Search Results

Search found 9928 results on 398 pages for 'facebook authentication'.

Page 123/398 | < Previous Page | 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130  | Next Page >

  • How to stub Restul-authentication's current_user method?

    - by Thiago
    Hi there, I'm trying to run the following spec: describe UsersController, "GET friends" do it "should call current_user.friends" do user = mock_model(User) user.should_receive(:friends) UsersController.stub!(:current_user).and_return(user) get :friends end end My controller looks like this def friends @friends = current_user.friends respond_to do |format| format.html end end The problem is that I cannot stub the current_user method, as when I run the test, I get: Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in 'UsersController GET friends should call current _user.friends' Mock "User_1001" expected :friends with (any args) once, but received it 0 times[0m ./spec/controllers/users_controller_spec.rb:44: current_user is a method from Restful-authentication, which is included in this controller. How am I supposed to test this controller? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Rails Authlogic authentication method

    - by Rabbott
    Within Authlogic, is there a way that I can add conditions to the authentication method? I know by using the find_by_login_method I can specify another method to use, but when I use this I need to pass another parameter since the find_by_login_method method only passes the parameter that is deemed the 'login_field'. What I need to do is check something that is an association of the authentic model.. Here is the method I want to use # make sure that the user has access to the subdomain that they are # attempting to login to, subdomains are company names def self.find_by_email_and_company(email, company) user = User.find_by_email(email) companies = [] user.brands.each do |b| companies << b.company.id end user && companies.include?(company) end But this fails due to the fact that only one parameter is sent to the find_by_email_and_company method. The company is actually the subdomain, so in order to get it here I am just placing it in a hidden field in the form (only way I could think to get it to the model) Is there a method I can override somehow..?

    Read the article

  • google calendar api (java) authentication error in dynamic web project

    - by HazProblem
    org.springframework.web.util.NestedServletException: Handler processing failed; nested exception is java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/google/gdata/util/AuthenticationException org.springframework.web.servlet.DispatcherServlet.doDispatch(DispatcherServlet.java:823) org.springframework.web.servlet.DispatcherServlet.doService(DispatcherServlet.java:719) org.springframework.web.servlet.FrameworkServlet.processRequest(FrameworkServlet.java:644) org.springframework.web.servlet.FrameworkServlet.doPost(FrameworkServlet.java:560) javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:641) javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:722) org.springframework.web.filter.CharacterEncodingFilter.doFilterInternal(CharacterEncodingFilter.java:88) org.springframework.web.filter.OncePerRequestFilter.doFilter(OncePerRequestFilter.java:76) The class i have written works fine as a normal java application, but when i try to use the code in an dynamic web project i get this authentication failure. Where´s the difference?

    Read the article

  • What causes session/forms authentication timeouts in MVC3

    - by SimpleUser
    Can somebody please let me know what are the reasons for your authentication to die suddenly, even when you are working on an application without any idle time? Both with and without AJAX calls. And what are the different reasons for getting a 302 redirect from an MVC3 application to the Logon page. Been struggling with an issue with timeouts that happen at random. Sometimes within a few minutes of login to the application and sometimes you can go for hours (with/without idle time) without being thrown out. Thank You

    Read the article

  • IIS Strategies for Accessing Secured Network Resources

    - by ErikE
    Problem: A user connects to a service on a machine, such as an IIS web site or a SQL Server database. The site or the database need to gain access to network resources such as file shares (the most common) or a database on a different server. Permission is denied. This is because the user the service is running under doesn't have network permissions in the first place, or if it does, it doesn't have rights to access the remote resource. I keep running into this problem over and over again and am tired of not having a really solid way of handling it. Here are some workarounds I'm aware of: Run IIS as a custom-created domain user who is granted high permissions If permissions are granted one file share at a time, then every time I want to read from a new share, I would have to ask a network admin to add it for me. Eventually, with many web sites reading from many shares, it is going to get really complicated. If permissions are just opened up wide for the user to access any file shares in our domain, then this seems like an unnecessary security surface area to present. This also applies to all the sites running on IIS, rather than just the selected site or virtual directory that needs the access, a further surface area problem. Still use the IUSR account but give it network permissions and set up the same user name on the remote resource (not a domain user, a local user) This also has its problems. For example, there's a file share I am using that I have full rights to for sharing, but I can't log in to the machine. So I have to find the right admin and ask him to do it for me. Any time something has to change, it's another request to an admin. Allow IIS users to connect as anonymous, but set the account used for anonymous access to a high-privilege one This is even worse than giving the IIS IUSR full privileges, because it means my web site can't use any kind of security in the first place. Connect using Kerberos, then delegate This sounds good in principle but has all sorts of problems. First of all, if you're using virtual web sites where the domain name you connect to the site with is not the base machine name (as we do frequently), then you have to set up a Service Principal Name on the webserver using Microsoft's SetSPN utility. It's complicated and apparently prone to errors. Also, you have to ask your network/domain admin to change security policy for both the web server and the domain account so they are "trusted for delegation." If you don't get everything perfectly right, suddenly your intended Kerberos authentication is NTLM instead, and you can only impersonate rather than delegate, and thus no reaching out over the network as the user. Also, this method can be problematic because sometimes you need the web site or database to have permissions that the connecting user doesn't have. Create a service or COM+ application that fetches the resource for the web site Services and COM+ packages are run with their own set of credentials. Running as a high-privilege user is okay since they can do their own security and deny requests that are not legitimate, putting control in the hands of the application developer instead of the network admin. Problems: I am using a COM+ package that does exactly this on Windows Server 2000 to deliver highly sensitive images to a secured web application. I tried moving the web site to Windows Server 2003 and was suddenly denied permission to instantiate the COM+ object, very likely registry permissions. I trolled around quite a bit and did not solve the problem, partly because I was reluctant to give the IUSR account full registry permissions. That seems like the same bad practice as just running IIS as a high-privilege user. Note: This is actually really simple. In a programming language of your choice, you create a class with a function that returns an instance of the object you want (an ADODB.Connection, for example), and build a dll, which you register as a COM+ object. In your web server-side code, you create an instance of the class and use the function, and since it is running under a different security context, calls to network resources work. Map drive letters to shares This could theoretically work, but in my mind it's not really a good long-term strategy. Even though mappings can be created with specific credentials, and this can be done by others than a network admin, this also is going to mean that there are either way too many shared drives (small granularity) or too much permission is granted to entire file servers (large granularity). Also, I haven't figured out how to map a drive so that the IUSR gets the drives. Mapping a drive is for the current user, I don't know the IUSR account password to log in as it and create the mappings. Move the resources local to the web server/database There are times when I've done this, especially with Access databases. Does the database have to live out on the file share? Sometimes, it was just easiest to move the database to the web server or to the SQL database server (so the linked server to it would work). But I don't think this is a great all-around solution, either. And it won't work when the resource is a service rather than a file. Move the service to the final web server/database I suppose I could run a web server on my SQL Server database, so the web site can connect to it using impersonation and make me happy. But do we really want random extra web servers on our database servers just so this is possible? No. Virtual directories in IIS I know that virtual directories can help make remote resources look as though they are local, and this supports using custom credentials for each virtual directory. I haven't been able to come up with, yet, how this would solve the problem for system calls. Users could reach file shares directly, but this won't help, say, classic ASP code access resources. I could use a URL instead of a file path to read remote data files in a web page, but this isn't going to help me make a connection to an Access database, a SQL server database, or any other resource that uses a connection library rather than being able to just read all the bytes and work with them. I wish there was some kind of "service tunnel" that I could create. Think about how a VPN makes remote resources look like they are local. With a richer aliasing mechanism, perhaps code-based, why couldn't even database connections occur under a defined security context? Why not a special Windows component that lets you specify, per user, what resources are available and what alternate credentials are used for the connection? File shares, databases, web sites, you name it. I guess I'm almost talking about a specialized local proxy server. Anyway, so there's my list. I may update it if I think of more. Does anyone have any ideas for me? My current problem today is, yet again, I need a web site to connect to an Access database on a file share. Here we go again...

    Read the article

  • IIS Strategies for Accessing Secured Network Resources

    - by Emtucifor
    Problem: A user connects to a service on a machine, such as an IIS web site or a SQL Server database. The site or the database need to gain access to network resources such as file shares (the most common) or a database on a different server. Permission is denied. This is because the user the service is running as doesn't have network permissions in the first place, or if it does, it doesn't have rights to access the remote resource. I keep running into this problem over and over again and am tired of not having a really solid way of handling it. Here are some workarounds I'm aware of: Run IIS as a custom-created domain user who is granted high permissions If permissions are granted one file share at a time, then every time I want to read from a new share, I would have to ask a network admin to add it for me. Eventually, with many web sites reading from many shares, it is going to get really complicated. If permissions are just opened up wide for the user to access any file shares in our domain, then this seems like an unnecessary security surface area to present. This also applies to all the sites running on IIS, rather than just the selected site or virtual directory that needs the access, a further surface area problem. Still use the IUSR account but give it network permissions and set up the same user name on the remote resource (not a domain user, a local user) This also has its problems. For example, there's a file share I am using that I have full rights to for sharing, but I can't log in to the machine. So I have to find the right admin and ask him to do it for me. Any time something has to change, it's another request to an admin. Allow IIS users to connect as anonymous, but set the account used for anonymous access to a high-privilege one This is even worse than giving the IIS IUSR full privileges, because it means my web site can't use any kind of security in the first place. Connect using Kerberos, then delegate This sounds good in principle but has all sorts of problems. First of all, if you're using virtual web sites where the domain name you connect to the site with is not the base machine name (as we do frequently), then you have to set up a Service Principal Name on the webserver using Microsoft's SetSPN utility. It's complicated and apparently prone to errors. Also, you have to ask your network/domain admin to change security policy for the web server so it is "trusted for delegation." If you don't get everything perfectly right, suddenly your intended Kerberos authentication is NTLM instead, and you can only impersonate rather than delegate, and thus no reaching out over the network as the user. Also, this method can be problematic because sometimes you need the web site or database to have permissions that the connecting user doesn't have. Create a service or COM+ application that fetches the resource for the web site Services and COM+ packages are run with their own set of credentials. Running as a high-privilege user is okay since they can do their own security and deny requests that are not legitimate, putting control in the hands of the application developer instead of the network admin. Problems: I am using a COM+ package that does exactly this on Windows Server 2000 to deliver highly sensitive images to a secured web application. I tried moving the web site to Windows Server 2003 and was suddenly denied permission to instantiate the COM+ object, very likely registry permissions. I trolled around quite a bit and did not solve the problem, partly because I was reluctant to give the IUSR account full registry permissions. That seems like the same bad practice as just running IIS as a high-privilege user. Note: This is actually really simple. In a programming language of your choice, you create a class with a function that returns an instance of the object you want (an ADODB.Connection, for example), and build a dll, which you register as a COM+ object. In your web server-side code, you create an instance of the class and use the function, and since it is running under a different security context, calls to network resources work. Map drive letters to shares This could theoretically work, but in my mind it's not really a good long-term strategy. Even though mappings can be created with specific credentials, and this can be done by others than a network admin, this also is going to mean that there are either way too many shared drives (small granularity) or too much permission is granted to entire file servers (large granularity). Also, I haven't figured out how to map a drive so that the IUSR gets the drives. Mapping a drive is for the current user, I don't know the IUSR account password to log in as it and create the mappings. Move the resources local to the web server/database There are times when I've done this, especially with Access databases. Does the database have to live out on the file share? Sometimes, it was just easiest to move the database to the web server or to the SQL database server (so the linked server to it would work). But I don't think this is a great all-around solution, either. And it won't work when the resource is a service rather than a file. Move the service to the final web server/database I suppose I could run a web server on my SQL Server database, so the web site can connect to it using impersonation and make me happy. But do we really want random extra web servers on our database servers just so this is possible? No. Virtual directories in IIS I know that virtual directories can help make remote resources look as though they are local, and this supports using custom credentials for each virtual directory. I haven't been able to come up with, yet, how this would solve the problem for system calls. Users could reach file shares directly, but this won't help, say, classic ASP code access resources. I could use a URL instead of a file path to read remote data files in a web page, but this isn't going to help me make a connection to an Access database, a SQL server database, or any other resource that uses a connection library rather than being able to just read all the bytes and work with them. I wish there was some kind of "service tunnel" that I could create. Think about how a VPN makes remote resources look like they are local. With a richer aliasing mechanism, perhaps code-based, why couldn't even database connections occur under a defined security context? Why not a special Windows component that lets you specify, per user, what resources are available and what alternate credentials are used for the connection? File shares, databases, web sites, you name it. I guess I'm almost talking about a specialized local proxy server. Anyway, so there's my list. I may update it if I think of more. Does anyone have any ideas for me? My current problem today is, yet again, I need a web site to connect to an Access database on a file share. Here we go again...

    Read the article

  • Facebooker extended permissions??

    - by Ivan
    Facebook gives access to users' emails via the extended permission. There's also a way in JS and PHP to force users to grant the permission when they accept the app's TOS - http://wiki.developers.facebook.com/index.php/Extended_permissions Is there a way that I can do this with Facebooker? Regards..

    Read the article

  • C# HtmlRequest and Javascript

    - by TechByte
    Is there anyway to get the same web source with c# as using Firebug? My source code is shown below. When I saved this, loaded with Firefox I couldn't get the same source as with Firebug. Are there any libraries that can help me to get all data? <html lang="pl" xml:lang="pl" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:fb="http://www.facebook.com/2008/fbml" xmlns:og="http://ogp.me/ns#"> <head> <meta property="og:title" content="Mitchel Official FanPage "/><meta property="og:type" content="website"/><meta property="og:url" content="http://facebook.com/MitchelOfficiall"/> <meta property="og:locale" content="pl_PL"/><meta property="og:site_name" content="Mitchel Official FanPage "/><meta property="og:description" content="Mitchel Official FanPage "/> <meta content="pl" http-equiv="Content-Language" /> <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type" /> <meta content="text/javascript" http-equiv="Content-Script-Type" /> <title>Mitchel Official FanPage </title> <style> body { overflow: hidden; } </style> </head> <body> <div id="fb-root"> </div> <script> window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({appId: '0', status: true, cookie: true,xfbml: true}); FB.Event.subscribe("edge.create", function(targetUrl) { save(1); }); FB.Event.subscribe("edge.remove", function(targetUrl) { save(0); }); }; (function() { var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = 'http://connect.facebook.net/pl_PL/all.js'; document.getElementById('fb-root').appendChild(e); }()); function save(x) { setTimeout('save2('+x+')',1000); } function save2(x) { document.location='http://www.likeplus.eu/post/saver?l=pl&t=112499|71272|00cb6c3576a64115878087272c970f751a0418f2e3d7440ca7c84c70b1d91ddb|8904e5cf28544785a42366aa89401017|'+x+'&h='+document.domain; } </script> <div class="fb-like" data-href="http://facebook.com/MitchelOfficiall" data-layout="button_count" data-send="false" data-show-faces="false" data-width="120"></div> </body> </html>

    Read the article

  • get fbml comments to automatically show form

    - by Cek
    I'm writing facebook app in fbml (not in iframe). I added comments with <fb:comments ...> and it appears to work. However, to add a comment, user has to click Add a comment... link to see the textarea and post button. I am wondering is there a way to automatically show the form? I want it to really look like here: developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/plugins/comments (with or without the like button)

    Read the article

  • How can this PHP/FQL code be modified to increase the performance and usability?

    - by Kaoukkos
    I try to get some insights from the pages I am administrator on Facebook. What my code does, it gets the IDs of the pages I want to work with through mySQL. I did not include that part though.After this, I get the page_id, name and fan_count of each of those facebook IDs and are saved in fancounts[]. Using the IDs ( pages[] ) I get two messages max from each page. There may be no messages, there may be 1 or 2 messages max. Possibly I will increase it later. messages[] holds the messages of each page. I have two problems with it. It has a very slow performance I can't find a way to echo the data like this: ID - Name of the page - Fan Count Here goes the first message Here goes the second one //here is a break ID - Name of the page 2 - Fan Count Here goes the first message of page 2 Here goes the second one of page 2 My questions are, how can the code be modified to increase performance and show the data as above? I read about fql.multiquery. Can it be used here? Please provide me with code examples. Thank you $pages = array(); // I get the IDs I want to work with $pagesIds = implode(',', $pages); // fancounts[] holds the page_id, name and fan_count of the Ids I work with $fancounts = array(); $pagesFanCounts = $facebook->api("/fql", array( "q" => "SELECT page_id, name, fan_count FROM page WHERE page_id IN ({$pagesIds})" )); foreach ($pagesFanCounts['data'] as $page){ $fancounts[] = $page['page_id']."-".$page['name']."-".$page['fan_count']; } //messages[] holds from 0 to 2 messages from each of the above pages $messages = array(); foreach( $pages as $id) { $getMessages = $facebook->api("/fql", array( "q" => "SELECT message FROM stream WHERE source_id = '$id' LIMIT 2" )); $messages[] = $getMessages['data']; } // this is how I print them now but it does not give me the best output. ( thanks goes to Mark for providing me this code ) $count = min(count($fancounts),count($messages)); for($i=0; $i<$count; ++$i) { echo $fancounts[$i],'<br>'; foreach($messages[$i] as $msg) { echo $msg['message'],'<br>'; } }

    Read the article

  • iPhone: cached profile images from the web - how to find out that remote image changed?

    - by Stefan Klumpp
    I'm loading profile pictures from Facebook, cache them on disk and load them into cells of a UITableView. Now I'm wondering, how I can find out when someone has changed his/her profile picture on Facebook that I have to load the new image from the web instead of using the one cached disk. The url of the image is always the same. Is there a lightweight way of doing this without downloading the image and comparing it to the local file?

    Read the article

  • Should a user authorize each time i need an access token?

    - by user259349
    In the facebook authentication guide, i am suppose to: Get the user to authorize my application, by redirecting them to authorize uri. Get my access token from facebook by hitting the /outh/accesstoken uri. Lets just say, that for whatever reason, this token is no longer valid. Do i need to perform step #1, or can i hit the /outh/accesstoken uri again?

    Read the article

  • extended permission using php sdk

    - by Awais Qarni
    Hello, I am developing a facebook application using php-sdk. i want to take some extended permissions from user of my application. As this is application where user comes after login into facebook, so how can i take extended permission when user visit my page? We cannot place login button in which we can take permissions. now any one can guide me how to take and where to place that code? Thanks in advance. Regards, Awais Qarni

    Read the article

  • FBML + jquery Validation + Rails

    - by user359467
    Hi all, In my local machine i have a scaffold that uses Jquery Validation plugin for the field's validation. Now i want to add that to a fbml facebook application, but i'm haven't been able to load the jquery javascript and the jquery Validation plugin into the app, does anybody now how to do that? or maybe someone could suggest me a better way of doing validation inside a facebook application. Thanks in Advance Ernesto Carrión

    Read the article

  • How to find memory leak from ASPX app having a DLL

    - by Tom
    Any tips How to figure out where is memory leak in my Facebook app, its ASPX using Facebook toolkit DLL and I am afraid the bug may be in that CS library. The problem is that after one week uptime, server is running out of memory and needs to be rebooted, there are quite many users and I cannot run debugger on this "production server", so I would need to simulate somehow use on my local PC.

    Read the article

  • Net::HTTP Gives time out but browser visit returns data

    - by steve
    I tried the following Net::HTTP.get_print URI.parse(URI.encode('https://graph.facebook.com/me/likes?access_token=mytoken', '|')) (My Token is my actual token in code) I get a EOFError: end of file reached error If I visit the page with my browswer it loads up a JSON page. Any idea what could be causing the error? It was working a few days ago. Can't see any changes to facebook api.

    Read the article

  • How to get a profile picture from fb:friends selector

    - by malshan
    Im a Newbie to PHP and FBML(Facebook Markup Language).....so now im coding a Facebook app so I need to get profile picture and friend name when I select a name from FB:Friend Selector Select a Friend <fb:friend-selector uid="exclude_ids" name="pal" idname="friend_sel" /> I use exclude_ids to see all friends in my selector so how to get profile picture? I can get name from this but how to get the profile pic large?

    Read the article

  • Why is my WCF Rest Service on IIS7 Authenticating TWICE!?!?

    - by TheAggie
    Ok, if someone could shed some light on this for me, I would greatly appreciate it. So here we go. I had a rest service running fine the other day but after I accidentally overwrote the web.config all hell broke loose. I've spent the past day and a half trying to sort things out but I can't seem to figure out what is missing or misplaced. So, I've designed this service around WCF Rest Contrib (http://wcfrestcontrib.codeplex.com)'s authentication process. Now, I can get this working fine on my localhost w/ the current web.config (minus the endpoint entry) but once I upload it to discountasp and select "basic authorization" in the ISS7 Manager, it appears that I'm getting authenticated twice! Once using my discount asp.net user/pass and then the next time using the application user/pass. Unfortunately I only provide one set of credentials and don't want to hard code my discountasp account info into the app. Like I said before, this worked fine a few days ago. Anyway. here is my web.config as it is now: <?xml version="1.0"?> <configuration> <connectionStrings> <add name="SQL2008_ConnectionString" connectionString="Data Source=sql2k8xx.discountasp.net;Initial Catalog=SQL2008_xx;Persist Security Info=True;User ID=SQL2008_xx_user;Password=myPass" providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" /> </connectionStrings> <system.web> <httpRuntime maxRequestLength="204800" executionTimeout="3600"/> <compilation debug="true"> <assemblies> <add assembly="System.Core, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089"/> <add assembly="System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> </assemblies> </compilation> <httpModules> <add name="ServiceAnonymityModule" type="WcfRestContrib.Web.ServiceAnonymityModule, WcfRestContrib"/> </httpModules> </system.web> <system.codedom> <compilers> <compiler language="c#;cs;csharp" extension=".cs" warningLevel="4" type="Microsoft.CSharp.CSharpCodeProvider, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <providerOption name="CompilerVersion" value="v3.5"/> <providerOption name="WarnAsError" value="false"/> </compiler> </compilers> </system.codedom> <system.webServer> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false"/> <modules> <remove name="ServiceAnonymityModule"/> <add name="ServiceAnonymityModule" type="WcfRestContrib.Web.ServiceAnonymityModule, WcfRestContrib"/> </modules> <handlers> <remove name="WebServiceHandlerFactory-Integrated"/> </handlers> </system.webServer> <system.diagnostics> <trace autoflush="true" /> </system.diagnostics> <system.serviceModel> <serviceHostingEnvironment aspNetCompatibilityEnabled="false"> <baseAddressPrefixFilters> <add prefix="http://www.mydomain.com/myServiceBaseAddress"/> </baseAddressPrefixFilters> </serviceHostingEnvironment> <extensions> <behaviorExtensions> <add name="webAuthentication" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Configuration.WebAuthentication.ConfigurationBehaviorElement, WcfRestContrib, Version=1.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89183999a8dc93b5"/> <add name="errorHandler" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Configuration.ErrorHandler.BehaviorElement, WcfRestContrib, Version=1.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89183999a8dc93b5"/> <add name="webFormatter" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Configuration.WebDispatchFormatter.ConfigurationBehaviorElement, WcfRestContrib, Version=1.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89183999a8dc93b5"/> <add name="webErrorHandler" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Configuration.WebErrorHandler.ConfigurationBehaviorElement, WcfRestContrib, Version=1.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89183999a8dc93b5"/> </behaviorExtensions> </extensions> <bindings> <customBinding> <binding name="HttpStreamedRest"> <httpTransport maxReceivedMessageSize="209715200" manualAddressing="true" /> </binding> <binding name="HttpsStreamedRest"> <httpsTransport maxReceivedMessageSize="209715200" manualAddressing="true" /> </binding> </customBinding> </bindings> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="Rest"> <webAuthentication requireSecureTransport="false" authenticationHandlerType="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.WebBasicAuthenticationHandler, WcfRestContrib" usernamePasswordValidatorType="MyLibrary.Runtime.SecurityValidator, MyLibrary" source="MyRESTServiceRealm"/> <webFormatter> <formatters defaultMimeType="application/xml"> <formatter mimeTypes="application/xml,text/xml" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.Formatters.PoxDataContract, WcfRestContrib"/> <formatter mimeTypes="application/json" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.Formatters.DataContractJson, WcfRestContrib"/> <formatter mimeTypes="application/x-www-form-urlencoded" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.Formatters.FormUrlEncoded, WcfRestContrib"/> </formatters> </webFormatter> <errorHandler errorHandlerType="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Web.WebErrorHandler, WcfRestContrib"/> <webErrorHandler returnRawException="true" logHandlerType="MyLibrary.Runtime.LogHandler, MyLibrary" unhandledErrorMessage="An error has occured processing your request. Please contact technical support for further assistance."/> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> </system.serviceModel> </configuration> So, whenever I upload this and change the ISS setting to Basic Authentication, it looks like it is trying to use the default handler for authentication as if I try to enter my web app user/pass, I get an error screen which has the following detailed information about the moduel/handler Detailed Error Information Module: IIS Web Core Notification: AuthenticateRequest Handler: svc-ISAPI-2.0 Error Code: 0x80070005 Requested URL: http://www.mydomain.com:80/MyService.../MyService.svc Physical Path: E:\web\xxxxxx\htdocs\MyServiceBaseAddress\MyService.svc Logon Method: Not yet determined Logon User: Not yet determined Now for the fun stuff... i tried providing my discountasp.net account username/password for kicks and sure enough it responded properly for any [OperationContract] which doesn't have [OperationAuthentication] defined (which is only one or two of the operations I have). I thought this was strange, so I looked at fiddler and saw something interesting. Whenever I try request a procedure with [OperationAuthentication] defined and provide my discountasp.net username/pass I get two different "WWW-Authenticate" headers back in Fiddler: WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="MyRESTServiceRealm" WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="www.mydomain.com" On the other hand, if I try to access the same procedures with only my application's user/pass, I only get the site's header: WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="www.mydomain.com" My hypothesis is that for some reason I'm having to pass through the default "Basic Authorization" layer set by IIS before I can get to the application's "Custom Basic Authorization" layer. After verifying this by created an identical user/pass for my service that I use for my discountasp.net account, I was able to successfully pass both layers of authentication without any issues... so I think I can conclude that this is indeed the issue. Now how do I disable the default one? Do I need to do this in the IIS Manager, or in the web.config? Anyway, I have absolutely no idea how this is possible or what I need to do to resolve the issue, but I know that something is seriously out of whack. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Google App Engine - Secure Cookies

    - by tponthieux
    I'd been searching for a way to do cookie based authentication/sessions in Google App Engine because I don't like the idea of memcache based sessions, and I also don't like the idea of forcing users to create google accounts just to use a website. I stumbled across someone's posting that mentioned some signed cookie functions from the Tornado framework and it looks like what I need. What I have in mind is storing a user's id in a tamper proof cookie, and maybe using a decorator for the request handlers to test the authentication status of the user, and as a side benefit the user id will be available to the request handler for datastore work and such. The concept would be similar to forms authentication in ASP.NET. This code comes from the web.py module of the Tornado framework. According to the docstrings, it "Signs and timestamps a cookie so it cannot be forged" and "Returns the given signed cookie if it validates, or None." I've tried to use it in an App Engine Project, but I don't understand the nuances of trying to get these methods to work in the context of the request handler. Can someone show me the right way to do this without losing the functionality that the FriendFeed developers put into it? The set_secure_cookie, and get_secure_cookie portions are the most important, but it would be nice to be able to use the other methods as well. #!/usr/bin/env python import Cookie import base64 import time import hashlib import hmac import datetime import re import calendar import email.utils import logging def _utf8(s): if isinstance(s, unicode): return s.encode("utf-8") assert isinstance(s, str) return s def _unicode(s): if isinstance(s, str): try: return s.decode("utf-8") except UnicodeDecodeError: raise HTTPError(400, "Non-utf8 argument") assert isinstance(s, unicode) return s def _time_independent_equals(a, b): if len(a) != len(b): return False result = 0 for x, y in zip(a, b): result |= ord(x) ^ ord(y) return result == 0 def cookies(self): """A dictionary of Cookie.Morsel objects.""" if not hasattr(self,"_cookies"): self._cookies = Cookie.BaseCookie() if "Cookie" in self.request.headers: try: self._cookies.load(self.request.headers["Cookie"]) except: self.clear_all_cookies() return self._cookies def _cookie_signature(self,*parts): self.require_setting("cookie_secret","secure cookies") hash = hmac.new(self.application.settings["cookie_secret"], digestmod=hashlib.sha1) for part in parts:hash.update(part) return hash.hexdigest() def get_cookie(self,name,default=None): """Gets the value of the cookie with the given name,else default.""" if name in self.cookies: return self.cookies[name].value return default def set_cookie(self,name,value,domain=None,expires=None,path="/", expires_days=None): """Sets the given cookie name/value with the given options.""" name = _utf8(name) value = _utf8(value) if re.search(r"[\x00-\x20]",name + value): # Don't let us accidentally inject bad stuff raise ValueError("Invalid cookie %r:%r" % (name,value)) if not hasattr(self,"_new_cookies"): self._new_cookies = [] new_cookie = Cookie.BaseCookie() self._new_cookies.append(new_cookie) new_cookie[name] = value if domain: new_cookie[name]["domain"] = domain if expires_days is not None and not expires: expires = datetime.datetime.utcnow() + datetime.timedelta( days=expires_days) if expires: timestamp = calendar.timegm(expires.utctimetuple()) new_cookie[name]["expires"] = email.utils.formatdate( timestamp,localtime=False,usegmt=True) if path: new_cookie[name]["path"] = path def clear_cookie(self,name,path="/",domain=None): """Deletes the cookie with the given name.""" expires = datetime.datetime.utcnow() - datetime.timedelta(days=365) self.set_cookie(name,value="",path=path,expires=expires, domain=domain) def clear_all_cookies(self): """Deletes all the cookies the user sent with this request.""" for name in self.cookies.iterkeys(): self.clear_cookie(name) def set_secure_cookie(self,name,value,expires_days=30,**kwargs): """Signs and timestamps a cookie so it cannot be forged""" timestamp = str(int(time.time())) value = base64.b64encode(value) signature = self._cookie_signature(name,value,timestamp) value = "|".join([value,timestamp,signature]) self.set_cookie(name,value,expires_days=expires_days,**kwargs) def get_secure_cookie(self,name,include_name=True,value=None): """Returns the given signed cookie if it validates,or None""" if value is None:value = self.get_cookie(name) if not value:return None parts = value.split("|") if len(parts) != 3:return None if include_name: signature = self._cookie_signature(name,parts[0],parts[1]) else: signature = self._cookie_signature(parts[0],parts[1]) if not _time_independent_equals(parts[2],signature): logging.warning("Invalid cookie signature %r",value) return None timestamp = int(parts[1]) if timestamp < time.time() - 31 * 86400: logging.warning("Expired cookie %r",value) return None try: return base64.b64decode(parts[0]) except: return None uid=1234|1234567890|d32b9e9c67274fa062e2599fd659cc14 Parts: 1. uid is the name of the key 2. 1234 is your value in clear 3. 1234567890 is the timestamp 4. d32b9e9c67274fa062e2599fd659cc14 is the signature made from the value and the timestamp

    Read the article

  • Can I connect to SQL Server using Windows Authentication from Java EE webapp?

    - by KG
    I am currently investigating how to make a connection to a SQL Server database from my Java EE web application using Windows Authentication instead of SQL Server authentication. I am running this app off of Tomcat 6.0, and am utilizing the Microsoft JDBC driver. My connection properties file looks as follows: dbDriver = com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver dbUser = user dbPass = password dbServer = localhost:1433;databaseName=testDb dbUrl = jdbc:sqlserver://localhost:1433 I have zero problems with connecting to a SQL Server database in this fashion when using SQL Server authentication. Is there any way I can retrieve the credentials of the user's Windows Authentication and use that authentication for SQL Server? UPDATE: I know in ASP.net there is a way to set up Windows Authentication for access to the webapp, which is exactly what I am looking for, except I want to pass that token off to SQL Server for access to the database.

    Read the article

  • Google+ : le nouveau réseau social de Google pour contrer Facebook, plus abouti que Google Buzz le service est accessible sur invitation

    Google+ : le nouveau réseau social de Google pour contrer Facebook Plus abouti que Google Buzz, le service est accessible sur invitation Google vient de lancer son (deuxième) service pour concurrencer Facebook : Google+. Après Google Buzz, cette tentative vise à récupérer une partie du trafic de plus en plus important généré par le leader des réseaux sociaux et de la publicité en ligne qui s'y rattache. Google+ n'est pour l'instant accessible que sur invitation. Présentation de Google+

    Read the article

  • Yahoo annonce la fin de l'utilisation des comptes Facebook et Google pour accéder à Flickr, la mesure prendra effet à partir du 30 juin

    Yahoo s'attaque à Facebook et Google en utilisant FlickrLa bataille du numérique fait rage dans la Silicon Valley, où les géants de l'internet ne perdent pas une occasion de se mettre des bâtons dans les roues. Dernier combat en date : Yahoo s'attaque à Facebook et Google.Yahoo veut affirmer son indépendance face à ses principaux rivaux. Soucieux de concrétiser cette volonté, le portail américain vient d'annoncer que les internautes ne pourront plus se connecter à Flickr en utilisant des comptes...

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130  | Next Page >