Search Results

Search found 13853 results on 555 pages for 'soa security'.

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

Page 145/555 | < Previous Page | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >

  • How to run Firefox jailed without serious performance loss?

    - by Vi
    My Firefox configuration is tricky: Firefox runs at separate restricted user account which cannot connect to main X server. Firefox uses Xvfb (virtual "headless" X server) as X server. x11vnc is running on that Xvfb. On the main X server there is vncviewer running that connect to this x11vnc On powerful laptop (Acer Extensa 5220) it seems to work more or less well, but on "Acer Aspire One" netbook it is slowish (on a background that firefox is loaded with lots of extensions). How to optimise this scheme? Requirements: Browser cannot connect to main X server. Browser should be in chroot jail (no "suid" scripts, readonly for many things) Browser should have a lot of features (like in AutoPager, NoScript, WoT, AdBlockPlus)

    Read the article

  • Secure email crashes Outlook 2007

    - by Josh
    I have a number of secure emails sent to my Outlook 2007 client. Most arrive fine and display the prompt with regards to granting access to the certificate and then open. Today I received two that crash Outlook whenever I try to open them. I've tried restarting Outlook and my computer but still have the same problem. Any ideas what might be causing this, and how I can fix it? I'm working on Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit.

    Read the article

  • My server appears to have been hacked+ scanssh run by zabbix is it normal?

    - by Niro
    I'm running a few EC2/Scalr instances with zabbix monitoring. I received complaints about one of my servers port scanning other servers. the logs show it is accessing port 22 on consecutive IP addresses. I looked at the processes list and saw scanssh is running under the user Zabbix. My question is- Is scanssh part of zabbix? Is it suppesd to run? I have active autodiscovery on zabbix but it is looking at another IP addresses and definately not port 20. Is it possible that something in the config of zabbix agent is controlling it and not the settings on zabbix server? What can I do to find out if zabbix is somehow misbehaving or it is a hacker? Any advice is highly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Recommended offline on-demand virus scanners

    - by ashh
    I have never run full anti-virus on my Windows XP systems. Instead I use various anti-malware tools to manually perform scans every few weeks. This approach, combined with Windows updates and general care about what web-sites I visit and what files I download has kept me 99% free of problems. The remaining 1% has occurred when I download files that I know may contain malware, but still decide the risk is worth it. When on 2 occasions in 10 years I did get caught doing this, I realised that being able to easily scan them would most likely have avoided getting infected. I don't need, or want, to run a "stay resident" anti-virus. Also, the online scanners such as Kaspersky etc limit uploads to small files, so these are not always useful. In summary I would like to simply be able to download a file and then manually initiate an on demand anti-virus scan, on the downloaded file only. I'm sure some/most Anti-Virus do both, however once again I don't really want to pay for or need the stay resident part. Any recommendations (commercial or free)? UPDATE: This is not an exact duplicate, nor a possible duplicate. I searched for and read other questions on anti-virus here at SuperUser and found none that answered my question. I am specifically asking about anti-virus scanners that run ON-DEMAND locally on the computer, not online scanners.

    Read the article

  • How to run specific program with root privileges (Ubuntu OS) when no sudo user log into system?

    - by makulia
    How to run specific program with root privileges (Ubuntu OS) when no sudo user log into system? Program need root privileges to function correctly. Normal user shouldn't be able to shutdown this process. For example, I have to users. Admin and Client. Program should start only when Client log into system. It needs root privileges and Client shouldn't be able to shut this process down.

    Read the article

  • How do I format this regex so it will work in fail2ban?

    - by chapkom
    I've just installed fail2ban on my CentOS server in response to an SSH brute force attempt. The default regular expressions in fail2ban's sshd.conf file do not match any entries in audit.log, which is where SSH seems to be logging all connection attempts, so I am trying to add an expression that will match. The string I am trying to match is as follows: type=USER_LOGIN msg=audit(1333630430.185:503332): user pid=30230 uid=0 auid=500 subj=user_u:system_r:unconfined_t:s0-s0:c0.c1023 msg='acct="root": exe="/usr /sbin/sshd" (hostname=?, addr=<HOST IP>, terminal=sshd res=failed)' The regular expression I am attempting to use is: ^.*addr=<HOST>, terminal=sshd res=failed.*$ I've used regextester.com and regexr to try to build the regex. The testers give me a match for this regex:^.*addr=\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}\.\d{1,3}, terminal=sshd res=failed.*$ but fail2ban-regex complains if I don't use the <HOST> tag in the regex. However, using ^.*addr=<HOST>, terminal=sshd res=failed.*$ gives me 0 matches. At this point, I am totally stuck and I would greatly appreciate any assistance. What am I doing wrong in the regex I am trying to use?

    Read the article

  • Is adding users to the group www-data safe on Debian?

    - by John
    Many PHP applications do self-configuration and self-updating. This requires apache to have write access to the PHP files. While chgrp'ing them all to www-data appears like a good practice to avoid making them world writable, I also wish to allow users to create new files and edit existing one. Is adding users to the group www-data safe on Debian? For example: 775 root www-data /var/www 644 john www-data /var/www/johns_php_application.php 660 john www-data /var/www/johns_php_applications_configuration_file

    Read the article

  • Limiting Failed SSH Logins

    - by nitins
    I would like to limit failure retries on my Fedora machine to 5. I think I can accomplish it with PAM. But was unable to to do this. I have referred to this article to do this http://www.puschitz.com/SecuringLinux.shtml Please provide suggestions

    Read the article

  • Tools to Hide IP address for webapp

    - by Jake Barti
    I am looking out for a paid software where I can 'choose' an IP address from a different country and browse a site. So if I want to see how the site will look to US users, I should be able to choose the IP from US. We are building a web app that will be used in many countries and we want to make sure we test it before releasing. Any recommendations ?

    Read the article

  • Is it worth running nessus as well as OpenVAS?

    - by kdt
    Apparently OpenVAS originated as a fork of Nessus. It is very easy to install and use OpenVAS because it's, well, open. However, am I kidding myself if I just use that instead of Nessus? Should I be using both, or if I use Nessus then is OpenVAS surplus to requirements? To break it down into non-subjective sub-questions: * Is openvas a superset or subset of nessus? * Is one updated more often than the other? * Does one have a bigger vulnerability database than the other? * ...or are there other qualitative differences that I may be missing?

    Read the article

  • Multiple *NIX Accounts with Identical UID

    - by Tim
    I am curious whether there is a standard expected behavior and whether it is considered bad practice when creating more than one account on Linux/Unix that have the same UID. I've done some testing on RHEL5 with this and it behaved as I expected, but I don't know if I'm tempting fate using this trick. As an example, let's say I have two accounts with the same IDs: a1:$1$4zIl1:5000:5000::/home/a1:/bin/bash a2:$1$bmh92:5000:5000::/home/a2:/bin/bash What this means is: I can log in to each account using its own password. Files I create will have the same UID. Tools such as "ls -l" will list the UID as the first entry in the file (a1 in this case). I avoid any permissions or ownership problems between the two accounts because they are really the same user. I get login auditing for each account, so I have better granularity into tracking what is happening on the system. So my questions are: Is this ability designed or is it just the way it happens to work? Is this going to be consistent across *nix variants? Is this accepted practice? Are there unintended consequences to this practice? Note, the idea here is to use this for system accounts and not normal user accounts.

    Read the article

  • RDP over VPN only

    - by shiva
    I know this question has been asked many a times here. But i want to gain certain perspective here. I have enabled VPN on certain systems and then can access remote system using rdp. However they can access the remote system without rdp as well. Is this because all these systems are in same lan group? How can i ensure that rdp works only when connected to vpn? I am looking at one vpn system and people should log into that system and then connect to vpn and then access remote system using rdp. I know that this can be achieved but i am not sure how to go about it. please guide me

    Read the article

  • Script for checking the nologin accounts and then disable the account

    - by suma
    "Could you please share the scripts which does the below ?" I have written a script that scans all the relevent logs daily, makes a list of people that have had any activity that day, and maintains database (just a text file) of users and the last time they logged in. Then I have a second script that examines the database for dates more than x days ago, an notifies the user and administrator 2 weeks prior to locking the account. And if there are any dates more than x+y days ago, deletes the account altogether. This seems to be working for me - but I would like to use a non-proprietary solution if one is available. "Could you please share the scripts?"

    Read the article

  • How to create limited user accounts in Linux

    - by James Willson
    I want to create a user account for each of the key programs installed on my debian server. For example, for the following programs: Tomcat Nginx Supervisor PostgreSQL This seems to be recommended based on my reading online. However, I want to restrict these user accounts as much as possible, so that they dont have a shell login, dont have access to the other programs and are as limited as possible but still functional. Would anyone mind telling me how this could be achieved? My reading so far suggests this: echo "/usr/sbin/nologin" /etc/shells useradd -s /usr/sbin/nologin tomcat But I think there may be a more complete way of doing it. EDIT: I'm using debian squeeze

    Read the article

  • "Slave" user accounts in GNU/Linux

    - by Vi
    How to make one user account to be like root for some other user account, e.g. to be able to read, write, chmod all it's files, chown from this account to master and back, kill/ptrace all it's processes and to all thinks root can, but limited only to that particular slave account? Now I'm simulating this by allowing "master" user to "sudo -u slaveuser" and setting setfacl -dRm u:masteruser:rwx ~slaveuser. It is useful as I run most desktop programs in separate user accounts, but need to move files between them sometimes. If it requires some simple kernel patch it is OK.

    Read the article

  • Nginx : Proper use of limit_req_zone and limit_req

    - by xperator
    I have 2 website running on VPS. Their purpose is sharing music files and publishing news. Both of them use wordpress. What I am trying is that I want to prevent little hackers from flooding the webserver and putting stress on the server to make it crash. The problem is that after using limit_req_zone and limit_req my website became very slow. Browsing Wordpress control panel takes a long long time. I tried changing values but it didn't improve much. I guess the problem is Wordpress because it's the only script I am using on both front and back end. Here is the last setting which seems to be more responsive than others : limit_req_zone $binary_remote_addr zone=flood:5m rate=10r/m; location ~ \.php$ { limit_req zone=flood burst=100 nodelay; } What are the optimal values that should be used in my case (wp) ? I want the website have it's normal behavior, On the other hand stopping lifeless people from flooding. Another question, Is it safe and enough to use limit_req only on php files ?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Picking up a lot of failed authentications for various accounts

    - by Josh K
    My server is getting a lot of various failed authentication attempts for various accounts. The most common one (that I've seen ) or the root account. I have since enabled Fail2Ban and ran several rootkit / malware checks to ensure I wasn't compromised. Is there anything else I should do? I only have three accounts enabled, and SSH access for only two. I have a full 48hr ban on anyone making more then six failed SSH login attempts. I do not have FTP enabled.

    Read the article

  • hardening a server: disallow password-login for sudoers and log unusual ips

    - by Fabian Zeindl
    Two question regarding sudo-login into an ubuntu-system (debian tips welcome as well): Is it possible to require sudoers on my box to only login with publickey-authentication? Is it possible to log which ip sudoers log in from and check that for "unusual activity" or take actions? I'm thinking about temporarily removing sudo-rights if sudoers don't log in from whitelisted IPs. Or is that too risky to be exploited?

    Read the article

  • My site was recently attacked. What do I do?

    - by ChrisH
    This is a first for me. One of the sites I run was recently attacked. Not at all an intelligent attack - pure brute force - hit every page and every non-page with every extension possible. Posted with garbage data to every form and tried to post to some random urls too. All tod, 16000 requests in one hour. What should I do to prevent/alert this kind of behavior? Is there a way to limit the request/hr for a given ip/client? Is there a place I should be reporting the user to? They appear to be from China and did leave what seems like a valid e-mail.

    Read the article

  • Recommended way to restrict Apache users

    - by Dor
    Following on why should we restrict Apache users, another two questions arises: What is the recommended method of restricting the places Apache users can traverse & read in the file system? What to do against fork bombs and other shell scripting problems? (bash scripting is allowed) My possible solutions (I prefer to know which solution you choose and why): chroot OR mod_chroot disable bash OR use Restricted BASH Please offer another solutions if you find appropriate. (perhaps selinux is?) Current status: Users are allowed to executed bash scripts (via PHP for example) suexec is active Apache requested are served with FastCGI for PHP

    Read the article

  • Apache Probes -- what are they after?

    - by Chris_K
    The past few weeks I've been seeing more and more of these probes each day. I'd like to figure out what vulnerability they're looking for but haven't been able to turn anything up with a web search. Here's a sample of what I get in my morning Logwatch emails: A total of XX possible successful probes were detected (the following URLs contain strings that match one or more of a listing of strings that indicate a possible exploit): /MyBlog/?option=com_myblog&Itemid=12&task=../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00 HTTP Response 200 /index2.php?option=com_myblog&item=12&task=../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00 HTTP Response 200 /?option=com_myblog&Itemid=12&task=../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00 HTTP Response 301 /index2.php?option=com_myblog&item=12&task=../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00 HTTP Response 200 //index2.php?option=com_myblog&Itemid=1&task=../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../proc/self/environ%00 HTTP Response 200 This is coming from a current CentOS 5.4 / Apache 2 box with all updates. I've manually tried entering a few in to see what they get, but those all appear to just return the site's home page. This server is just hosting a few Joomla! sites... but this doesn't seem to be targeting Joomla (as far as I can tell). Anyone know what they're probing for? I just want to make sure whatever it is I've got it covered (or not installed). The escalation of these entries has me a bit concerned.

    Read the article

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

< Previous Page | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >