Search Results

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

Page 158/398 | < Previous Page | 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165  | Next Page >

  • FacebookRestClientException: A session key is required for calling this method in

    - by simple
    I have a app, that is used in the fanpage, so basically I am showing up the user request/invite form, after submission which refers to my server and I get friends ids(from $_POST) and info about user who sent invite, to get user info I am using $user = $this->_facebook->api_client->users_getLoggedInUser(); $dataToRetrive = array(....); $usersInfo = $this->_facebook->api_client->users_getInfo($user,$dataToRetrive); and then I redirect to fan page again in FF it is working fine but OPera and Chrome it is loosing the session.

    Read the article

  • How to force Share Intent to open a specific app?

    - by AndroidUser99
    I like share intent, it is perfect to open sharing apps with image and text parameters. But now i'm researching the way to force share intent to open a specific app from the list, with the paramters given to the share intent. This is my actual code, it shows the list of sharing apps installed on the phone. Please, can somedone tell me what i should add to the code to force for example official twitter app? and official faccebok app? Intent sharingIntent = new Intent(Intent.ACTION_SEND); Uri screenshotUri = Uri.parse("file:///sdcard/test.jpg"); sharingIntent.setType("image/*"); sharingIntent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_TEXT, "body text"); sharingIntent.putExtra(Intent.EXTRA_STREAM, screenshotUri); startActivity(Intent.createChooser(sharingIntent, "Share image using")); Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to put log in box in a website to ensure one user can vote once only?

    - by shah
    I have a school project to do which requires us to develop an online voting website. how do i ensure one user has voted once only? the website is supposed to be in booths in public places which means i cannot use ip addresses or cookies. i was planning to use fb login id or maybe some other email id but i cannot find relevant codes/links. i just want people to go through the procedure of entering the log in id but not go to fb directly. my website cannot be published online. could you please suggest how i can achieve this? it is a bit urgent, thank you!

    Read the article

  • make user attend event through sdk

    - by Jakob Dam Jensen
    I was wondering if it's possible to make a user attend an event through the sdk (probably fql). I've been looking at the wiki for FQL info as well as the graph api. But both look like they only support fetching info and not changing... Any suggestions? I would like to build this feature into an application....

    Read the article

  • How do I add a loading indicator to my page while my iframe loads?

    - by keybored
    I am currently creating a page where upon clicking a link an iframe is inserted into a div and it's contents loaded. I do this using the following jQuery call: $('#mydiv').html('<iframe src="sourcelink.html" frameborder="0" width="760" height="2400" scrolling="no"></iframe>'); Sometimes the source content loads very slowly and, as a result, it looks like nothing is happening. I would like to have a simple loading animation while the content is loading while the iframe's content loads. When the iframe finishes loading it's content should pop in and the loading animation should go away. I've been considering a couple ways I could do this (e.g. having a separate loader div to simply swap the two in and out) but I'm not sure of what the 'best' approach to solving this problem is. Perhaps I shouldn't be using .html()? I'm open to suggestion if there is a more correct solution.

    Read the article

  • Can't add libraries to Eclipse Android project

    - by neuromancer
    I'm trying to get the Hackbook for Android project to work in Eclipse. One of the things I need to do is remove that invalid reference and include that project I made. I did this before, but then I started over and now it doesn't work. Here is where I add the project. If I click "Apply" and then "OK" everything seems to be fine, but it isn't, because when I go back to this screen, none of the changes I made are there. Why isn't it saving my changes? How am I supposed to do this?

    Read the article

  • Update FB:Like URL Dynamically using JavaScript

    - by br4inwash3r
    i'd like to change the URL to like of an FB:Like button dynamically using javascript. right now i've been able to change the href attribute of the fb:like tag (i've pasted the code below). but that doesn't work. perhaps i have to re-initiate the FB:Like button, but so far i can't figure out how.. function update_share(container, url) { // update fb:like href value var container = container[0] || document.body; var button = container.getElementsByTagName('fb:like'); button[0].setAttribute('href', url); } any help would be appreciated. thx..

    Read the article

  • How i can i use the value of a variable from one class in another in objective c?

    - by user337174
    Hi i am fairly new to objective c and have been doing some iphone programming. Is it possible to look up the value of a variable in a different class? Basically what i am doing is running a function that exists in my app delegate from a view controller, but the app delegate needs to use a variable stored in the view controller from which the app delegate function was called. Make sense??? Any help would be grateful. James

    Read the article

  • FBML limit on Fan pages...

    - by Monosofr
    I tried to add 15 tabs to a page of mine, with just images and information, but i could only add 10 FMBL apps and make them on tabs...Any idea whether the FMBL limit is 10 ? Is there any way i can increase that limit ?

    Read the article

  • Open Graph API - Github PHP Class

    - by clarkstudios
    Hi all, I have downloaded the PHP class from github which is the wrapper for their Open Graph API. I can log in and list freinds and images etc. But what I am really struggling with is allowing for extended permissions to allow posting to a users wall. I know somewhere I need to add "scope=publish_stream" to allow this option and can only assume it is on the getLoginUrl method but I am having next to know joy with it. Can anyone help me. Steve

    Read the article

  • Problem with fb:swf in Opera

    - by agog.iam
    Hi, I am embedding my flash game in the following way, which runs fine in IE, Firefox, Chrome but doesn't play in Opera. Please suggest what is wrong here. <div> <fb:swf waitforclick = "true" wmode="opaque" width="640" height="480" imgsrc=""http://mygame.jpg" swfsrc="http://mygame.swf" flashvars="sid=<?php echo $id;?>&musicVal=<?php echo $musicVal;?>&efxVal=<?php echo $efxVal;?>&muteVal=<?php echo $muteVal;?>"/> </div> Thanks in advance, agog.iam

    Read the article

  • Remove alert from a javascript

    - by albastar
    I've the below code from a tutorial,i want the action but i just want to remove the alert, here is the code: <script type="text/javascript"> setTimeout('read()', 10000); function read() { FB.api('/me/news.reads' + '?article=<?php echo $fbrdurl ?>&access_token=<?php echo $access_token ?>','post', function(response) { var msg = 'Error occured'; if (!response || response.error) { if (response.error) { msg += "\n\nType: "+response.error.type+"\n\nMessage: "+response.error.message; } alert(msg); } else { alert('Post was successful! Action ID: ' + response.id); } }); } </script> I've tried this: <script type="text/javascript"> setTimeout('read()', 10000); function read() { FB.api('/me/news.reads' + '?article=<?php echo $fbrdurl ?>&access_token=<?php echo $access_token ?>','post'; } </script> but not worked, thanks

    Read the article

  • Error when changing or resetting FBProfilePictureView profileId

    - by Jeff Schwartz
    I have programmatically added an FBProfilePictureView object to a view. When initially logging in, the user's profile picture displays as expected when setting the profileId of the object within the FBLoginViewDelegate method loginViewFetchedUserInfo:user:. However, when logging off the following line of code produces an error: profilePicture.profileId = nil; The error thrown is: [__NSCFNumber isEqualToString:]: unrecognized selector sent to instance Note: This was only an issue after I incrementally upgraded the iOS SDK from 3.5 to 3.8. If anyone has encountered this issue, please let me know. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Fb.Login() does not popup OAuth Dialog?

    - by cnz81
    I'm study fb api recently and I use fb api to do login, however, when I use Fb.Login() method, and scope the permission that I needed. I found the problem that when I use account ( this account is also the fb app admin ) to login, everything is be work including login dialog and oauth dialog , but when I use another account ( General account ) the login dialog is work but OAuth Dialog is not work . I've tried another account ( General account ), it had the same situation, Only when I use the account which is also the fb app owner account would be work. Any Ideas ? Below is the code... FB.login(function (response) { if (response.authResponse) { alert('success !') ; } else { alert(' faild ! '); } }, { scope: "publish_actions" });

    Read the article

  • Pros and Cons of Facebook's React vs. Web Components (Polymer)

    - by CletusW
    What are the main benefits of Facebook's React over the upcoming Web Components spec and vice versa (or perhaps a more apples-to-apples comparison would be to Google's Polymer library)? According to this JSConf EU talk and the React homepage, the main benefits of React are: Decoupling and increased cohesion using a component model Abstraction, Composition and Expressivity Virtual DOM & Synthetic events (which basically means they completely re-implemented the DOM and its event system) Enables modern HTML5 event stuff on IE 8 Server-side rendering Testability Bindings to SVG, VML, and <canvas> Almost everything mentioned is being integrated into browsers natively through Web Components except this virtual DOM concept (obviously). I can see how the virtual DOM and synthetic events can be beneficial today to support old browsers, but isn't throwing away a huge chunk of native browser code kind of like shooting yourself in the foot in the long term? As far as modern browsers are concerned, isn't that a lot of unnecessary overhead/reinventing of the wheel? Here are some things I think React is missing that Web Components will care of. Correct me if I'm wrong. Native browser support (read "guaranteed to be faster") Write script in a scripting language, write styles in a styling language, write markup in a markup language. Style encapsulation using Shadow DOM React instead has this, which requires writing CSS in JavaScript. Not pretty. Two-way binding

    Read the article

  • How can I use WCF with only basichttpbinding, SSL and Basic Authentication in IIS?

    - by Tim
    Hello, Is it possible to setup a WCF service with SSL and Basic Authentication in IIS using only BasicHttpBinding-binding? (I can’t use the wsHttpBinding-binding) The site is hosted on IIS 7, with the following authentication set up: - Anonymous access: off - Basic authentication: on - Integrated Windows authentication: off !! Service Config: <services> <service name="NameSpace.SomeService"> <host> <baseAddresses> <add baseAddress="https://hostname/SomeService/" /> </baseAddresses> </host> <!-- Service Endpoints --> <endpoint address="" binding="basicHttpBinding" bindingNamespace="http://hostname/SomeMethodName/1" contract="NameSpace.ISomeInterfaceService" name="Default" /> <endpoint address="mex" binding="mexHttpsBinding" contract="IMetadataExchange"/> </service> </services> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior> <!-- To avoid disclosing metadata information, set the value below to false and remove the metadata endpoint above before deployment --> <serviceMetadata httpsGetEnabled="true"/> <!-- To receive exception details in faults for debugging purposes, set the value below to true. Set to false before deployment to avoid disclosing exception information --> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="false"/> <exceptionShielding/> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> I tried 2 types of bindings with two different errors: 1 - IIS Error: 'Could not find a base address that matches scheme http for the endpoint with binding BasicHttpBinding. Registered base address schemes are [https]. <bindings> <basicHttpBinding> <binding> <security mode="TransportCredentialOnly"> <transport clientCredentialType="Basic"/> </security> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> </bindings> 2 - IIS Error: Security settings for this service require 'Anonymous' Authentication but it is not enabled for the IIS application that hosts this service. <bindings> <basicHttpBinding> <binding> <security mode="Transport"> <transport clientCredentialType="Basic"/> </security> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> </bindings> Does somebody know how to configure this correctly? (if possible?)

    Read the article

  • How to do Basic Authentication using FireWatir on Ubuntu Linux?

    - by lotharsmash
    Hi, I'm trying to use FireWatir (1.6.5) to access a site using Basic Authentication and I've been unable to find a solution that works on Firefox in Linux. Does FireWatir 1.6.5 support Basic Authentication on Linux? I've been searching the web for 2 days and can't get a straight answer anywhere as to how to do this. The only thread I found that seemed helpful was this one ( http://groups.google.com/group/watir-general/browse_thread/thread/d8ab9a177d282ce4/fc1bf2319fb387d8?lnk=gst&q=basic+authentication#fc1bf2319fb387d8). Aedorn Varanis says " Angrez's fork had the solution so I'm using that now. Thanks Angrez, works perfectly!", but he doesn't mention what he did to get things working. Initially I tried to bypass the authentication dialog box by using: browser.goto('http://admin:[email protected]') However, this generates a "Confirm" dialog which says: "You are about to log in to the site "172.20.1.1" with the username "admin"." [Cancel, OK] This dialog blocks, and the goto call won't return until I click "OK". Then I tried adding: browser.startClicker("ok") browser.goto('http://admin:[email protected]') But this ALSO generates the same "Confirm" dialog. I tested out the startClicker functionality using the unit test /var/ lib/gems/1.8/gems/firewatir-1.6.5/unittests/html/JavascriptClick.html and it worked fine, which makes me think that using the startClicker method is NOT the correct way to take care of the Confirm dialog. Anybody else found a way to get Basic Auth to work, or how to click the OK on the confirm dialog? I'm at my wits end...

    Read the article

  • How to design authentication in a thick client, to be fail safe?

    - by Jay
    Here's a use case: I have a desktop application (built using Eclipse RCP) which on start, pops open a dialog box with 'UserName' and 'Password' fields in it. Once the end user, inputs his UserName and Password, a server is contacted (a spring remote-servlet, with the client side being a spring httpclient: similar to the approaches here.), and authentication is performed on the server side. A few questions related to the above mentioned scenario: If said this authentication service were to go down, what would be the best way to handle further proceedings? Authentication is something that I cannot do away with. Would running the desktop client in a "limited" mode be a good idea? For instance, important features/menus/views will be disabled, rest of the application will be accessible? Should I have a back up authentication service running on a different machine, working as a backup? What are the general best-practices in this scenario? I remember reading about google gears and how it would let you edit and do stuff offline - should something like this be designed? Please let me know your design/architectural comments/suggestions. Appreciate your help.

    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

  • How to setup certificate authentication for MS SQL server 2008 R2 ?

    - by Stephane
    Hello, I have to connect an (ADO) application running on a standalone Windows 2003 R2 server to a SQL 2008 R2 database that is a member of the domain. I have setup an SQL authentication account for this and hard-coded the password into the connection string but I wonder if it wouldn't be possible to use certificate-based authentication for this instead. I haven't been able to find any documentation regarding this apparently new functionality of SQL 2008 R2 anywhere. Could someone kindly point me at some good documentation ? Or at least a description of the functionality and whether it could be used in my case or not ? Thank you in advance

    Read the article

  • Are there any sFTP clients that support a proxy that uses NTLM authentication?

    - by Iraklis
    The title pretty much summarizes the question. We have deployed an sFTP server that needs to be accessed from our client's MS Windows Pc's that reside within a restricted local area network. The only way they can get out for their Intranet is to use an HTTP proxy that requires NTLM authentication. From what I understand all open-source sFTP clients (FilleZilla,WinSCP,etc) do NOT support NTLM authentication (Because of legal issues). I know that there are workarounds to this (installing a local proxy at the machine that understands NTLM) but this would break all sorts of security policies of our client. So my question is : Does anyone know of any sFTP client that supports a NTLM Proxy?

    Read the article

  • Securing RDP access to Windows Server 2008 R2: is Network Level Authentication enough?

    - by jamesfm
    I am a dev with little admin expertise, administering a single dedicated web server remotely. A recent independent security audit of our site recommended that "RDP is not exposed to the Internet and that a robust management solution such as a VPN is considered for remote access. When used, RDP should be configured for Server Authentication to ensure that clients cannot be subjected to man-in-the-middle attacks." Having read around a bit, it seems like Network Level Authentication is a Good Thing so I have enabled the "Allow connections only from Remote Desktop with NLA" option on the server today. Is this acion enough to mitigate the risk of a Man-in-the-Middle attack? Or are there other essential steps I should be taking? If VPN is essential, how do I go about it?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165  | Next Page >