Search Results

Search found 1208 results on 49 pages for 'proxied authorization'.

Page 14/49 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • C#/Resharper 5 structural search, detect and warn if any non-virtual public methods on classes with

    - by chillitom
    Hi All, I'm using LinFu's dynamic proxy to add some advice to some classes. The problem is that the proxied objects can only intercept virtual methods and will return the return type's default value for non-virtual methods. I can tell whether a class is proxied or not based whether the class or any of it's method has an interception attribute, e.g. [Transaction] Is it possible to write a ReSharper 5 structural search that would warn if any non-virtual public methods are defined on a class with an interception attribute. E.g. Ok public class InterceptedClass { [Transaction] public virtual void TransactionalMethod() { ... } public virtual void AnotherMethod() { ... } } Bad public class InterceptedClass { [Transaction] public virtual void TransactionalMethod() { ... } public void AnotherMethod() // non-virtual method will not be called by proxy { ... } } Many Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Scaling Java applications - existing cluster-aware IoC frameworks?

    - by Zoltan
    Most people use some kind of an IoC framework - Guice, Spring, you name it. Many of us need to scale their applications too, so they complicate their lifes with Terracotta, Glassfish/JBoss/insertyourfavouritehere clusters. But is it really the way to go? Are you using any of the above? Here's some ideas we currently have implemented in a yet-to-be-opensourced framework, and I'd like to see what you think of it, or maybe "it's a complete ripoff of XY!". cluster-wide object replication - give it a name, and whenever you do something (in any node) on such an object, it will get replicated - with different guarantees do transparent soft-loadbalancing - simplest scenario: restful webservice method call proxied to an other node view-only node injection: inject a proxy to a "named" object, and get your calls automatically proxied to a node Would you use something like that? Is there a current, stable, enterprise-ready implementation out there?

    Read the article

  • Framework 4 Features: Summary of Security enhancements

    - by Anthony Shorten
    In the last log entry I mentioned one of the new security features in Oracle Utilities Application Framework 4.0.1. Security is one of the major "tent poles" (to borrow a phrase from Steve Jobs) in this release of the framework. There are a number of security related enhancements requested by customers and as a result of internal reviews that we have introduced. Here is a summary of some of the security enchancements we have added in this release: Security Cache Changes - Security authorization information is automatically cached on the server for performance reasons (security is checked for every single call the product makes for all modes of access). Prior to this release the cache auto-refreshed every 30 minutes (or so). This has beem made more nimble by supporting a cache refresh every minute (or so). This means authorization changes are reflected quicker than before. Business Level security - Business Services are configurable services that are based upon Application Services. Typically, the business service inherited its security profile from its parent service. Whilst this is sufficient for most needs, it is now required to further specify security on the Business Service definition itself. This will allow granular security and allow the same application service to be exposed as different Business Services with their own security. This is particularly useful when you base a Business Service on a query zone. User Propogation - As with other client server applications, the database connections are pooled and shared as needed. This means that a common database user is used to access the database from the pool to allow sharing. Unfortunently, this means that tracability at the database level is that much harder. In Oracle Utilities Application Framework V4 the end userid is now propogated to the database using the CLIENT_IDENTIFIER as part of the Oracle JDBC connection API. This not only means that the common database userid is still used but the end user is indentifiable for the duration of the database call. This can be used for monitoring or to hook into Oracle's database security products. This enhancement is only available to Oracle Database customers. Enhanced Security Definitions - Security Administrators use the product browser front end to control access rights of defined users. While this is sufficient for most sites, a new security portal has been introduced to speed up the maintenance of security information. Oracle Identity Manager Integration - With the popularity of Oracle's Identity Management Suite, the Framework now provides an integration adapter and Identity Manager Generic Transport Connector (GTC) to allow users and group membership to be provisioned to any Oracle Utilities Application Framework based product from Oracle's Identity Manager. This is also available for Oracle Utilties Application Framework V2.2 customers. Refer to My Oracle Support KBid 970785.1 - Oracle Identity Manager Integration Overview. Audit On Inquiry - Typically the configurable audit facility in the Oracle Utilities Application Framework is used to audit changes to records. In Oracle Utilities Application Framework the Business Services and Service Scripts could be configured to audit inquiries as well. Now it is possible to attach auditing capabilities to zones on the product (including base package ones). Time Zone Support - In some of the Oracle Utilities Application Framework based products, the timezone of the end user is a factor in the processing. The user object has been extended to allow the recording of time zone information for use in product functionality. JAAS Suport - Internally the Oracle Utilities Application Framework uses a number of techniques to validate and transmit security information across the architecture. These various methods have been reconciled into using Java Authentication and Authorization Services for standardized security. This is strictly an internal change with no direct on how security operates externally. JMX Based Cache Management - In the last bullet point, I mentioned extra security applied to cache management from the browser. Alternatively a JMX based interface is now provided to allow IT operations to control the cache without the browser interface. This JMX capability can be initiated from a JSR120 compliant JMX console or JMX browser. I will be writing another more detailed blog entry on the JMX enhancements as it is quite a change and an exciting direction for the product line. Data Patch Permissions - The database installer provided with the product required lower levels of security for some operations. At some sites they wanted the ability for non-DBA's to execute the utilities in a controlled fashion. The framework now allows feature configuration to allow delegation for patch execution. User Enable Support - At some sites, the use of temporary staff such as contractors is commonplace. In this scenario, temporary security setups were required and used. A potential issue has arisen when the contractor left the company. Typically the IT group would remove the contractor from the security repository to prevent login using that contractors userid but the userid could NOT be removed from the authorization model becuase of audit requirements (if any user in the product updates financials or key data their userid is recorded for audit purposes). It is now possible to effectively diable the user from the security model to prevent any use of the useridwhilst retaining audit information. These are a subset of the security changes in Oracle Utilities Application Framework. More details about the security capabilities of the product is contained in My Oracle Support KB Id 773473.1 - Oracle Utilities Application Framework Security Overview.

    Read the article

  • Token based Authentication for WCF HTTP/REST Services: The Client

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    If you wondered how a client would have to look like to work with the authentication framework, it is pretty straightfoward: Request a token Put that token on the authorization header (along with a registered scheme) and make the service call e.g.: var oauth2 = new OAuth2Client(_oauth2Address); var swt = oauth2.RequestAccessToken( "username", "password", _baseAddress.AbsoluteUri);   var client = new HttpClient { BaseAddress = _baseAddress }; client.DefaultRequestHeaders.Authorization = new AuthenticationHeaderValue("Bearer", swt); var response = client.Get("identity"); response.EnsureSuccessStatusCode(); HTH

    Read the article

  • TDE Tablespace Encryption 11.2.0.1 Certified with EBS 11i

    - by Steven Chan
    Oracle Advanced Security is an optional licenced Oracle 11g Database add-on.  Oracle Advanced Security Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) offers two different features:  column encryption and tablespace encryption.  TDE Tablespace Encryption 11.2.0.1 is now certified with Oracle E-Business Suite Release 11i. What is Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) ? Oracle Advanced Security Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) allows you to protect data at rest. TDE helps address privacy and PCI requirements by encrypting personally identifiable information (PII) such as Social Security numbers and credit card numbers. TDE is completely transparent to existing applications with no triggers, views or other application changes required. Data is transparently encrypted when written to disk and transparently decrypted after an application user has successfully authenticated and passed all authorization checks. Authorization checks include verifying the user has the necessary select and update privileges on the application table and checking Database Vault, Label Security and Virtual Private Database enforcement policies.

    Read the article

  • Using the OAM Mobile & Social SDK to secure native mobile apps - Part 2 : OAM Mobile & Social Server configuration

    - by kanishkmahajan
    Objective  In the second part of this blog post I'll now cover configuration of OAM to secure our sample native apps developed using the iOS SDK. First, here are some key server side concepts: Application Profiles: An application profile is a logical representation of your application within OAM server. It could be a web (html/javascript) or native (iOS or Android) application. Applications may have different requirements for AuthN/AuthZ, and therefore each application that interacts with OAM Mobile & Social REST services must be uniquely defined. Service Providers: Service providers represent the back end services that are accessed by applications. With OAM Mobile & Social these services are in the areas of authentication, authorization and user profile access. A Service Provider then defines a type or class of service for authentication, authorization or user profiles. For example, the JWTAuthentication provider performs authentication and returns JWT (JSON Web Tokens) to the application. In contrast, the OAMAuthentication also provides authentication but uses OAM SSO tokens Service Profiles:  A Service Profile is a logical envelope that defines a service endpoint URL for a service provider for the OAM Mobile & Social Service. You can create multiple service profiles for a service provider to define token capabilities and service endpoints. Each service provider instance requires atleast one corresponding service profile.The  OAM Mobile & Social Service includes a pre-configured service profile for each pre-configured service provider. Service Domains: Service domains bind together application profiles and service profiles with an optional security handler. So now let's configure the OAM server. Additional details are in the OAM Documentation and this post simply provides an outline of configuration tasks required to configure OAM for securing native apps.  Configuration  Create The Application Profile Log on to the Oracle Access Management console and from System Configuration -> Mobile and Social -> Mobile Services, select "Create" under Application Profiles. You would do this  step twice - once for each of the native apps - AvitekInventory and AvitekScheduler. Enter the parameters for the new Application profile: Name:  The application name. In this example we use 'InventoryApp' for the AvitekInventory app and 'SchedulerApp' for the AvitekScheduler app. The application name configured here must match the application name in the settings for the deployed iOS application. BaseSecret: Enter a password here. This does not need to match any existing password. It is used as an encryption key between the client and the OAM server.  Mobile Configuration: Enable this checkbox for any mobile applications. This enables the SDK to collect and send Mobile specific attributes to the OAM server.  Webview: Controls the type of browser that the iOS application will use. The embedded browser (default) will render the browser within the application. External will use the system standalone browser. External can sometimes be preferable for debugging URLScheme: The URL scheme associated with the iOS apps that is also used as a custom URL scheme to register O/S handlers that will take control when OAM transfers control to device. For the AvitekInventory and the AvitekScheduler apps I used osa:// and client:// respectively. You set this scheme in Xcode while developing your iOS Apps under Info->URL Types.  Bundle Identifier : The fully qualified name of your iOS application. You typically set this when you create a new Xcode project or under General->Identity in Xcode. For the AvitekInventory and AvitekScheduler apps these were com.us.oracle.AvitekInventory and com.us.oracle.AvitekScheduler respectively.  Create The Service Domain Select create under Service domains. Create a name for your domain (AvitekDomain is what I've used). The name configured must match the service domain set in the iOS application settings. Under "Application Profile Selection" click the browse button. Choose the application profiles that you created in the previous step one by one. Set the InventoryApp as the SSO agent (with an automatic priority of 1) and the SchedulerApp as the SSO client. This associates these applications with this service domain and configures them in a 'circle of trust'.  Advance to the next page of the wizard to configure the services for this domain. For this example we will use the following services:  Authentication:   This will use the JWT (JSON Web Token) format authentication provider. The iOS application upon successful authentication will receive a signed JWT token from OAM Mobile & Social service. This token will be used in subsequent calls to OAM. Use 'MobileOAMAuthentication' here. Authorization:  The authorization provider. The SDK makes calls to this provider endpoint to obtain authorization decisions on resource requests. Use 'OAMAuthorization' here. User Profile Service:  This is the service that provides user profile services (attribute lookup, attribute modification). It can be any directory configured as a data source in OAM.  And that's it! We're done configuring our native apps. In the next section, let's look at some additional features that were mentioned in the earlier post that are automated by the SDK for the app developer i.e. these are areas that require no additional coding by the app developer when developing with the SDK as they only require server side configuration: Additional Configuration  Offline Authentication Select this option in the service domain configuration to allow users to log in and authenticate to the application locally. Clear the box to block users from authenticating locally. Strong Authentication By simply selecting the OAAMSecurityHandlerPlugin while configuring mobile related Service Domains, the OAM Mobile&Social service allows sophisticated device and client application registration logic as well as the advanced risk and fraud analysis logic found in OAAM to be applied to mobile authentication. Let's look at some scenarios where the OAAMSecurityHandlerPlugin gets used. First, when we configure OAM and OAAM to integrate together using the TAP scheme, then that integration kicks off by selecting the OAAMSecurityHandlerPlugin in the mobile service domain. This is how the mobile device is now prompted for KBA,OTP etc depending on the TAP scheme integration and the OAM users registered in the OAAM database. Second, when we configured the service domain, there were claim attributes there that are already pre-configured in OAM Mobile&Social service and we simply accepted the default values- these are the set of attributes that will be fetched from the device and passed to the server during registration/authentication as device profile attributes. When a mobile application requests a token through the Mobile Client SDK, the SDK logic will send the Device Profile attributes as a part of an HTTP request. This set of Device Profile attributes enhances security by creating an audit trail for devices that assists device identification. When the OAAM Security Plug-in is used, a particular combination of Device Profile attribute values is treated as a device finger print, known as the Digital Finger Print in the OAAM Administration Console. Each finger print is assigned a unique fingerprint number. Each OAAM session is associated with a finger print and the finger print makes it possible to log (and audit) the devices that are performing authentication and token acquisition. Finally, if the jail broken option is selected while configuring an application profile, the SDK detects a device is jail broken based on configured policy and if the OAAM handler is configured the plug-in can allow or block access to client device depending on the OAAM policy as well as detect blacklisted, lost or stolen devices and send a wipeout command that deletes all the mobile &social relevant data and blocks the device from future access. 1024x768 Social Logins Finally, let's complete this post by adding configuration to configure social logins for mobile applications. Although the Avitek sample apps do not demonstrate social logins this would be an ideal exercise for you based on the sample code provided in the earlier post. I'll cover the server side configuration here (with Facebook as an example) and you can retrofit the code to accommodate social logins by following the steps outlined in "Invoking Authentication Services" and add code in LoginViewController and maybe create a new delegate - AvitekRPDelegate based on the description in the previous post. So, here all you will need to do is configure an application profile for social login, configure a new service domain that uses the social login application profile, register the app on Facebook and finally configure the Facebook OAuth provider in OAM with those settings. Navigate to Mobile and Social, click on "Internet Identity Services" and create a new application profile. Here are the relevant parameters for the new application profile (-also we're not registering the social user in OAM with this configuration below, however that is a key feature as well): Name:  The application name. This must match the name of the of mobile application profile created for your application under Mobile Services. We used InventoryApp for this example. SharedSecret: Enter a password here. This does not need to match any existing password. It is used as an encryption key between the client and the OAM Mobile and Social service.  Mobile Application Return URL: After the Relying Party (social) login, the OAM Mobile & Social service will redirect to the iOS application using this URI. This is defined under Info->URL type and we used 'osa', so we define this here as 'osa://' Login Type: Choose to allow only internet identity authentication for this exercise. Authentication Service Endpoint : Make sure that /internetidentityauthentication is selected. Login to http://developers.facebook.com using your Facebook account and click on Apps and register the app as InventoryApp. Note that the consumer key and API secret gets generated automatically by the Facebook OAuth server. Navigate back to OAM and under Mobile and Social, click on "Internet Identity Services" and edit the Facebook OAuth Provider. Add the consumer key and API secret from the Facebook developers site to the Facebook OAuth Provider: Navigate to Mobile Services. Click on New to create a new service domain. In this example we call the domain "AvitekDomainRP". The type should be 'Mobile Application' and the application credential type 'User Token'. Add the application "InventoryApp" to the domain. Advance the next page of the wizard. Select the  default service profiles but ensure that the Authentication Service is set to 'InternetIdentityAuthentication'. Finish the creation of the service domain.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Backup SQL databases to Box or SkyDrive

    - by Pinal Dave
    To ensure your SQL Server or Azure databases remain safe, you should backup your databases periodically. And it is important to store the backups in a reliable location. Microsoft SkyDrive currently offers 7GB free, Box offers 5GB free – both are reliable and it is simple to send your backups there. SQLBackupAndFTP in it’s latest version 9 added the option to backup to SkyDrive and Box ( in addition to local/network folder, NAS drive, FTP, Dropbox, Google Drive and Amazon S3). Just select the databases that you’d like to backup and select to store the backups in SkyDrive or Box. Below I will show you how to do it in details Select databases to backup First connect to your SQL Server or Azure Sql Database. Then select the databases you’d like to backup. Connect to SkyDrive or Box cloud If you have a free version of SQLBackupAndFTP Box destination is included, but SkyDrive destination will be disabled as it is available in the Standard version or above. Click “Try now” to get 30 days trial on all options On the “SkyDrive Settings” form you’ll need to authorize SQLBackupAndFTP to access your SkyDrive. Click “Authorize…” to open SkyDrive authorization page in your browser, sign in your to SkyDrive account and click at “Allow” . On the next page you will see the field with authorization code. Copy it to the clipboard. Box operation is just the same. After that return to SQLBackupAndFTP, paste the authorization code and click “OK” . After you are authorized, you can enter the path to a backup folder. SQLBackupAndFTP will create the folder if it does not exist. That’s all what has to be done to backup to SkyDrive or Box cloud.  You can now click on “Run Now” button to test this job. Conclusion Whatever is your preference for storing SQL backups, it is easy with SQLBackupAndFTP. Note that at the time of this writing they are running a very rare promotion on volume licenses: 5–9 licenses: 20% off 10–19 licenses: 35% off more than 20 licenses: 50% off Please let me know your favorite options for storing the backups. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com)Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL

    Read the article

  • Access Control Service v2: Registering Web Identities in your Applications [concepts]

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    ACS v2 support two fundamental types of client identities– I like to call them “enterprise identities” (WS-*) and “web identities” (Google, LiveID, OpenId in general…). I also see two different “mind sets” when it comes to application design using the above identity types: Enterprise identities – often the fact that a client can present a token from a trusted identity provider means he is a legitimate user of the application. Trust relationships and authorization details have been negotiated out of band (often on paper). Web identities – the fact that a user can authenticate with Google et al does not necessarily mean he is a legitimate (or registered) user of an application. Typically additional steps are necessary (like filling out a form, email confirmation etc). Sometimes also a mixture of both approaches exist, for the sake of this post, I will focus on the web identity case. I got a number of questions how to implement the web identity scenario and after some conversations it turns out it is the old authentication vs. authorization problem that gets in the way. Many people use the IsAuthenticated property on IIdentity to make security decisions in their applications (or deny user=”?” in ASP.NET terms). That’s a very natural thing to do, because authentication was done inside the application and we knew exactly when the IsAuthenticated condition is true. Been there, done that. Guilty ;) The fundamental difference between these “old style” apps and federation is, that authentication is not done by the application anymore. It is done by a third party service, and in the case of web identity providers, in services that are not under our control (nor do we have a formal business relationship with these providers). Now the issue is, when you switch to ACS, and someone with a Google account authenticates, indeed IsAuthenticated is true – because that’s what he is! This does not mean, that he is also authorized to use the application. It just proves he was able to authenticate with Google. Now this obviously leads to confusion. How can we solve that? Easy answer: We have to deal with authentication and authorization separately. Job done ;) For many application types I see this general approach: Application uses ACS for authentication (maybe both enterprise and web identities, we focus on web identities but you could easily have a dual approach here) Application offers to authenticate (or sign in) via web identity accounts like LiveID, Google, Facebook etc. Application also maintains a database of its “own” users. Typically you want to store additional information about the user In such an application type it is important to have a unique identifier for your users (think the primary key of your user database). What would that be? Most web identity provider (and all the standard ACS v2 supported ones) emit a NameIdentifier claim. This is a stable ID for the client (scoped to the relying party – more on that later). Furthermore ACS emits a claims identifying the identity provider (like the original issuer concept in WIF). When you combine these two values together, you can be sure to have a unique identifier for the user, e.g.: Facebook-134952459903700\799880347 You can now check on incoming calls, if the user is already registered and if yes, swap the ACS claims with claims coming from your user database. One claims would maybe be a role like “Registered User” which can then be easily used to do authorization checks in the application. The WIF claims authentication manager is a perfect place to do the claims transformation. If the user is not registered, show a register form. Maybe you can use some claims from the identity provider to pre-fill form fields. (see here where I show how to use the Facebook API to fetch additional user properties). After successful registration (which may include other mechanisms like a confirmation email), flip the bit in your database to make the web identity a registered user. This is all very theoretical. In the next post I will show some code and provide a download link for the complete sample. More on NameIdentifier Identity providers “guarantee” that the name identifier for a given user in your application will always be the same. But different applications (in the case of ACS – different ACS namespaces) will see different name identifiers. This is by design to protect the privacy of users because identical name identifiers could be used to create “profiles” of some sort for that user. In technical terms they create the name identifier approximately like this: name identifier = Hash((Provider Internal User ID) + (Relying Party Address)) Why is this important to know? Well – when you change the name of your ACS namespace, the name identifiers will change as well and you will will lose your “connection” to your existing users. Oh an btw – never use any other claims (like email address or name) to form a unique ID – these can often be changed by users.

    Read the article

  • What should be stored in UserContext?

    - by HonorGod
    From my general understanding I believe UserContext for a web application is supposed to hold user authentication and authorization (user roles) information. As part of user roles, there are definitions on who can access what data and accordingly the corresponding reference data is loaded into the UserContext as well. Is this a good practice to load and use reference data from UserContext? Does this have any impact with the number of sessions vs size of data it is holding inside JVM? I am thinking we use UserContext only for authentication and authorization but load the reference data from cache on demand and use it if required.

    Read the article

  • Problems with cross forest authentication in SQL Reporting

    - by chunkyb2002
    We're currently running an SQL 2008 R2 Cluster with Reporting Services running, all for use with System Center Operations Manager 2007 R2 (RU3). Our users are on a different domains to the SCOM and SQL servers (we have two domains as we are in the process of a domain migration) We have no problems at all with users accessing reports via the SCOM Console or the Web interface if they are on the new domain which runs at 2008 R2 functional level. However users on the old domain (which runs at a 2003 functional level) cannot access reports on SCOM or via the web interface (http://sqlserver/reports) The error we get is: An error occurred when invoking the authorization extension. (rsAuthorizationExtensionError) For more information about this error navigate to the report server on the local server machine, or enable remote errors Taking the errors advise we logged on to the SQL server as a user on the old domain (which works fine!) and then try to authenticate with the reporting via the web interface which produces this most useful of errors: An error occurred when invoking the authorization extension. (rsAuthorizationExtensionError) The creator of this fault did not specify a Reason. Things we've tried: Recreating the trust between domains Ensuring the SQL Reporting service account was a member of Windows Authorization Access Group on the 2003 domain Added users on the 2003 domain explicitly to the Reporting Users group on the SQL Server Has anyone come across this issue before perhaps in a different scenario? If so how was it resolved? Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • Routing a single request through multiple nginx backend apps

    - by Jonathan Oliver
    I wanted to get an idea if anything like the following scenario was possible: Nginx handles a request and routes it to some kind of authentication application where cookies and/or other kinds of security identifiers are interpreted and verified. The app perhaps makes a few additions to the request (appending authenticated headers). Failing authentication returns an HTTP 401. Nginx then takes the request and routes it through an authorization application which determines, based upon identity and the HTTP verb (put, delete, get, etc.) and URL in question, whether the actor/agent/user has permission to performed the intended action. Perhaps the authorization application modifies the request somewhat by appending another header, for example. Failing authorization returns 403. (Wash, rinse, repeat the proxy pattern for any number of services that want to participate in the request in some fashion.) Finally, Nginx routes the request into the actual application code where the request is inspected and the requested operations are executed according to the URL in question and where the identity of the user can be captured and understood by the application by looking at the altered HTTP request. Ideally, Nginx could do this natively or with a plugin. Any ideas? The alternative that I've considered is having Nginx hand off the initial request to the authentication application and then have this application proxy the request back through to Nginx (whether on the same box or another box). I know there are a number of applications frameworks (Django, RoR, etc.) that can do a lot of this stuff "in process", but I was trying to make things a little more generic and self contained where different applications could "hook" the HTTP pipeline of Nginx and then participate in, short circuit, and even modify the request accordingly. If Nginx can't do this, is anyone aware of other web servers that will perform in the manner described above?

    Read the article

  • Understanding Authorized Access to your Google Account

    - by firebush
    I'm having trouble understanding what I'm am granting to sites when they have "Authorized Access to my Google Account." This is how I see what has authorized access: Log into gmail. Click on the link that is my name in the upper-right corner, and from the drop-down select Account. From the list of links to the left, select Security. Click on Edit next to Authorized applications and sites. Authenticate again. At the top of the page, I see a set of sites that have authorized access to my account in various ways. I'm having trouble finding out information about what is being told to me here. There's no "help" link anywhere on the page and my Google searches are coming up unproductive. From the looks of what I see there, Google has access to my Google calendar. I feel comfortable about that, I think. But other sites have authorization to "Sign in using your Google account". My question is, what exactly does that authorization mean? What do the sites that have authorization to "Sign in using my Google account" have the power to do? I hope that this simply means that they authorize using the same criterion that gmail does. I assume that this doesn't grant them the ability to access my email. Can someone please calm my paranoia by describing (or simply pointing me to a site that describes) what these terms mean exactly? Also, if you have any thoughts about the safety of this feature, please share. Thanks!

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • ExtJS.Ajax - Authentication?

    - by lajuette
    Is there a way to send requests using ExtJS.Ajax to endpoints that require authentication (e.g. Basic Authentication)? Adding an Authorization-Header won't work. headers : { Authorization : 'Basic ' + Ext.util.base64.encode(username + ':' + password) }

    Read the article

  • Retrieve file from url with autorization PHP

    - by Belgin Fish
    Hi, I'm currently trying to grab a file from an external url that has an authorization box that pops up (like the default one asking for a username and password) How can I have a script get the contents of the page (it's a video), save it to a directory and handle the authorization (i have a username and password) Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • How to get a OAuth token for Google Buzz using username and password without showing Googles login p

    - by Witek
    To read Google Buzz activities, an authorization token is required. A web application would redirect to Googles login page, where the user logs in and a token is returned back to the web application. But I have a local Java application without a UI (like a script). This application knows username and password. How to get an authorization token, using this username and password, without presenting the Google login page?

    Read the article

  • FormsAuthentication redirecting to login page when visiting root of website

    - by Ryan Lattimer
    I wanted to use FormsAuthentication to secure my static files as well on my site, so I followed the instructions located here http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/244/how-to-take-advantage-of-the-iis7-integrated-pipeline/ under title "Enabling Forms Authentication for the Entire Application". Now though, when I try to visit the site by going directly to http://www.mysite.com I get redirected to http://www.mysite.com/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2f instead of it using my DefaultDocument I have set. I can go to my default document by just visiting http://www.mysite.com/Home.aspx without any issues because it is set to allow anonymous access. Is there something I need to add into my web.config file to make iis7 allow anonymous access to the root? I tried adding with anonymous access but no such luck. Any help would be much appreciated. Both Home and the Login form allow anonymous. <location path="Home.aspx"> <system.web> <authorization> <allow users="*" /> </authorization> </system.web> </location> <location path="Login.aspx"> <system.web> <authorization> <allow users="*" /> </authorization> </system.web> </location> Login form is set as the loginUrl <authentication mode="Forms"> <forms protection="All" loginUrl="Login.aspx"> </forms> </authentication> Default document is set as Home.aspx <defaultDocument> <files> <add value="Home.aspx" /> </files> </defaultDocument> I have not removed any of the iis7 default documents. However, Home.aspx is first in the priority.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET 2.0 and 4.0 seem to treat the root url differently in Forms Authentication

    - by Kev
    If have the following web.config: <configuration> <system.web> <authentication mode="Forms"> <forms name="MembershipCookie" loginUrl="Login.aspx" protection="All" timeout="525600" slidingExpiration="true" enableCrossAppRedirects="true" path="/" /> </authentication> <authorization> <deny users="?" /> </authorization> </system.web> <location path="Default.aspx"> <system.web> <authorization> <allow users="*"/> </authorization> </system.web> </location> </configuration> The application is an ASP.NET 2.0 application running on Windows 2008R2/IIS7.5. If the site's application pool is configured to run ASP.NET 2.0 and I browse to http://example.com then Default.aspx is rendered as you'd expect from the rules above. However if the application pool is set to run ASP.NET 4.0 I am redirected to the login page. If I explicitly specify http://example.com/default.aspx then all is good and default.aspx renders. I've tried rewriting / -> /default.aspx (using IIS UrlRewriter 2.0) but the result is still the same, I get kicked to the login page. I've also tried this with an ASP.NET 4.0 application with the same result (which is where the problem initially arose). The reason I tried this with a 2.0 application was to see if there was a change in behaviour, and it seems that / is handled differently in 4.0. So to summarise, using the configuration above the following is observed: ASP.NET Version Url Behaviour ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.0 http://example.com Renders Default.aspx 2.0 http://example.com/Default.aspx Renders Default.aspx 4.0 http://example.com Redirects to Login.aspx 4.0 http://example.com/Default.aspx Renders Default.aspx Is this a bug/breaking change or have I missed something glaringly obvious?

    Read the article

  • sql count conditions

    - by user1311030
    there! I have this question, hope you guys can help me out. So i have this table with two fields: type and authorization in type i have 2 different values: Raid and Hold in authorization i have 2 different values: Accepted or Denied I need to make a view that returns values like this: TYPE:RAID ACCEPTED:5 DENIED:7 Basically i need to know how many of the values in TYPE are Raid, and then how many of them are Accepted and Denied. Thank you in advance!!

    Read the article

  • Using a WebView widget to authorize access

    - by tunneling
    I am trying to access a server that requires authorization using the WebView widget in Android. I think it's the .htaccess type of authorization. I works with the default browser provided with the OS, but when I try it with a WebView.. it gives a 401 immediately. Any ideas on how I can have a WebView present the dialog to enter the user/pass (and remember it)? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Apache reverse proxy access control

    - by Steven
    I have an Apache reverse proxy that is currently reverse proxying for a few sites. However i am now going to be adding a new site (lets call it newsite.com) that should only be accessible by certain IP's. Is this doable using Apache as a reverse proxy? I use VirtualHosts for the sites that are being proxyied. I have tried using the Allow/Deny directives in combination with the Location statements. For example: <VirtualHost *:80> Servername newsite.com <Location http://newsite.com> Order Deny,Allow Deny from all Allow from x.x.x.x </Location> <IfModule rewrite_module> RewriteRule ^/$ http://newsite.internal.com [proxy] </IfModule> I have also tried configuring allow/deny specicaily for the site in the Proxy directives, for example <Proxy http://newsite.com/> Order deny,allow Deny from all Allow from x.x.x.x </Proxy> I still have this definition for the rest of the proxied sites however. <Proxy *> Order deny,allow Allow from all </Proxy> No matter what i do it seems to be accessible from any where. Is this because of the definition for all other proxied sites. Is there an order to which it applies Proxy directives. I have had the newsite one both before and after the * one, and also within the VirtualHost statement.

    Read the article

  • Using IIS7 as a reverse proxy

    - by Jon
    My question is pretty much identical to the question listed but they did not get an answer as they ended up using Linux as the reverse proxy. http://serverfault.com/questions/55309/using-iis7-as-a-reverse-proxy I need to have IIS the main site and linux (Apache) being the proxied site(s). so I have site1.com (IIS7) site2.com (Linux Apache) they have subdomains of sub1.site1.com sub2.site1.com sub3.site2.com I want all traffic to go to site1.com and to say anything that is site2.com should be proxied to linux box on internal network, (believe ARR can do this but not sure how). I can not have it running as Apache doing the proxying as I need IIS exposed directly. any and all advice would be great. EDIT I think this might help me: <rule name="Canonical Host Name" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" negate="true" pattern="^cto\.com$" /> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" negate="true" pattern="^antoniochagoury\.com$" /> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" negate="true" pattern="www.antoniochagoury\.com$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="http://www.cto20.com/{R:1}" redirectType="Permanent" /> </rule> from: http://www.cto20.com/post/Tips-Tricks-3-URL-Rewriting-Rules-Everyone-Should-Use.aspx I will have a look at this when I have access to the IIS7 box. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Nginx Multiple If Statements Cause Memory Usage to Jump

    - by Justin Kulesza
    We need to block a large number of requests by IP address with nginx. The requests are proxied by a CDN, and so we cannot block with the actual client IP address (it would be the IP address of the CDN, not the actual client). So, we have $http_x_forwarded_for which contains the IP which we need to block for a given request. Similarly, we cannot use IP tables, as blocking the IP address of the proxied client will have no effect. We need to use nginx to block the requested based on the value of $http_x_forwarded_for. Initially, we tried multiple, simple if statements: http://pastie.org/5110910 However, this caused our nginx memory usage to jump considerably. We went from somewhere around a 40MB resident size to over a 200MB resident size. If we changed things up, and created one large regex that matched the necessary IP addresses, memory usage was fairly normal: http://pastie.org/5110923 Keep in mind that we're trying to block many more than 3 or 4 IP addresses... more like 50 to 100, which may be included in several (20+) nginx server configuration blocks. Thoughts? Suggestions? I'm interested both in why memory usage would spike so greatly using multiple if blocks, and also if there are any better ways to achieve our goal.

    Read the article

  • Load balance to proxies

    - by LoveRight
    I have installed several proxy programs whose IP addresses are, for example, 127.0.0.1:8580(use http), 127.0.0.1:9050(use socks5). You may regrard them as Tor and its alternatives. You know, certain proxy programs are faster than others at times, while at other times, they would be slower. The Firefox add-in, AutoProxy and FoxyProxy Standard, can define a list of rules such as any urls matching the pattern *.google.com should be proxied to 127.0.0.1:8580 using socks5 protocol. But the rule is "static". I want *.google.com to be proxied to the fastest proxy, no matter which one. I think that is kind of load balancing. I thought I could set a rule that direct request of *.google.com to the address the load balancer listens, and the load balancer forwards the request to the fastest real proxy. I notice that tor uses socks5 protocol and some other applications use http. I feel confused that which protocol should the load balancer use. I also start to wonder about the feasibility of this solution. Any suggestions? My operating system is Windows 7 x64.

    Read the article

  • Security in Software

    The term security has many meanings based on the context and perspective in which it is used. Security from the perspective of software/system development is the continuous process of maintaining confidentiality, integrity, and availability of a system, sub-system, and system data. This definition at a very high level can be restated as the following: Computer security is a continuous process dealing with confidentiality, integrity, and availability on multiple layers of a system. Key Aspects of Software Security Integrity Confidentiality Availability Integrity within a system is the concept of ensuring only authorized users can only manipulate information through authorized methods and procedures. An example of this can be seen in a simple lead management application.  If the business decided to allow each sales member to only update their own leads in the system and sales managers can update all leads in the system then an integrity violation would occur if a sales member attempted to update someone else’s leads. An integrity violation occurs when a team member attempts to update someone else’s lead because it was not entered by the sales member.  This violates the business rule that leads can only be update by the originating sales member. Confidentiality within a system is the concept of preventing unauthorized access to specific information or tools.  In a perfect world the knowledge of the existence of confidential information/tools would be unknown to all those who do not have access. When this this concept is applied within the context of an application only the authorized information/tools will be available. If we look at the sales lead management system again, leads can only be updated by originating sales members. If we look at this rule then we can say that all sales leads are confidential between the system and the sales person who entered the lead in to the system. The other sales team members would not need to know about the leads let alone need to access it. Availability within a system is the concept of authorized users being able to access the system. A real world example can be seen again from the lead management system. If that system was hosted on a web server then IP restriction can be put in place to limit access to the system based on the requesting IP address. If in this example all of the sales members where accessing the system from the 192.168.1.23 IP address then removing access from all other IPs would be need to ensure that improper access to the system is prevented while approved users can access the system from an authorized location. In essence if the requesting user is not coming from an authorized IP address then the system will appear unavailable to them. This is one way of controlling where a system is accessed. Through the years several design principles have been identified as being beneficial when integrating security aspects into a system. These principles in various combinations allow for a system to achieve the previously defined aspects of security based on generic architectural models. Security Design Principles Least Privilege Fail-Safe Defaults Economy of Mechanism Complete Mediation Open Design Separation Privilege Least Common Mechanism Psychological Acceptability Defense in Depth Least Privilege Design PrincipleThe Least Privilege design principle requires a minimalistic approach to granting user access rights to specific information and tools. Additionally, access rights should be time based as to limit resources access bound to the time needed to complete necessary tasks. The implications of granting access beyond this scope will allow for unnecessary access and the potential for data to be updated out of the approved context. The assigning of access rights will limit system damaging attacks from users whether they are intentional or not. This principle attempts to limit data changes and prevents potential damage from occurring by accident or error by reducing the amount of potential interactions with a resource. Fail-Safe Defaults Design PrincipleThe Fail-Safe Defaults design principle pertains to allowing access to resources based on granted access over access exclusion. This principle is a methodology for allowing resources to be accessed only if explicit access is granted to a user. By default users do not have access to any resources until access has been granted. This approach prevents unauthorized users from gaining access to resource until access is given. Economy of Mechanism Design PrincipleThe Economy of mechanism design principle requires that systems should be designed as simple and small as possible. Design and implementation errors result in unauthorized access to resources that would not be noticed during normal use. Complete Mediation Design PrincipleThe Complete Mediation design principle states that every access to every resource must be validated for authorization. Open Design Design PrincipleThe Open Design Design Principle is a concept that the security of a system and its algorithms should not be dependent on secrecy of its design or implementation Separation Privilege Design PrincipleThe separation privilege design principle requires that all resource approved resource access attempts be granted based on more than a single condition. For example a user should be validated for active status and has access to the specific resource. Least Common Mechanism Design PrincipleThe Least Common Mechanism design principle declares that mechanisms used to access resources should not be shared. Psychological Acceptability Design PrincipleThe Psychological Acceptability design principle refers to security mechanisms not make resources more difficult to access than if the security mechanisms were not present Defense in Depth Design PrincipleThe Defense in Depth design principle is a concept of layering resource access authorization verification in a system reduces the chance of a successful attack. This layered approach to resource authorization requires unauthorized users to circumvent each authorization attempt to gain access to a resource. When designing a system that requires meeting a security quality attribute architects need consider the scope of security needs and the minimum required security qualities. Not every system will need to use all of the basic security design principles but will use one or more in combination based on a company’s and architect’s threshold for system security because the existence of security in an application adds an additional layer to the overall system and can affect performance. That is why the definition of minimum security acceptably is need when a system is design because this quality attributes needs to be factored in with the other system quality attributes so that the system in question adheres to all qualities based on the priorities of the qualities. Resources: Barnum, Sean. Gegick, Michael. (2005). Least Privilege. Retrieved on August 28, 2011 from https://buildsecurityin.us-cert.gov/bsi/articles/knowledge/principles/351-BSI.html Saltzer, Jerry. (2011). BASIC PRINCIPLES OF INFORMATION PROTECTION. Retrieved on August 28, 2011 from  http://web.mit.edu/Saltzer/www/publications/protection/Basic.html Barnum, Sean. Gegick, Michael. (2005). Defense in Depth. Retrieved on August 28, 2011 from  https://buildsecurityin.us-cert.gov/bsi/articles/knowledge/principles/347-BSI.html Bertino, Elisa. (2005). Design Principles for Security. Retrieved on August 28, 2011 from  http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~bhargav/cs526/security-9.pdf

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >