Search Results

Search found 7669 results on 307 pages for 'dealing with clients'.

Page 125/307 | < Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >

  • To HTML 5 or not to HTML 5 ?

    - by ZX12R
    I am a designer whose main marketing strategy is multi browser compatibility. I assure my clients that the site will work even in IE6 (!). Of late i have been pondering over the question of moving to HTML 5. The reason behind my apprehension is that IE6 is still a major player in terms of market share and i don't want to lose it. Is there any way of moving to HTML 5 and still promise multi browser compatibility? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Membership for high security scenarios?

    - by Joachim Kerschbaumer
    Hi there, Is the asp.net membership system used over wcf (transport security turned on) enough for high security internet scenarios with thousands of clients spread all over the internet? I'm just evaluating possible solutions and wanted to know if this might fit in this category. If not, what would be the best method to provide high security access over wcf for internet scenarios?

    Read the article

  • C# Finalize/Dispose pattern

    - by robUK
    Hello, C# 2008 I have been working on this for a while now. And I am still confused about some issues. My questions below 1) I know that you only need a finalizer if you are disposing of unmanaged resources. However, if you are using managed resources that make calls to unmanaged resources. Would you still need to implement a finalizer? 2) However, if you develop a class that doesn't use any unmanged resources directly or indirectly and you implement the IDisposable so that clients of your class can use the 'using statement'. Would it be acceptable to implement the IDisposable just so that clients of your class can use the using statement? using(myClass objClass = new myClass()) { // Do stuff here } 3) I have developed this simple code below to demostrate the Finalize/dispose pattern: public class NoGateway : IDisposable { private WebClient wc = null; public NoGateway() { wc = new WebClient(); wc.DownloadStringCompleted += wc_DownloadStringCompleted; } // Start the Async call to find if NoGateway is true or false public void NoGatewayStatus() { // Start the Async's download // Do other work here wc.DownloadStringAsync(new Uri(www.xxxx.xxx)); } private void wc_DownloadStringCompleted(object sender, DownloadStringCompletedEventArgs e) { // Do work here } // Dispose of the NoGateway object public void Dispose() { wc.DownloadStringCompleted -= wc_DownloadStringCompleted; wc.Dispose(); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } } Question about the source code: 1) Here I have not added the finalizer. And normally the finalizer will be called by the GC, and the finalizer will call the Dispose. As I don't have the finalizer, when do I call the Dispose method? Is it the client of the class that has to call it? So my class in the example is called NoGateway and the client could use and dispose of the class like this: Would the Dispose method be automatically called when execution reaches the end of the using block? using(NoGateway objNoGateway = new NoGateway()) { // Do stuff here } Or does the client have to manually call the dispose method i.e.? NoGateway objNoGateway = new NoGateway(); // Do stuff with object objNoGateway.Dispose(); // finished with it Many thanks for helping with all these questions, 2) I am using the webclient class in my 'NoGateway' class. Because the webclient implements the IDisposable interface. Does this mean that the webclient indirectly uses unmanaged resources? Is there any hard and fast rule to follow about this. How do I know that a class uses unmanaged resources?

    Read the article

  • Verify Authenticode signature as being from our company for automatic updater

    - by James Johnston
    I am implementing an automatic update feature and need some advice on how to do this securely using best practices. I would like to use the downloaded file's Authenticode signature to verify that it is safe to run (i.e. originates from our company and hasn't been tampered with). My question is very similar to question #2008519. The bottom-line question: what's the best, most secure way to check Authenticode signatures for an automatic update feature? What fields in the certificate should be checked? Requirements being: (1) check signature is valid, (2) check it's my signature, (3) old clients can still update when my certificate expires and I get a new one. Here's some background information / ideas from my research: I believe this could be broken into two steps: Verify that the signature is valid. I believe this should be easy using WinVerifyTrust as outlined in http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa382384(VS.85).aspx - I don't expect problems here. Verify that the signature corresponds to our company, and not another company. This seems to be a more difficult question to answer: One possibility is to check some of the strings in the signature. Could be obtained via code at MS KB article #323809, but this article doesn't make recommendations on what fields should be checked for this type of application (or any other, for that matter). Question #1072540 also illustrates how to get some certificate info, but again doesn't recommend what fields to actually check. My concern is that the strings might not be the best check: what if another person is able to obtain a certificate with the same name, for example? Or if there's a valid reason for us to change the strings in the future? The person at question #2008519 has a very similar requirement. His need for a "TrustedByUs" function is identical to mine. However, he goes about doing the check by comparing public keys. While this would work in the short-term, it seems like it won't work for an automatic update feature. This is because code signing certificates are only valid for 2 - 3 years max. Therefore, in the future, when we buy a new certificate in 2 years, the old clients wouldn't be able to update any more due to the change in public key.

    Read the article

  • SOAP web service evolution

    - by Thilo
    Are there any guidelines/tutorials as to how to handle the evolution of a SOAP web service? I can see that changing existing methods or types would probably not work, but can I just add new methods, complex types, enumeration values without breaking existing clients?

    Read the article

  • UDP Broadcast stress

    - by Ori Cohen
    I am writing an application that relies on UDP Broadcasting. Does anyone know what kind of stress this puts on your network? I would like to have multiple clients on the same network broadcasting frequently. Any information on this would be helpful Thanks

    Read the article

  • asp.net-mvc RenderPartial onclick

    - by niao
    Greetings, I have an asp.net mvc application. I have some links that corresponds to clients names. When user clicks on this link I would like to show an information of clicked client and additionally a textarea where user shall be able to write some text (comment) about selected client. How can I achieve it?

    Read the article

  • Distributed sequence number generation?

    - by Jon
    I've generally implemented sequence number generation using database sequences in the past. e.g. Using Postgres SERIAL type http://neilconway.org/docs/sequences/ I'm curious though as how to generate sequence numbers for large distributed systems where there is no database. Does anybody have any experience or suggestions of a best practice for achieving sequence number generation in a thread safe manner for multiple clients?

    Read the article

  • Ultimate chat-client API for .NET?

    - by Shimmy
    Does anyone know of a .NET API (source-code is preferrable of course) that I can access all the common chat clients thru it (GT, Yahoo, MSN, AIM, FB, ICQ, SKYPE and more)? I guess I am looking for a .NET library project that performs something like pidjin. I need it because I hate Pidgin's interface and functionality, and I want to have a Google-Talk desktop like UI. Any comments and tips will also be very useful. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Python port forwarding/multiplexing server

    - by Ib33X
    I would like to make server that listen on UDP port 162 (SNMP trap) and then forwards this traffic to multiple clients. Also important is that the source port & address stays same (address spoofing). I guess that best tool for this would be Twisted or Scapy or mybe vanilla sockets, only I can't find anything in the documentation for Twisted about source address spoofing/forging. What would you recommend me to do? Edit:added bounty

    Read the article

  • Web Services API Versioning

    - by Paul Izzy
    I offer a small Web Services API to my clients which I plan to evolve over time. So I need some sort of versioning, but I can't find any information about how you do something like that. Is there a best practise? How can I keep adding new functionality without breaking compatibility with the web services consumers?

    Read the article

  • How do I determine the .NET framwork version in a partial/medium trust environment?

    - by Ezombort
    I need to determine the clients .NET framework version in my web application. I'm running in partial trust so I can not read the filesystem or registry (Is there an easy way to check .net framework verison using C#?). System.Environment.Version returns the runtime version, so I can not use that. I cannot use javascript The only way I can think of at the moment is to try to load a .NET 3.5 dll and catch an exception, but this does not sound very nice. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Windows Identity Foundation in SharePoint 2007

    - by rsteckly
    Hi, I've been reading about SharePoint 2010's Claims based authentication support. At this point, my shop has several clients who may not upgrade for a while, however. In making our other services claims compatible, we're wondering if claims based authentication is realistic without a great deal of reworking of existing code in our 2007 installations?

    Read the article

  • One entityManger finds entity , the other does not.

    - by Pitelk
    Hi all, I have a very strange behavior in my program. I have 2 classes (class LogIn and CreateGame) where i have injected an EntityManager in each using the annotation @PersistenceContext(unitName="myUnitPU") EntityManager entitymanger; In some point i remove an object called "user" from the database using entitymanger.remove(user) from a method in LogIn class. The business logic is that a user can host and join games ( in the same time) so removing the user all the entries in database about the games the user has created are removed and all the entries showing in which games the user has joined are removed also. After that, i call another function which checks if the user exists using a method in the LogIn class entitymanager.find(user) which surprisingly enough, finds the user. After that I call a method in CreateGame class which tries to find the user by using again entitymanger.find(user) the entitymanger in that class fails to find the user (which is the expected result as the user is removed and it's not in the database) So the question is : Why the entitymanager in one class finds the user (which is wrong) where the other doesn't find it? Does anyone has ever the same problem? PS : This "bug" occurs when the user has hosted a game which is joined by another user (lets call him Buser) and the Buser has made a game which is joined by the current user. GAME | HOST | CLIENTS game1 | user | userB game2 | userB | user where in this case by removing the user, the game1 is deleted and the user is removed from game2 so the result is GAME | HOST | CLIENTS game2 | userB | PS2 : The Beans are EJB3.0. The methods are called from a delegate class. The beans in the delegate class are instantiated using the InitialContext.lookup() method. Note that for logging in ,creating , joining games the appropriate delegate class calls the correspondent EJB which does the transactions. In the case of logOut, the delegate calls an EJB to logout the user but becuase other stuff must be done (as said above) this EJB calls other EJB (again using lookup() ) which has methods like removegame(), removeUserFromGame() etc. After those methods are executed the user is then logged out. Maybe it has something to do with the fact the the first entity manager is called by a delegate but the second from inside an EJb and thats why the one entitymanger can see the non-existent user while the other cannot? Also all the methods have TRANSACTIONTYPE.REQUIRED Thank you in advance

    Read the article

  • Avoid running of software after copying to next machine?

    - by KoolKabin
    Hi guys, I have developed a small software. I want to provide and run it commercially only. I want it to be run in the machines who have purchased it from me. If someone copies it from my clients computer and runs it in next computer, I would like to stop functioning/running the software. What can be the ways to prevent the piracy of my software?

    Read the article

  • XEP-0080 User Location in Smack Library.

    - by Kristof
    Hi, I would like to create a simple XMPP client in java that shares his location (XEP-0080) with other clients. I already know I can use the smack library for XMPP and that it supports PEP, which is needed for XEP-0080. Does anyone have an example how to implement this or any pointers, i don't find anything using google. thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Encrypted Search Index File

    - by mcxiand
    Hi, Does anybody know a full text search engine like dtsearch that has an encrypted index files? We were having problem because our application is hosted on cloud. And we have an agreement with the clients that all files on the cloud must be encrypted. However, the generated index files on dt search can be read as plain text. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • What is correct HTTP status code when redirecting to a login page?

    - by PHP_Jedi
    When a user is not logged in and tries to access an page that requires login, what is the correct HTTP status code for a redirect to the login page? I don't feel that any of the 3xx fit that description. 10.3.1 300 Multiple Choices The requested resource corresponds to any one of a set of representations, each with its own specific location, and agent- driven negotiation information (section 12) is being provided so that the user (or user agent) can select a preferred representation and redirect its request to that location. Unless it was a HEAD request, the response SHOULD include an entity containing a list of resource characteristics and location(s) from which the user or user agent can choose the one most appropriate. The entity format is specified by the media type given in the Content- Type header field. Depending upon the format and the capabilities of the user agent, selection of the most appropriate choice MAY be performed automatically. However, this specification does not define any standard for such automatic selection. If the server has a preferred choice of representation, it SHOULD include the specific URI for that representation in the Location field; user agents MAY use the Location field value for automatic redirection. This response is cacheable unless indicated otherwise. 10.3.2 301 Moved Permanently The requested resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any future references to this resource SHOULD use one of the returned URIs. Clients with link editing capabilities ought to automatically re-link references to the Request-URI to one or more of the new references returned by the server, where possible. This response is cacheable unless indicated otherwise. The new permanent URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s). If the 301 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued. Note: When automatically redirecting a POST request after receiving a 301 status code, some existing HTTP/1.0 user agents will erroneously change it into a GET request. 10.3.3 302 Found The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection might be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field. The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s). If the 302 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued. Note: RFC 1945 and RFC 2068 specify that the client is not allowed to change the method on the redirected request. However, most existing user agent implementations treat 302 as if it were a 303 response, performing a GET on the Location field-value regardless of the original request method. The status codes 303 and 307 have been added for servers that wish to make unambiguously clear which kind of reaction is expected of the client. 10.3.4 303 See Other The response to the request can be found under a different URI and SHOULD be retrieved using a GET method on that resource. This method exists primarily to allow the output of a POST-activated script to redirect the user agent to a selected resource. The new URI is not a substitute reference for the originally requested resource. The 303 response MUST NOT be cached, but the response to the second (redirected) request might be cacheable. The different URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s). Note: Many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 303 status. When interoperability with such clients is a concern, the 302 status code may be used instead, since most user agents react to a 302 response as described here for 303. 10.3.5 304 Not Modified If the client has performed a conditional GET request and access is allowed, but the document has not been modified, the server SHOULD respond with this status code. The 304 response MUST NOT contain a message-body, and thus is always terminated by the first empty line after the header fields. The response MUST include the following header fields: - Date, unless its omission is required by section 14.18.1 If a clockless origin server obeys these rules, and proxies and clients add their own Date to any response received without one (as already specified by [RFC 2068], section 14.19), caches will operate correctly. - ETag and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent in a 200 response to the same request - Expires, Cache-Control, and/or Vary, if the field-value might differ from that sent in any previous response for the same variant If the conditional GET used a strong cache validator (see section 13.3.3), the response SHOULD NOT include other entity-headers. Otherwise (i.e., the conditional GET used a weak validator), the response MUST NOT include other entity-headers; this prevents inconsistencies between cached entity-bodies and updated headers. If a 304 response indicates an entity not currently cached, then the cache MUST disregard the response and repeat the request without the conditional. If a cache uses a received 304 response to update a cache entry, the cache MUST update the entry to reflect any new field values given in the response. 10.3.6 305 Use Proxy The requested resource MUST be accessed through the proxy given by the Location field. The Location field gives the URI of the proxy. The recipient is expected to repeat this single request via the proxy. 305 responses MUST only be generated by origin servers. Note: RFC 2068 was not clear that 305 was intended to redirect a single request, and to be generated by origin servers only. Not observing these limitations has significant security consequences. 10.3.7 306 (Unused) The 306 status code was used in a previous version of the specification, is no longer used, and the code is reserved. 10.3.8 307 Temporary Redirect The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection MAY be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field. The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s) , since many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 307 status. Therefore, the note SHOULD contain the information necessary for a user to repeat the original request on the new URI. If the 307 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued. I'm using 302 for now, until I find THE correct answer.

    Read the article

  • When creating a WCF Service with NetTcpBinding, use endpoint "localhost" or machine's host name?

    - by Elan
    I have a WCF service that uses the NetTcpBinding and is running within a Windows service. Remote clients connect to this service. So far, I have defined the endpoint to use "localhost". If the host machine has multiple network adapters, will it receive messages on all adapters? Would it be better to assign the machine's host name to the endpoint instead of "localhost"? What are the advantages/disadvantages?

    Read the article

  • How to set username and password for SmtpClient object in .NET?

    - by Ryan
    I see different versions of the constructor, one uses info from web.config, one specifies the host, and one the host and port. But how do I set the username and password to something different from the web.config? We have the issue where our internal smtp is blocked by some high security clients and we want to use their smtp server, is there a way to do this from the code instead of web.config?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >