/ User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; BullsEye; Windows 95) Disallow:/ User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows 95) Disallow:/ User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows 98) Disallow:/ User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows NT) Disallow:/ User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows XP) Disallow:/ User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows 2000) Disallow:/ User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; Windows ME) Disallow:/ User-agent: mozilla/5 Disallow:/ User-agent: NetAnts Disallow:/ User-agent: NICErsPRO Disallow:/ User-agent: Offline Explorer Disallow:/ User-agent: Openfind Disallow:/ User-agent: Openfind data gathere Disallow:/ User-agent: ProPowerBot/2.14 Disallow:/ User-agent: ProWebWalker Disallow:/ User-agent: QueryN Metasearch Disallow:/ User-agent: RepoMonkey Disallow:/ User-agent: RepoMonkey Bait & Tackle/v1.01 Disallow:/ User-agent: RMA Disallow:/ User-agent: SiteSnagger Disallow:/ User-agent: SpankBot Disallow:/ User-agent: spanner Disallow:/ User-agent: suzuran Disallow:/ User-agent: Szukacz/1.4 Disallow:/ User-agent: Teleport Disallow:/ User-agent: TeleportPro Disallow:/ User-agent: Telesoft Disallow:/ User-agent: The Intraformant Disallow:/ User-agent: TheNomad Disallow:/ User-agent: TightTwatBot Disallow:/ User-agent: Titan Disallow:/ User-agent: toCrawl/UrlDispatcher Disallow:/ User-agent: True_Robot Disallow:/ User-agent: True_Robot/1.0 Disallow:/ User-agent: turingos Disallow:/ User-agent: URLy Warning Disallow:/ User-agent: VCI Disallow:/ User-agent: VCI WebViewer VCI WebViewer Win32 Disallow:/ User-agent: Web Image Collector Disallow:/ User-agent: WebAuto Disallow:/ User-agent: WebBandit Disallow:/ User-agent: WebBandit/3.50 Disallow:/ User-agent: WebCopier Disallow:/ User-agent: WebEnhancer Disallow:/ User-agent: WebmasterWorldForumBot Disallow:/ User-agent: WebSauger Disallow:/ User-agent: Website Quester Disallow:/ User-agent: Webster Pro Disallow:/ User-agent: WebStripper Disallow:/ User-agent: WebZip Disallow:/ User-agent: WebZip/4.0 Disallow:/ User-agent: Wget Disallow:/ User-agent: Wget/1.5.3 Disallow:/ User-agent: Wget/1.6 Disallow:/ User-agent: WWW-Collector-E Disallow:/ User-agent: Xenu's Disallow:/ User-agent: Xenu's Link Sleuth 1.1c Disallow:/ User-agent: Zeus Disallow:/ User-agent: Zeus 32297 Webster Pro V2.9 Win32 Disallow:/

    Read the article

  • Blocking a distributed, consistent spam attack? Could it be something more serious?

    - by mattmcmanus
    I will do my best to try and explain this as it's strange and confusing to me. I posted a little while ago about a sustained spike in mysql queries on a VPS I had recently setup. It turned out to be a single post on a site I was developmenting. The post had over 30,000 spam comments! Since the site was one I was slowly building I hadn't configured the anti-spam comment software yet. I've since deleted the particular post which has given the server a break but the post's url keeps on getting hit. The frustrating thing is every hit is from a different IP. How do I even start to block/prevent this? Is this even something I need to worry about? Here are some more specific details about my setup, just to give some context: Ubuntu 8.10 server with ufw setup The site I'm building is in Drupal which now has Mollom setup for spam control. It wasn't configured before. The requests happen inconsistently. Sometimes it's every couple seconds and other times it's a an or so between hits. However it's been going on pretty much constantly like that for over a week. Here is a sample of my apache access log from the last 15 minutes just for the page in question: dev.domain-name.com:80 97.87.97.169 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:47:40 +0000] "POST http://dev.domain-name.com/comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 202.149.24.193 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:50:37 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 193.106.92.77 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:50:39 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 194.85.136.187 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:52:03 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 220.255.7.13 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:52:14 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 195.70.55.151 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:53:41 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 71.91.4.31 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:56:07 +0000] "POST http://dev.domain-name.com/comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 98.209.203.170 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:56:10 +0000] "POST http://dev.domain-name.com/comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 24.255.137.159 - - [28/Mar/2010:06:56:19 +0000] "POST http://dev.domain-name.com/comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 77.242.20.18 - - [28/Mar/2010:07:00:15 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 94.75.215.42 - - [28/Mar/2010:07:01:34 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.0" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 89.115.2.128 - - [28/Mar/2010:07:03:20 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 75.65.230.252 - - [28/Mar/2010:07:05:05 +0000] "POST http://dev.domain-name.com/comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 206.251.255.61 - - [28/Mar/2010:07:06:46 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.0" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" dev.domain-name.com:80 213.194.120.14 - - [28/Mar/2010:07:07:22 +0000] "POST /comment/reply/3 HTTP/1.1" 404 5895 "http://dev.domain-name.com/blog/2009/11/23/another" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" I understand this is an open ended question, but any help or insight you could give would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Le protocole WebSocket doit-il être évincé ? Mozilla et Opera cessent de le supporter à cause de failles de sécurité

    Le protocole WebSocket doit-il être évincé ? Mozilla et Opera cessent de le supporter, suite à la découverte de failles de sécurité WebSocket, à la fois protocole et API, avait dernièrement la cotte du fait de sa position de spécification potentielle du futur standard de l'HTML5. Mais un coup de théâtre vient de frapper son destin : des failles de sécurité ont été découvertes en son sein. Les vulnérabilités se situent au niveau du canal bidirectionnel et fullduplex que Web Socket ouvre entre le navigateur et le serveur. La négociation qui s'y joue pose problème : quand le browser envoie une requête, cela crée une handshake (poignée de main). Mais cette action ouvre la voie à un empoisonnement du cache, qui peut alors voir un fich...

    Read the article

  • Le web peut-il améliorer la vie ? Mozilla lance une consultation auprès des développeurs américains, on l'aurait souhaitée mondiale

    A quoi sert Internet ? Le réseau peut-il améliorer la vie ? Mozilla lance une consultation américaine que l'on souhaiterait mondiale On ne compte plus les essais et les avis « d'experts » qui expliquent la dangerosité du Web et les risques (pêle-mêle : racisme, terrorisme, pédophilie, détournement bancaire, pornographie, etc.) qui pèsent sur les téméraires internautes qui osent s'y aventurer. Encore un exemple pas plus tard qu'avant-hier sur France Television. A l'opposé, certains écrivent moins mais agissent plus pour faire d'Internet un facteur de progrès. C'es...

    Read the article

  • Mozilla isole les plug-in de Firefox avec la sortie d'une nouvelle beta et la mise en application du

    Mise à jour du 21/04/09 Mozilla isole les plug-ins de Firefox Avec la sortie de la beta de la version 3.6.4 et du "Projet Lorentz" Le futur Firefox 3.6.4 ne sera pas une mise à jour aussi mineure que cela. L'arrivée du Projet Lorentz est en effet attendue avec impatience par les utilisateurs du navigateur. Pour l'instant en beta (qui vient tout juste de sortir), cette nouvelle release, issue de ce projet Lorentz, inclut un système de protection contre les crashs en isolant les plugins défectueux lorsque ceux-ci ont un problème. Sont particulièrement ciblés Flash, Quicktime et Silverlight. ...

    Read the article

  • Adobe s'associe à Google et Mozilla pour corriger un bogue, qui permettait de restaurer des cookies supprimés via Flash Player

    Adobe s'associe à Google et Mozilla pour corriger un bogue, qui permettait de restaurer des cookies supprimés via Flash Player Les LSO (Local Storage Objects) en place dans le Flash Player d'Adobe, peuvent être diablement utiles : stockage de diverses informations évitant d'avoir à les ressaisir, ou de perdre des données en ligne (travail en cours dans une application, identifiants, historique, etc.). Mais chaque médaille à son revers, surtout lorsqu'il est question de laisser des sites et des logiciels retenir des informations. Déjà, ces derniers peuvent être utilisés pour la restauration de cookies de navigateur qui avaient été supprimés. De quoi récupérer des données permettant de tracker un internaute. Adobe a do...

    Read the article

  • A single request appears to have come from all the browsers? Should I be worried?

    - by HorusKol
    I was looking over my site access logs when I noticed a request with the following user agent string: "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12\",\"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; pl-PL; rv:1.8.1.24pre) Gecko/20100228 K-Meleon/1.5.4\",\"Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US) AppleWebKit/540.0 (KHTML,like Gecko) Chrome/9.1.0.0 Safari/540.0\",\"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/532.5 (KHTML, like Gecko) Comodo_Dragon/4.1.1.11 Chrome/4.1.249.1042 Safari/532.5\",\"Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.0.16) Gecko/2009122206 Firefox/3.0.16 Flock/2.5.6\",\"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Maxthon/3.0.8.2 Safari/533.1\",\"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.8pre) Gecko/20070928 Firefox/2.0.0.7 Navigator/9.0RC1\",\"Opera/9.99 (Windows NT 5.1; U; pl) Presto/9.9.9\",\"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; zh-HK) AppleWebKit/533.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Safari/533.18.5\",\"Seamonkey-1.1.13-1(X11; U; GNU Fedora fc 10) Gecko/20081112\",\"Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 9.0; Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; Trident/5.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; SLCC2; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; Zune 4.0; Tablet PC 2.0; InfoPath.3; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E)\",\"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; MS-RTC LM 8; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E; InfoPath.3)" The request appears to have originated from 91.121.153.210 - which appears to be owned by these guys: http://www.medialta.eu/accueil.html I find this rather impressive - a request from 'all' user-agents. There's actually quite a few of these requests over at least the few days - so it naturally piqued my interested. Searching Google simply seems to produce a very long list of websites which make their Apache access logs publicly available... Is this some weird indication that we're being targeted? And by who?

    Read the article

  • Protecting Apache with Fail2Ban

    - by NetStudent
    Having checked my Apache logs for the last two days I have noticed several attempts to access URLs such as /phpmyadmin, /phpldapadmin: 121.14.241.135 - - [09/Jun/2012:04:37:35 +0100] "GET /w00tw00t.at.blackhats.romanian.anti-sec:) HTTP/1.1" 404 415 "-" "ZmEu" 121.14.241.135 - - [09/Jun/2012:04:37:35 +0100] "GET /phpMyAdmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 405 "-" "ZmEu" 121.14.241.135 - - [09/Jun/2012:04:37:35 +0100] "GET /phpmyadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 404 "-" "ZmEu" 121.14.241.135 - - [09/Jun/2012:04:37:36 +0100] "GET /pma/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 399 "-" "ZmEu" 121.14.241.135 - - [09/Jun/2012:04:37:36 +0100] "GET /myadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 403 "-" "ZmEu" 121.14.241.135 - - [09/Jun/2012:04:37:37 +0100] "GET /MyAdmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 403 "-" "ZmEu" 66.249.72.235 - - [09/Jun/2012:07:11:06 +0100] "GET /robots.txt HTTP/1.1" 404 430 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2.1; +http://www.google.com/bot.html)" 66.249.72.235 - - [09/Jun/2012:07:11:06 +0100] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 424 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2.1; +http://www.google.com/bot.html)" 188.132.178.34 - - [09/Jun/2012:08:39:05 +0100] "HEAD /manager/html HTTP/1.0" 404 166 "-" "-" 95.108.150.235 - - [09/Jun/2012:09:42:09 +0100] "GET /robots.txt HTTP/1.1" 404 432 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; YandexBot/3.0; +http://yandex.com/bots)" 95.108.150.235 - - [09/Jun/2012:09:42:09 +0100] "GET /robots.txt HTTP/1.1" 404 432 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; YandexBot/3.0; +http://yandex.com/bots)" 95.108.150.235 - - [09/Jun/2012:09:42:10 +0100] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 424 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; YandexBot/3.0; +http://yandex.com/bots)" 95.108.150.235 - - [09/Jun/2012:09:42:10 +0100] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 424 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; YandexBot/3.0; +http://yandex.com/bots)" 95.108.150.235 - - [09/Jun/2012:09:42:11 +0100] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 424 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; YandexBot/3.0; +http://yandex.com/bots)" 95.108.150.235 - - [09/Jun/2012:09:42:11 +0100] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 424 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; YandexBot/3.0; +http://yandex.com/bots)" 194.128.132.2 - - [09/Jun/2012:16:04:41 +0100] "HEAD / HTTP/1.0" 200 260 "-" "-" 66.249.68.176 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:08:12 +0100] "GET /robots.txt HTTP/1.1" 404 430 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2.1; +http://www.google.com/bot.html)" 66.249.68.176 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:08:13 +0100] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 424 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2.1; +http://www.google.com/bot.html)" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:33 +0100] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 388 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:34 +0100] "GET /phpldapadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 379 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:34 +0100] "GET /phpldapadmin/htdocs/ HTTP/1.1" 404 386 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:35 +0100] "GET /phpldap/ HTTP/1.1" 404 374 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:36 +0100] "GET /phpldap/htdocs/ HTTP/1.1" 404 381 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:36 +0100] "GET /admin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 372 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:38 +0100] "GET /admin/ldap/ HTTP/1.1" 404 377 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:38 +0100] "GET /admin/ldap/htdocs/ HTTP/1.1" 404 384 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:38 +0100] "GET /admin/phpldap/ HTTP/1.1" 404 380 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:39 +0100] "GET /admin/phpldap/htdocs/ HTTP/1.1" 404 387 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:39 +0100] "GET /admin/phpldapadmin/htdocs/ HTTP/1.1" 404 392 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:40 +0100] "GET /admin/phpldapadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 385 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:40 +0100] "GET /openldap HTTP/1.1" 404 374 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:41 +0100] "GET /openldap/htdocs HTTP/1.1" 404 381 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:42 +0100] "GET /openldap/htdocs/ HTTP/1.1" 404 382 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:44 +0100] "GET /ldap/ HTTP/1.1" 404 371 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:44 +0100] "GET /ldap/htdocs/ HTTP/1.1" 404 378 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:45 +0100] "GET /ldap/phpldapadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 384 "-" "-" 212.3.106.249 - - [09/Jun/2012:18:12:46 +0100] "GET /ldap/phpldapadmin/htdocs/ HTTP/1.1" 404 391 "-" "-" Is there any way I can use Fail2Ban or any other similar software to ban these IPs in situations when my server is being abused this way (by trying several "common" URLs)?

    Read the article

  • How to increase PermGen memory for eclipselink StaticWeaveAntTask

    - by rayd09
    We are using Eclipselink and need to weave the code in order for lazy fetching to work property. During the weave process I'm getting the following error: weave: BUILD FAILED java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: PermGen space I have the following tasks within my ant build file: <target name="define_weave_task" description="task definition for EclipseLink static weaving"> <taskdef name="eclipse_weave" classname="org.eclipse.persistence.tools.weaving.jpa.StaticWeaveAntTask"/> </target> <target name="weave" depends="compile,define_weave_task" description="weave eclipselink code into compiled classes"> <eclipse_weave source="${path.classes}" target="${path.classes}"> <classpath refid="compile.classpath"/> </eclipse_weave> </target> It has been working great for a long time. Now that the amount of code to be woven has increased I'm getting the PermGen error. I would like to be able to up the amount of perm space. If I was doing a compile I would be able to up the perm space via a compiler argument such as <compilerarg value="-XX:MaxPermSize=256M"/> but this does not appear to be a valid argument for eclipselink weaving. How can I up the perm space for the weave?

    Read the article

  • How to download Firefox extensions from addons.mozilla.org without installing them?

    - by kjo
    Pages at the https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox site often feature buttons that say "Add to Firefox". Clicking on such a button causes a Firefox extension to be downloaded and installed. I am looking for a convenient way to limit this action to the download step only, so that in the end I am left with the downloaded *.xpi file in my disk. Thanks! P.S. The following approach is not only inconvenient: it doesn't work!. Inspect the HTML for the button, and extract a URL like https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/downloads/latest/1234/addon-1234-latest.xpi?src=search give or take the stuff after .xpi. at the command-line prompt, download this URL with wget or curl. This download attempt just hangs. (Even if it didn't, I'd like to find a less cumbersome approach.)

    Read the article

  • Survey: Your Plans for Adopting New Firefox Releases?

    - by Steven Chan (Oracle Development)
    Mozilla is committing to releasing new Firefox versions every six weeks.  Mozilla released Firefox 5 this week.  With this release, Mozilla states that Firefox 4 is End-of-Life and will not receive any additional security updates.  In a comment thread posted on to a Mike Kaply's blog article discussing these new Firefox policies, Asa Dotzler from Mozilla stated: ... Enterprise has never been (and I’ll argue, shouldn’t be) a focus of ours. Until we run out of people who don’t have sysadmins and enterprise deployment teams looking out for them, I can’t imagine why we’d focus at all on the kinds of environments you care so much about.  In a later comment, he added: ... A minute spent making a corporate user happy can better be spent making many regular users happy. I’d much rather Mozilla spending its limited resources looking out for the billions of users that don’t have enterprise support systems already taking care of them. Asa then confirmed that every new Firefox release will put the previous one into End-of-Life: As for John’s concern, “By the time I validate Firefox 5, what guarantee would I have that Firefox 5 won’t go EOL when Firefox 6 is released?” He has the opposite of guarantees that won’t happen. He has my promise that it will happen. Firefox 6 will be the EOL of Firefox 5. And Firefox 7 will be the EOL for Firefox 6.  He added: “You’re basically saying you don’t care about corporations.” Yes, I’m basically saying that I don’t care about making Firefox enterprise friendly. Kev Needham, Channel Manager at Mozilla later stated to PC Mag: The Web and Web browsers continue to evolve rapidly. Mozilla's focus is on providing users with the best Web experience possible, and Firefox needs to evolve at the pace the Web's users and developers expect. By releasing small, focused updates more often, we are able to deliver improved security and stability even as we introduce new features, which is better for our users, and for the Web.We recognize that this shift may not be compatible with a large organization's IT Policy and understand that it is challenging to organizations that have effort-intensive certification polices. However, our development process is geared toward delivering products that support the Web as it is today, while innovating and building future Web capabilities. Tying Firefox product development to an organizational process we do not control would make it difficult for us to continue to innovate for our users and the betterment of the Web.  Your feedback needed for E-Business Suite certifications  Mozilla's new support policy has significant implications for enterprise users of Firefox with Oracle E-Business Suite.  We are reviewing the implications for our certification and support policies for Firefox now.  It would be very helpful if you could let me know about your organisation's plans for Firefox in light of this new information.  Please feel free to drop me a private email, or post a comment here if that's appropriate. 

    Read the article

  • Duplicate GET request from multiple IPs - can anyone explain this?

    - by dwq
    We've seen a pattern in our webserver access logs which we're having problem explaining. A GET request appears in the access log which is a legitimate, but private, url as part of normal e-commerce website use (by private, we mean there is a unique key in a url form variable generated specifically for that customer session). Then a few seconds later we get hit with an identical request maybe 10-15 times within the space of a second. The duplicate requests are all from different IP addresses. The UserAgent for the duplicates are all the same (but different from the original request). The reverse DNS lookup on the IPs for all the duplicates requests resolve to the same large hosting company. Can anyone think of a scenario what would explain this? EDIT 1 Here's an example that's probably anonymised beyond being any actual use, but it might give an idea of the sort of pattern we're seeing (it's from a search query as they sometimes get duplicated too): xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:42:57 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "http://www.ourdomain.com/index.html" "Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/6.0)" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:03 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:03 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:04 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:04 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:04 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:04 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:04 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:04 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:04 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" xx.xx.xx.xx - - [21/Jun/2013:21:43:04 +0100] "GET /search.html?search=widget&Submit=Search HTTP/1.0" 200 5475 "" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.91 Safari/534.30" UPDATE 2 Sometimes it is part of a checkout flow that's duplicated to I'd think twitter is unlikely.

    Read the article

  • "MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME not set" zekr quran study software java error

    - by Acess Denied
    I have installed zekr Quran study software on ubuntu 12.04 and I upgraded to 12.10. then the zekr app has been giving me this error when ever I start it. org.eclipse.swt.SWTError: No more handles [Unknown Mozilla path (MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME not set)] at org.eclipse.swt.SWT.error(SWT.java:4387) at org.eclipse.swt.browser.Mozilla.initMozilla(Mozilla.java:1939) at org.eclipse.swt.browser.Mozilla.create(Mozilla.java:699) at org.eclipse.swt.browser.Browser.<init>(Browser.java:99) at net.sf.zekr.ui.QuranForm.makeFrame(QuranForm.java:628) at net.sf.zekr.ui.QuranForm.init(QuranForm.java:340) at net.sf.zekr.ui.QuranForm.<init>(QuranForm.java:319) at net.sf.zekr.ZekrMain.startZekr(ZekrMain.java:51) at net.sf.zekr.ZekrMain.main(ZekrMain.java:94) Please Advice me

    Read the article

  • How to sync bookmarks across Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox bookmarks?

    - by ViliusK
    How to sync bookmarks across Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox bookmarks? As I, currently, understand, Google Chrome puts bookmarks seperatly from Google Bookmarks, which is accessible in Firefox by using Google Toolbar for Firefox. Right? So how should I synchronize my browsers? I use Google Chrome as my primary browser and it works good and bookmarks are synchronized across number of computers I'm using. Thanks, viliusk

    Read the article

  • How to sync bookmarks across Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox bookmarks?

    - by ViliusK
    How to sync bookmarks across Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox bookmarks? As I, currently, understand, Google Chrome puts bookmarks seperatly from Google Bookmarks, which is accessible in Firefox by using Google Toolbar for Firefox. Right? So how should I synchronize my browsers? I use Google Chrome as my primary browser and it works good and bookmarks are synchronized across number of computers I'm using. Thanks, viliusk

    Read the article

  • Why doesn't Mozilla release .deb and .rpm packages for their software?

    - by ushabtay
    i use and enjoy Firefox on my Ubuntu 10.04.2 laptop (although Firefox needs work for the Linux/Ubuntu version..) Yet i realize that in comparison to other pieces of software that have an "Ubuntu/Debian" version (.deb file, and usually .rpm files as well), i don't see it in one of the most profound assets of the FLOSS world. The Question is - Why? If Chrom/ium can - why can't they? Easier to get up-to-date software and features and so forth.. cheers,

    Read the article

  • Multiple thunderbird Icons in System Tray(Windows 7) & TaskBar

    - by chobo2
    Is this some new "feature" for thunderbird 8? When I start thunderbird it starts by opening thunderbird. Once it is loading thunderbird it loads another 6 thunderbirds. The windows are called Mozilla Thunderbird Inbox - [email protected] - Mozilla Thuderbird Inbox - [email protected] - Mozilla Thuderbird Inbox - [email protected] - Mozilla Thuderbird Inbox - [email protected] - Mozilla Thuderbird (yes it repeats the same one a few times) Inbox - [email protected] - Mozilla Thuderbird I have 7 email accounts but for whatever reason it only made 3 windows. What happened to the one window? When I minimize to tray I got 4 of thunderbird icons. When closing one of them all of the close. My other windows 7(32 bit not 64 bit) only have one instance.

    Read the article

  • How do I run Firefox OS as a standalone application?

    - by JamesTheAwesomeDude
    I got the add-on for the Firefox OS simulator, and it works great! It even keeps functioning after Firefox is closed, so I can save processing power for other things. I'd like to run it as a standalone application, so that I don't even have to open Firefox in the first place. I've gone to the System Monitor, and it says that the process (I guessed which by CPU usage and filename) was started via /home/james/.mozilla/firefox-trunk/vkuuxfit.default/extensions/[email protected]/resources/r2d2b2g/data/linux64/b2g/plugin-container 3386 true tab, so I tried running that in the Terminal (after I'd closed the simulator, of course,) but it gives this: james@james-OptiPlex-GX620:~/.mozilla/firefox-trunk/vkuuxfit.default/extensions/[email protected]/resources/r2d2b2g/data/linux64/b2g$ ./plugin-container 3386 true tab ./plugin-container: error while loading shared libraries: libxpcom.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory james@james-OptiPlex-GX620:~/.mozilla/firefox-trunk/vkuuxfit.default/extensions/[email protected]/resources/r2d2b2g/data/linux64/b2g$ What should I do? Is what I'm attempting even possible? (It should be, since the simulator kept running even after Firefox itself was closed...) NOTE: I've tried chmod u+sx plugin-container, but that didn't help.

    Read the article

  • Arguments to homologate Firefox in a Company

    - by Vegetus
    I developed a web project for my company and this project was designed to use Mozilla Firefox (including the javascript (jQuery)). However, now the company wants the project to be transferred to Internet Explorer. I know that in Google, there are several explanations about Mozilla Firefox, which I can demonstrate to the company. But is there any link showing that Internet Explorer runs the W3C standards and has several justifications for why using Mozilla Firefox? I searched on youtube and slideshare, but both have a very weak argument for me to select them and show to the company. The company where I work is still very naive to keep Internet Explorer. 1) The project is intranet. Only 400 internal employees can access the web. 2) The company argues that Mozilla Firefox is not approved by the company. Any suggestions? Any link which shows that the developers of the world hate Internet Explorer? A link explaining why developers do not like Internet Explorer? After the answers, I'm thinking of making a great slide with all the necessary arguments to the company homologue firefox. And yet, published in slideshare. EDIT: Someone here must be wondering why I have not designed, also for Internet Explorer. Welllll... As the deadline for project completion is always short, I developed the project focused only on Mozilla Firefox, because the browser Mozilla Firefox most respects W3C standards (and javascript too) than Internet Explorer.

    Read the article

  • How to report a malicious site to Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, etc. so that they will warn users

    - by Jayapal Chandran
    I completed a project a year ago. Now a few modification were needed. While trying to test the site, there was an index.html file with a malicious script which had an iframe to another site's jar file. Kaspersky antivirus blocked it. I browsed via ftp to find the file and I deleted it. I also disabled directory listing. Maybe the ftp details of the site owner would have been hacked. I want to report this site to Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, and other antivirus providers. How do I do that? I hope kaspersky would have updated it in their database, but I still want to explicitly report this. Here is the popup kaspersky showed:

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >