Search Results

Search found 46419 results on 1857 pages for 'web traffic'.

Page 140/1857 | < Previous Page | 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147  | Next Page >

  • How to forward traffic using iptables rules?

    - by ProbablePattern
    I am new to iptables and I have been doing Google searches for a few days now without finding a good solution to this problem. I have computer A with a public ip address (say 192.0.2.1) that can access the Internet unrestricted. I have another computer B with a private ip address (192.168.1.1) that can only access computer A. How do I use iptables to forward network traffic from B through A to the Internet? I need to use http, ftp, and https in order to use apt-get with sudo. Both computers run Ubuntu linux. I have tried using Squid but I think it is far too complicated for what I need to do.

    Read the article

  • how to monitor traffic at port 53 (DNS)

    - by Registered User
    I am a bit confused with the abundant tcpdump tutorials on internet. I am having a few of the virtual machines running on a virtualization server.Where I am debugging a problem.Port 53 is the one in problem. I have a bridged setup where out of 4 LAN cards on the machine in question one is active and it is xen-br0 I want to check if there is any request coming on port 53 on the server by other machines on LAN in question. I also want to see if the guest operating systems on LAN or any other machine is sending traffic at port 53.Due to abundant messages being generated via tcpdump I am finding it difficult to grep the output at desired port. So how can I use it if some one can give an example that would be helpful. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Redirect outbound traffic on port 53 to port 5300 with iptables

    - by Zagorax
    I'm running a local dns server on port 5300 to develop a software. I need my machine to use that dns but I wasn't able to tell /etc/resolv.conf to check on a different port. I searched a bit on google and I didn't find a solution. I set 127.0.0.1 as nameserver on /etc/resolv.conf. Could you please tell me how can I redirect outbound traffic on port 53 to another port? I tried the following but it didn't work: iptable -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp --dport 53 -j DNAT --to 127.0.0.1:5300 iptable -t nat -A PREROUTING -p udp --dport 53 -j DNAT --to 127.0.0.1:5300

    Read the article

  • Forward external traffic to 127.0.0.1

    - by user2939415
    I have an HTTP server running on 127.0.0.1:8000. How can I use iptables or something to route external traffic to it? I want to be able to access my.ip.addr:8000 from my browser. iptables -A PREROUTING -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 8000 -j REDIRECT --to-ports 8000 does not help EDIT: To test whether or not this works I am using the following node.js script: // Load the http module to create an http server. var http = require('http'); // Configure our HTTP server to respond with Hello World to all requests. var server = http.createServer(function (request, response) { response.writeHead(200, {"Content-Type": "text/plain"}); response.end("Hello World\n"); }); // Listen on port 8000, IP defaults to 127.0.0.1 server.listen(8000, "127.0.0.1"); // Put a friendly message on the terminal console.log("Server running at http://127.0.0.1:8000/");

    Read the article

  • Are the old httpHandlers and httpModules elements needed in IIS7?

    - by James Newton-King
    I'd like to clean up the web.config and remove unneeded XML. A default ASP.NET 3.5 web application has the follow elements in the web.config: <httpHandlers> <remove verb="*" path="*.asmx"/> <add verb="*" path="*.asmx" validate="false" type="System.Web.Script.Services.ScriptHandlerFactory, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> <add verb="*" path="*_AppService.axd" validate="false" type="System.Web.Script.Services.ScriptHandlerFactory, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> <add verb="GET,HEAD" path="ScriptResource.axd" type="System.Web.Handlers.ScriptResourceHandler, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" validate="false"/> </httpHandlers> <httpModules> <add name="ScriptModule" type="System.Web.Handlers.ScriptModule, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> <add name="UrlRoutingModule" type="System.Web.Routing.UrlRoutingModule, System.Web.Routing, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> </httpModules> When running under IIS7, which has modules and handlers being registered under the system.webServer element, is the configuration above still needed?

    Read the article

  • OutOfMemory during paging

    - by Tony
    Hi I am using ObjectDataSource, ListView, CustomPaging If the total number of rows is too big, I got OutOfMemory exception, it seems that it caused by some array, I don't get it, because total number of rows should never make any array to be filled with elements, the page size do!! This is the logger. ****EXCEPTION # 3 : 4/30/2010 9:43:07 PM System.Web.HttpUnhandledException: Exception of type 'System.Web.HttpUnhandledException' was thrown. --- System.OutOfMemoryException: Exception of type 'System.OutOfMemoryException' was thrown. at System.Web.UI.WebControls.ListView.CreateChildControls() at System.Web.UI.Control.EnsureChildControls() at System.Web.UI.WebControls.ListView.get_Controls() at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadChildViewStateByIndex(ArrayList childState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadViewStateRecursive(Object savedState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadChildViewStateByIndex(ArrayList childState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadViewStateRecursive(Object savedState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadChildViewStateByIndex(ArrayList childState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadViewStateRecursive(Object savedState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadChildViewStateByIndex(ArrayList childState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadViewStateRecursive(Object savedState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadChildViewStateByIndex(ArrayList childState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadViewStateRecursive(Object savedState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadChildViewStateByIndex(ArrayList childState) at System.Web.UI.Control.LoadViewStateRecursive(Object savedState) at System.Web.UI.Page.LoadAllState() at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) --- End of inner exception stack trace --- at System.Web.UI.Page.HandleError(Exception e) at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest() at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestWithNoAssert(HttpContext context) at System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context) at ASP.default_aspx.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context) in c:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\Temporary ASP.NET Files\flickrdemo\15752207\c63ea96c\App_Web__8yxn9sb.0.cs:line 0 at System.Web.HttpApplication.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() at System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously)

    Read the article

  • Setup of high-end web server and DB server cluster on Amazon EC2: Is this how it's done?

    - by user1086584
    Amazon is so technical, I want to confirm that my understanding is correct. We have a large 500 GB database. (OrientDB.) We will have it mirrored to one another in the same Availability Zone. We believe the database size will grow rapidly. The plan is: Get 4 large instances that are compatible types with Placement Groups (as well as ideally, Enhanced Networking) (2 for web, 2 for DB.) We use an EBS-backed instances to store our operating system. Discussion here: http://alestic.com/2012/01/ec2-ebs-boot-recommended We can set up ephemeral SSD instance storage as swap space. (But it is lost after even a reboot. I hear its hard to add ephemeral storage if booting from EBS, but possible.) For offsite backup, we will take periodic snapshots and store them on S3. Obviously we need to ensure the database is in a safe state when that snapshot happens to avoid corruption. (Any hints here, aside from shutting down the DB?) If the database gets too big, we need to create a EBS volume that's larger. We can use RAID to break the 1 TB limit: http://alestic.com/2009/06/ec2-ebs-raid Static assets on web servers will be stored on S3. Is that correct? Or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • How to hide subfolder when using Web.config for subdomains?

    - by mc-kay
    I have FTP access to my ASP.NET Websapce (IIS 7) and I route subdomains with a Web.config in the web root folder. She looks like this: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <configuration> <system.webServer> <rewrite> <rules> <rule name="route www and emtpy requests" stopProcessing="true"> <match url=".*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^(www.)?example.com" /> <add input="{PATH_INFO}" pattern="^/www/" negate="true" /> </conditions> <action type="Rewrite" url="\www\{R:0}" /> </rule> <rule name="route to blog" stopProcessing="true"> <match url=".*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^blog.example.com$" /> <add input="{PATH_INFO}" pattern="^/blog/" negate="true" /> </conditions> <action type="Rewrite" url="\blog\{R:0}" /> </rule> </rules> </rewrite> </system.webServer> </configuration> As you can see i have two folders in my root directory: "www" and "blog". When i now enter "blog.example.com" everythink is working fine, but when i click a link i will go to "blog.example.com/blog" What can I do to prevent this behavior ?

    Read the article

  • Prevent outgoing traffic unless OpenVPN connection is active using pf.conf on Mac OS X

    - by Nick
    I've been able to deny all connections to external networks unless my OpenVPN connection is active using pf.conf. However, I lose Wi-Fi connectivity if the connection is broken by closing and opening the laptop lid or toggling Wi-Fi off and on again. I'm on Mac OS 10.8.1. I connect to the Web via Wi-Fi (from varying locations, including Internet cafés). The OpenVPN connection is set up with Viscosity. I have the following packet filter rules set up in /etc/pf.conf # Deny all packets unless they pass through the OpenVPN connection wifi=en1 vpn=tun0 block all set skip on lo pass on $wifi proto udp to [OpenVPN server IP address] port 443 pass on $vpn I start the packet filter service with sudo pfctl -e and load the new rules with sudo pfctl -f /etc/pf.conf. I have also edited /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.pfctl.plist and changed the line <string>-f</string> to read <string>-ef</string> so that the packet filter launches at system startup. This all seems to works great at first: applications can only connect to the web if the OpenVPN connection is active, so I'm never leaking data over an insecure connection. But, if I close and reopen my laptop lid or turn Wi-Fi off and on again, the Wi-Fi connection is lost, and I see an exclamation mark in the Wi-Fi icon in the status bar. Clicking the Wi-Fi icon shows an "Alert: No Internet connection" message: To regain the connection, I have to disconnect and reconnect Wi-Fi, sometimes five or six times, before the "Alert: No Internet connection" message disappears and I'm able to open the VPN connection again. Other times, the Wi-Fi alert disappears of its own accord, the exclamation mark clears, and I'm able to connect again. Either way, it can take five minutes or more to get a connection again, which can be frustrating. Why does Wi-Fi report "No internet connection" after losing connectivity, and how can I diagnose this issue and fix it?

    Read the article

  • How to Log Into a Web App Simultaneously with Different Account?

    - by Ngu Soon Hui
    I want to log into a web application, using at least ten account names at one single point of time ( I am not trying to do anything illegal, so don't worry). AFAIK, each tab in Chrome will share the same session, therefore, for one machine, one can use Google Chrome to log in at most 2 accounts, one in normal mode, another in Incognito mode. Is there anyway I can log into multiple accounts? I know I can open up IE and Firefox ( probably Safari etc) and login, but this is not really scalable as the number of web browsers is finite. Edit: My application is a localhost application; it resides on my computer. So proxy may not be that useful, and you now probably understand why it's nothing illegal. Edit2: CookieSwap seems like a good idea, but the problem is that once I swap the cookie, all the tabs and the FF apps' cookie are swap as well. Can the swapping be done on a tab basis or on application basis, so that on a dual-monitor, I can see the different login side-by-side?

    Read the article

  • How should I deploy my JVM-based web application on ubuntu?

    - by Pieter Breed
    I've developed a web application using clojure/compojure (JVM based) and while developing I tested it using embedded jetty that runs on 0.0.0.0:8080. I would now like to deploy it to run on port 80 on ubuntu. I do dynamic virtual hosting, so any request for any host that arrives on port 80 should be handled by my application. The issues that worries me are: I can still run it embedded but I'm worried about running my app as root (needed for binding to port 80). I'm not sure if I can 'give up root' when in the JVM. Do I need to be concerned by this? besides, serving web applications is a known problem and I should be using known solutions for this (jetty or tomcat) but especially tomcat seems very heavy weight. Besides, I only have one application that listens to /* and does routing internally. (with compojure/ring). What I'm trying to say with this is that tomcat by default assigns WARs to subfolders which I don't want. So basically what I need is some very safe way of binding to port 80 on ubuntu that can with minimal interference send all requests to my app. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • .NET WebRequest.PreAuthenticate not quite what it sounds like

    - by Rick Strahl
    I’ve run into the  problem a few times now: How to pre-authenticate .NET WebRequest calls doing an HTTP call to the server – essentially send authentication credentials on the very first request instead of waiting for a server challenge first? At first glance this sound like it should be easy: The .NET WebRequest object has a PreAuthenticate property which sounds like it should force authentication credentials to be sent on the first request. Looking at the MSDN example certainly looks like it does: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.net.webrequest.preauthenticate.aspx Unfortunately the MSDN sample is wrong. As is the text of the Help topic which incorrectly leads you to believe that PreAuthenticate… wait for it - pre-authenticates. But it doesn’t allow you to set credentials that are sent on the first request. What this property actually does is quite different. It doesn’t send credentials on the first request but rather caches the credentials ONCE you have already authenticated once. Http Authentication is based on a challenge response mechanism typically where the client sends a request and the server responds with a 401 header requesting authentication. So the client sends a request like this: GET /wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus HTTP/1.1 Host: rasnote User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506) Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Language: en,de;q=0.7,en-us;q=0.3 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7 Keep-Alive: 300 Connection: keep-alive and the server responds with: HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized Cache-Control: private Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5 WWW-Authenticate: basic realm=rasnote" X-AspNet-Version: 2.0.50727 WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate WWW-Authenticate: NTLM WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="rasnote" X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:58:20 GMT Content-Length: 5163 plus the actual error message body. The client then is responsible for re-sending the current request with the authentication token information provided (in this case Basic Auth): GET /wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus HTTP/1.1 Host: rasnote User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506) Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Language: en,de;q=0.7,en-us;q=0.3 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7 Keep-Alive: 300 Connection: keep-alive Cookie: TimeTrakker=2HJ1998WH06696; WebLogCommentUser=Rick Strahl|http://www.west-wind.com/|[email protected]; WebStoreUser=b8bd0ed9 Authorization: Basic cgsf12aDpkc2ZhZG1zMA== Once the authorization info is sent the server responds with the actual page result. Now if you use WebRequest (or WebClient) the default behavior is to re-authenticate on every request that requires authorization. This means if you look in  Fiddler or some other HTTP client Proxy that captures requests you’ll see that each request re-authenticates: Here are two requests fired back to back: and you can see the 401 challenge, the 200 response for both requests. If you watch this same conversation between a browser and a server you’ll notice that the first 401 is also there but the subsequent 401 requests are not present. WebRequest.PreAuthenticate And this is precisely what the WebRequest.PreAuthenticate property does: It’s a caching mechanism that caches the connection credentials for a given domain in the active process and resends it on subsequent requests. It does not send credentials on the first request but it will cache credentials on subsequent requests after authentication has succeeded: string url = "http://rasnote/wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus"; HttpWebRequest req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Credentials = new NetworkCredential("rick", "secret", "rasnote"); req.AuthenticationLevel = System.Net.Security.AuthenticationLevel.MutualAuthRequested; req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; WebResponse resp = req.GetResponse(); resp.Close(); req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Credentials = new NetworkCredential("rstrahl", "secret", "rasnote"); req.AuthenticationLevel = System.Net.Security.AuthenticationLevel.MutualAuthRequested; req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; resp = req.GetResponse(); which results in the desired sequence: where only the first request doesn’t send credentials. This is quite useful as it saves quite a few round trips to the server – bascially it saves one auth request request for every authenticated request you make. In most scenarios I think you’d want to send these credentials this way but one downside to this is that there’s no way to log out the client. Since the client always sends the credentials once authenticated only an explicit operation ON THE SERVER can undo the credentials by forcing another login explicitly (ie. re-challenging with a forced 401 request). Forcing Basic Authentication Credentials on the first Request On a few occasions I’ve needed to send credentials on a first request – mainly to some oddball third party Web Services (why you’d want to use Basic Auth on a Web Service is beyond me – don’t ask but it’s not uncommon in my experience). This is true of certain services that are using Basic Authentication (especially some Apache based Web Services) and REQUIRE that the authentication is sent right from the first request. No challenge first. Ugly but there it is. Now the following works only with Basic Authentication because it’s pretty straight forward to create the Basic Authorization ‘token’ in code since it’s just an unencrypted encoding of the user name and password into base64. As you might guess this is totally unsecure and should only be used when using HTTPS/SSL connections (i’m not in this example so I can capture the Fiddler trace and my local machine doesn’t have a cert installed, but for production apps ALWAYS use SSL with basic auth). The idea is that you simply add the required Authorization header to the request on your own along with the authorization string that encodes the username and password: string url = "http://rasnote/wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus"; HttpWebRequest req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; string user = "rick"; string pwd = "secret"; string domain = "www.west-wind.com"; string auth = "Basic " + Convert.ToBase64String(System.Text.Encoding.Default.GetBytes(user + ":" + pwd)); req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.AuthenticationLevel = System.Net.Security.AuthenticationLevel.MutualAuthRequested;req.Headers.Add("Authorization", auth); req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; WebResponse resp = req.GetResponse(); resp.Close(); This works and causes the request to immediately send auth information to the server. However, this only works with Basic Auth because you can actually create the authentication credentials easily on the client because it’s essentially clear text. The same doesn’t work for Windows or Digest authentication since you can’t easily create the authentication token on the client and send it to the server. Another issue with this approach is that PreAuthenticate has no effect when you manually force the authentication. As far as Web Request is concerned it never sent the authentication information so it’s not actually caching the value any longer. If you run 3 requests in a row like this: string url = "http://rasnote/wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus"; HttpWebRequest req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; string user = "ricks"; string pwd = "secret"; string domain = "www.west-wind.com"; string auth = "Basic " + Convert.ToBase64String(System.Text.Encoding.Default.GetBytes(user + ":" + pwd)); req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Headers.Add("Authorization", auth); req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; WebResponse resp = req.GetResponse(); resp.Close(); req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Credentials = new NetworkCredential(user, pwd, domain); req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; resp = req.GetResponse(); resp.Close(); req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Credentials = new NetworkCredential(user, pwd, domain); req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; resp = req.GetResponse(); you’ll find the trace looking like this: where the first request (the one we explicitly add the header to) authenticates, the second challenges, and any subsequent ones then use the PreAuthenticate credential caching. In effect you’ll end up with one extra 401 request in this scenario, which is still better than 401 challenges on each request. Getting Access to WebRequest in Classic .NET Web Service Clients If you’re running a classic .NET Web Service client (non-WCF) one issue with the above is how do you get access to the WebRequest to actually add the custom headers to do the custom Authentication described above? One easy way is to implement a partial class that allows you add headers with something like this: public partial class TaxService { protected NameValueCollection Headers = new NameValueCollection(); public void AddHttpHeader(string key, string value) { this.Headers.Add(key,value); } public void ClearHttpHeaders() { this.Headers.Clear(); } protected override WebRequest GetWebRequest(Uri uri) { HttpWebRequest request = (HttpWebRequest) base.GetWebRequest(uri); request.Headers.Add(this.Headers); return request; } } where TaxService is the name of the .NET generated proxy class. In code you can then call AddHttpHeader() anywhere to add additional headers which are sent as part of the GetWebRequest override. Nice and simple once you know where to hook it. For WCF there’s a bit more work involved by creating a message extension as described here: http://weblogs.asp.net/avnerk/archive/2006/04/26/Adding-custom-headers-to-every-WCF-call-_2D00_-a-solution.aspx. FWIW, I think that HTTP header manipulation should be readily available on any HTTP based Web Service client DIRECTLY without having to subclass or implement a special interface hook. But alas a little extra work is required in .NET to make this happen Not a Common Problem, but when it happens… This has been one of those issues that is really rare, but it’s bitten me on several occasions when dealing with oddball Web services – a couple of times in my own work interacting with various Web Services and a few times on customer projects that required interaction with credentials-first services. Since the servers determine the protocol, we don’t have a choice but to follow the protocol. Lovely following standards that implementers decide to ignore, isn’t it? :-}© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2010Posted in .NET  CSharp  Web Services  

    Read the article

  • SimpleMembership, Membership Providers, Universal Providers and the new ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC 4 templates

    - by Jon Galloway
    The ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet template adds some new, very useful features which are built on top of SimpleMembership. These changes add some great features, like a much simpler and extensible membership API and support for OAuth. However, the new account management features require SimpleMembership and won't work against existing ASP.NET Membership Providers. I'll start with a summary of top things you need to know, then dig into a lot more detail. Summary: SimpleMembership has been designed as a replacement for traditional the previous ASP.NET Role and Membership provider system SimpleMembership solves common problems people ran into with the Membership provider system and was designed for modern user / membership / storage needs SimpleMembership integrates with the previous membership system, but you can't use a MembershipProvider with SimpleMembership The new ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet application template AccountController requires SimpleMembership and is not compatible with previous MembershipProviders You can continue to use existing ASP.NET Role and Membership providers in ASP.NET 4.5 and ASP.NET MVC 4 - just not with the ASP.NET MVC 4 AccountController The existing ASP.NET Role and Membership provider system remains supported as is part of the ASP.NET core ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms does not use SimpleMembership; it implements OAuth on top of ASP.NET Membership The ASP.NET Web Site Administration Tool (WSAT) is not compatible with SimpleMembership The following is the result of a few conversations with Erik Porter (PM for ASP.NET MVC) to make sure I had some the overall details straight, combined with a lot of time digging around in ILSpy and Visual Studio's assembly browsing tools. SimpleMembership: The future of membership for ASP.NET The ASP.NET Membership system was introduces with ASP.NET 2.0 back in 2005. It was designed to solve common site membership requirements at the time, which generally involved username / password based registration and profile storage in SQL Server. It was designed with a few extensibility mechanisms - notably a provider system (which allowed you override some specifics like backing storage) and the ability to store additional profile information (although the additional  profile information was packed into a single column which usually required access through the API). While it's sometimes frustrating to work with, it's held up for seven years - probably since it handles the main use case (username / password based membership in a SQL Server database) smoothly and can be adapted to most other needs (again, often frustrating, but it can work). The ASP.NET Web Pages and WebMatrix efforts allowed the team an opportunity to take a new look at a lot of things - e.g. the Razor syntax started with ASP.NET Web Pages, not ASP.NET MVC. The ASP.NET Web Pages team designed SimpleMembership to (wait for it) simplify the task of dealing with membership. As Matthew Osborn said in his post Using SimpleMembership With ASP.NET WebPages: With the introduction of ASP.NET WebPages and the WebMatrix stack our team has really be focusing on making things simpler for the developer. Based on a lot of customer feedback one of the areas that we wanted to improve was the built in security in ASP.NET. So with this release we took that time to create a new built in (and default for ASP.NET WebPages) security provider. I say provider because the new stuff is still built on the existing ASP.NET framework. So what do we call this new hotness that we have created? Well, none other than SimpleMembership. SimpleMembership is an umbrella term for both SimpleMembership and SimpleRoles. Part of simplifying membership involved fixing some common problems with ASP.NET Membership. Problems with ASP.NET Membership ASP.NET Membership was very obviously designed around a set of assumptions: Users and user information would most likely be stored in a full SQL Server database or in Active Directory User and profile information would be optimized around a set of common attributes (UserName, Password, IsApproved, CreationDate, Comment, Role membership...) and other user profile information would be accessed through a profile provider Some problems fall out of these assumptions. Requires Full SQL Server for default cases The default, and most fully featured providers ASP.NET Membership providers (SQL Membership Provider, SQL Role Provider, SQL Profile Provider) require full SQL Server. They depend on stored procedure support, and they rely on SQL Server cache dependencies, they depend on agents for clean up and maintenance. So the main SQL Server based providers don't work well on SQL Server CE, won't work out of the box on SQL Azure, etc. Note: Cory Fowler recently let me know about these Updated ASP.net scripts for use with Microsoft SQL Azure which do support membership, personalization, profile, and roles. But the fact that we need a support page with a set of separate SQL scripts underscores the underlying problem. Aha, you say! Jon's forgetting the Universal Providers, a.k.a. System.Web.Providers! Hold on a bit, we'll get to those... Custom Membership Providers have to work with a SQL-Server-centric API If you want to work with another database or other membership storage system, you need to to inherit from the provider base classes and override a bunch of methods which are tightly focused on storing a MembershipUser in a relational database. It can be done (and you can often find pretty good ones that have already been written), but it's a good amount of work and often leaves you with ugly code that has a bunch of System.NotImplementedException fun since there are a lot of methods that just don't apply. Designed around a specific view of users, roles and profiles The existing providers are focused on traditional membership - a user has a username and a password, some specific roles on the site (e.g. administrator, premium user), and may have some additional "nice to have" optional information that can be accessed via an API in your application. This doesn't fit well with some modern usage patterns: In OAuth and OpenID, the user doesn't have a password Often these kinds of scenarios map better to user claims or rights instead of monolithic user roles For many sites, profile or other non-traditional information is very important and needs to come from somewhere other than an API call that maps to a database blob What would work a lot better here is a system in which you were able to define your users, rights, and other attributes however you wanted and the membership system worked with your model - not the other way around. Requires specific schema, overflow in blob columns I've already mentioned this a few times, but it bears calling out separately - ASP.NET Membership focuses on SQL Server storage, and that storage is based on a very specific database schema. SimpleMembership as a better membership system As you might have guessed, SimpleMembership was designed to address the above problems. Works with your Schema As Matthew Osborn explains in his Using SimpleMembership With ASP.NET WebPages post, SimpleMembership is designed to integrate with your database schema: All SimpleMembership requires is that there are two columns on your users table so that we can hook up to it – an “ID” column and a “username” column. The important part here is that they can be named whatever you want. For instance username doesn't have to be an alias it could be an email column you just have to tell SimpleMembership to treat that as the “username” used to log in. Matthew's example shows using a very simple user table named Users (it could be named anything) with a UserID and Username column, then a bunch of other columns he wanted in his app. Then we point SimpleMemberhip at that table with a one-liner: WebSecurity.InitializeDatabaseFile("SecurityDemo.sdf", "Users", "UserID", "Username", true); No other tables are needed, the table can be named anything we want, and can have pretty much any schema we want as long as we've got an ID and something that we can map to a username. Broaden database support to the whole SQL Server family While SimpleMembership is not database agnostic, it works across the SQL Server family. It continues to support full SQL Server, but it also works with SQL Azure, SQL Server CE, SQL Server Express, and LocalDB. Everything's implemented as SQL calls rather than requiring stored procedures, views, agents, and change notifications. Note that SimpleMembership still requires some flavor of SQL Server - it won't work with MySQL, NoSQL databases, etc. You can take a look at the code in WebMatrix.WebData.dll using a tool like ILSpy if you'd like to see why - there places where SQL Server specific SQL statements are being executed, especially when creating and initializing tables. It seems like you might be able to work with another database if you created the tables separately, but I haven't tried it and it's not supported at this point. Note: I'm thinking it would be possible for SimpleMembership (or something compatible) to run Entity Framework so it would work with any database EF supports. That seems useful to me - thoughts? Note: SimpleMembership has the same database support - anything in the SQL Server family - that Universal Providers brings to the ASP.NET Membership system. Easy to with Entity Framework Code First The problem with with ASP.NET Membership's system for storing additional account information is that it's the gate keeper. That means you're stuck with its schema and accessing profile information through its API. SimpleMembership flips that around by allowing you to use any table as a user store. That means you're in control of the user profile information, and you can access it however you'd like - it's just data. Let's look at a practical based on the AccountModel.cs class in an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet project. Here I'm adding a Birthday property to the UserProfile class. [Table("UserProfile")] public class UserProfile { [Key] [DatabaseGeneratedAttribute(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)] public int UserId { get; set; } public string UserName { get; set; } public DateTime Birthday { get; set; } } Now if I want to access that information, I can just grab the account by username and read the value. var context = new UsersContext(); var username = User.Identity.Name; var user = context.UserProfiles.SingleOrDefault(u => u.UserName == username); var birthday = user.Birthday; So instead of thinking of SimpleMembership as a big membership API, think of it as something that handles membership based on your user database. In SimpleMembership, everything's keyed off a user row in a table you define rather than a bunch of entries in membership tables that were out of your control. How SimpleMembership integrates with ASP.NET Membership Okay, enough sales pitch (and hopefully background) on why things have changed. How does this affect you? Let's start with a diagram to show the relationship (note: I've simplified by removing a few classes to show the important relationships): So SimpleMembershipProvider is an implementaiton of an ExtendedMembershipProvider, which inherits from MembershipProvider and adds some other account / OAuth related things. Here's what ExtendedMembershipProvider adds to MembershipProvider: The important thing to take away here is that a SimpleMembershipProvider is a MembershipProvider, but a MembershipProvider is not a SimpleMembershipProvider. This distinction is important in practice: you cannot use an existing MembershipProvider (including the Universal Providers found in System.Web.Providers) with an API that requires a SimpleMembershipProvider, including any of the calls in WebMatrix.WebData.WebSecurity or Microsoft.Web.WebPages.OAuth.OAuthWebSecurity. However, that's as far as it goes. Membership Providers still work if you're accessing them through the standard Membership API, and all of the core stuff  - including the AuthorizeAttribute, role enforcement, etc. - will work just fine and without any change. Let's look at how that affects you in terms of the new templates. Membership in the ASP.NET MVC 4 project templates ASP.NET MVC 4 offers six Project Templates: Empty - Really empty, just the assemblies, folder structure and a tiny bit of basic configuration. Basic - Like Empty, but with a bit of UI preconfigured (css / images / bundling). Internet - This has both a Home and Account controller and associated views. The Account Controller supports registration and login via either local accounts and via OAuth / OpenID providers. Intranet - Like the Internet template, but it's preconfigured for Windows Authentication. Mobile - This is preconfigured using jQuery Mobile and is intended for mobile-only sites. Web API - This is preconfigured for a service backend built on ASP.NET Web API. Out of these templates, only one (the Internet template) uses SimpleMembership. ASP.NET MVC 4 Basic template The Basic template has configuration in place to use ASP.NET Membership with the Universal Providers. You can see that configuration in the ASP.NET MVC 4 Basic template's web.config: <profile defaultProvider="DefaultProfileProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultProfileProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultProfileProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </profile> <membership defaultProvider="DefaultMembershipProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultMembershipProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultMembershipProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" enablePasswordRetrieval="false" enablePasswordReset="true" requiresQuestionAndAnswer="false" requiresUniqueEmail="false" maxInvalidPasswordAttempts="5" minRequiredPasswordLength="6" minRequiredNonalphanumericCharacters="0" passwordAttemptWindow="10" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </membership> <roleManager defaultProvider="DefaultRoleProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultRoleProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultRoleProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </roleManager> <sessionState mode="InProc" customProvider="DefaultSessionProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultSessionProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultSessionStateProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" /> </providers> </sessionState> This means that it's business as usual for the Basic template as far as ASP.NET Membership works. ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet template The Internet template has a few things set up to bootstrap SimpleMembership: \Models\AccountModels.cs defines a basic user account and includes data annotations to define keys and such \Filters\InitializeSimpleMembershipAttribute.cs creates the membership database using the above model, then calls WebSecurity.InitializeDatabaseConnection which verifies that the underlying tables are in place and marks initialization as complete (for the application's lifetime) \Controllers\AccountController.cs makes heavy use of OAuthWebSecurity (for OAuth account registration / login / management) and WebSecurity. WebSecurity provides account management services for ASP.NET MVC (and Web Pages) WebSecurity can work with any ExtendedMembershipProvider. There's one in the box (SimpleMembershipProvider) but you can write your own. Since a standard MembershipProvider is not an ExtendedMembershipProvider, WebSecurity will throw exceptions if the default membership provider is a MembershipProvider rather than an ExtendedMembershipProvider. Practical example: Create a new ASP.NET MVC 4 application using the Internet application template Install the Microsoft ASP.NET Universal Providers for LocalDB NuGet package Run the application, click on Register, add a username and password, and click submit You'll get the following execption in AccountController.cs::Register: To call this method, the "Membership.Provider" property must be an instance of "ExtendedMembershipProvider". This occurs because the ASP.NET Universal Providers packages include a web.config transform that will update your web.config to add the Universal Provider configuration I showed in the Basic template example above. When WebSecurity tries to use the configured ASP.NET Membership Provider, it checks if it can be cast to an ExtendedMembershipProvider before doing anything else. So, what do you do? Options: If you want to use the new AccountController, you'll either need to use the SimpleMembershipProvider or another valid ExtendedMembershipProvider. This is pretty straightforward. If you want to use an existing ASP.NET Membership Provider in ASP.NET MVC 4, you can't use the new AccountController. You can do a few things: Replace  the AccountController.cs and AccountModels.cs in an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet project with one from an ASP.NET MVC 3 application (you of course won't have OAuth support). Then, if you want, you can go through and remove other things that were built around SimpleMembership - the OAuth partial view, the NuGet packages (e.g. the DotNetOpenAuthAuth package, etc.) Use an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet application template and add in a Universal Providers NuGet package. Then copy in the AccountController and AccountModel classes. Create an ASP.NET MVC 3 project and upgrade it to ASP.NET MVC 4 using the steps shown in the ASP.NET MVC 4 release notes. None of these are particularly elegant or simple. Maybe we (or just me?) can do something to make this simpler - perhaps a NuGet package. However, this should be an edge case - hopefully the cases where you'd need to create a new ASP.NET but use legacy ASP.NET Membership Providers should be pretty rare. Please let me (or, preferably the team) know if that's an incorrect assumption. Membership in the ASP.NET 4.5 project template ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms took a different approach which builds off ASP.NET Membership. Instead of using the WebMatrix security assemblies, Web Forms uses Microsoft.AspNet.Membership.OpenAuth assembly. I'm no expert on this, but from a bit of time in ILSpy and Visual Studio's (very pretty) dependency graphs, this uses a Membership Adapter to save OAuth data into an EF managed database while still running on top of ASP.NET Membership. Note: There may be a way to use this in ASP.NET MVC 4, although it would probably take some plumbing work to hook it up. How does this fit in with Universal Providers (System.Web.Providers)? Just to summarize: Universal Providers are intended for cases where you have an existing ASP.NET Membership Provider and you want to use it with another SQL Server database backend (other than SQL Server). It doesn't require agents to handle expired session cleanup and other background tasks, it piggybacks these tasks on other calls. Universal Providers are not really, strictly speaking, universal - at least to my way of thinking. They only work with databases in the SQL Server family. Universal Providers do not work with Simple Membership. The Universal Providers packages include some web config transforms which you would normally want when you're using them. What about the Web Site Administration Tool? Visual Studio includes tooling to launch the Web Site Administration Tool (WSAT) to configure users and roles in your application. WSAT is built to work with ASP.NET Membership, and is not compatible with Simple Membership. There are two main options there: Use the WebSecurity and OAuthWebSecurity API to manage the users and roles Create a web admin using the above APIs Since SimpleMembership runs on top of your database, you can update your users as you would any other data - via EF or even in direct database edits (in development, of course)

    Read the article

  • Rate limiting an internet connection per user

    - by Alister
    I've got a friend who has a "rent-by-room" property and includes internet access as part of this. However some tenants are somewhat hogging the internet (i.e. constantly downloading). I was wondering if anyone knows of a fairly easy way of rate limiting each connection to make the system more equitable. A preferred solution would be a cheap piece of hardware or some sort of Linux "appliance". I would rather not have to get an iptables headache if this is avoidable.

    Read the article

  • How to I sniff this from iTunes?

    - by Alex
    If you have used Firebug, you know that you can see the "AJAX" requests back and forth. And you can see the headers sent. I would like the same thing. Except, I would like to sniff iTunes. I want to know the REST API that iTunes uses to talk to the cloud. As well as the user-agent and headers sent.

    Read the article

  • Tracking Unique site Views for 2012 - Not my website

    - by user580950
    I am in trouble. I placed and advt on a website in 2012 which said he has 950,000 unique visits each month so early in 2012 i advertised with them. The advertised didn't worked out so checked in 2-3 months time and i saw that the unique visitors on their site was 8,000 at that time.I immediately close the account I dont remember which site i was checking the unique visitors.That advt company has filed a dispute against me. So is there any tool that give me stats of 2012 of any website. i tried google trends but it doesnt show statistics ..

    Read the article

  • Simulating a low-bandwidth, high-latency network connection on Linux

    - by Justin L.
    I'd like to simulate a high-latency, low-bandwidth network connection on my Linux machine. Limiting bandwidth has been discussed before, e.g. here, but I can't find any posts which address limiting both bandwidth and latency. I can get either high latency or low bandwidth using tc. But I haven't been able to combine these into a single connection. In particular, the example rate control script here doesn't work for me: # tc qdisc add dev lo root handle 1:0 netem delay 100ms # tc qdisc add dev lo parent 1:1 handle 10: tbf rate 256kbit buffer 1600 limit 3000 RTNETLINK answers: Operation not supported How can I create a low-bandwidth, high-latency connection, using tc or any other readily-available tool?

    Read the article

  • How can I limit the upload/download bandwidth on my CentOS server?

    - by Dan Nestor
    How can I limit the upload and download bandwidth on my CentOS server? This is a box with a single interface, eth0. Ideally, I would like a command-line solution (I've been trying to use tc), something that I could easily switch on and off in a script. So far I've been trying to do something like tc filter add dev eth0 protocol ip prio 50 u32 police rate 100kbit burst 10240 drop but I'm obviously missing a lot of knowledge and information. Can somebody help with a quick one-liner? Many thanks, Dan

    Read the article

  • tc u32 --- how to match L2 protocols in recent kernels?

    - by brownian
    I have a nice shaper, with hashed filtering, built at a linux bridge. In short, br0 connects external and internal physical interfaces, VLAN tagged packets are bridged "transparently" (I mean, no VLAN interfaces are there). Now, different kernels do it differently. I can be wrong with exact kernel verions ranges, please forgive me. Thanks. 2.6.26 So, in debian, 2.6.26 and up (up to 2.6.32, I believe) --- this works: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 flowid 1:200 Here, "kernel" matches two bytes in "protocol" field with 0x8100, but counts the beginning of ip packet as a "zero position" (sorry for my English, if I'm a bit unclear). 2.6.32 Again, in debian (I've not built vanilla kernel), 2.6.32-5 --- this works: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 at 20 flowid 1:200 Here, "kernel" matches the same for protocol, but counts offset from the beginning of this protocol's header --- I have to add 4 bytes to offset (20, not 16 for dst address). It's ok, seems more logical, as for me. 3.2.11, the latest stable now This works --- as if there is no 802.1q tag at all: tc filter add dev internal protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 flowid 1:200 The problem is that I couldn't find a way to match 802.1q tag so far. Matching 802.1q tag at past I could do this before as follows: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 match u16 0x0ed8 0x0fff at -4 flowid 1:300 Now I'm unable to match 802.1q tag with at 0, at -2, at -4, at -6 or like that. The main issue that I have zero hits count --- this filter is not being checked at all, "wrong protocol", in other words. Please, anyone, help me :-) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Monitor number of bytes transferred to/from IP address on port.

    - by Mike
    Can anyone recommend a linux command line tool to monitor the number of bytes transferred between the local server and a specified IP address/port. The equivalent tcpdump command would be: tcpdump -s 0 -i any -w mycapture.trc port 80 host google.com which outputs : 46 packets captured 131 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel I'd like something similar that outputs: 54 bytes out, 176 bytes in I'd like it to work on RHEL and be free/open-source. It would be good if there was an existing tool which I was just missing too!

    Read the article

  • Total network data sent/received of a non-daemon Linux process?

    - by leden
    I'm looking for a simple and effective way of measuring total bytes received/sent from a single process upon its termination. Basically, I am looking for a tool which has the interface similar to "time" and "/usr/bin/time", e.g. measure-net-data <prog_to_run> <prog_args> Received (b): XYZ Sent (b): ABC I know that there are many tools for bandwidth/network monitoring, but as far I can tell all of them are performing the measurements it real-time, which is inappropriate not only because of overhead but also because of the inconvenience - I would need to stop the program, capture the output of the tool and then kill it. I have seen that newer versions of Linux 2.6.20+ provide /proc/<pid>/io/ which contain the information I'm looking for; however, everything under /proc/<pid> when the process terminates, so I'm again back to the same problem as with any network monitoring tool.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147  | Next Page >