Search Results

Search found 12704 results on 509 pages for 'it security'.

Page 17/509 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

  • Upgrading from 12.10 to 13.04 -> dpkg: error processing sudo (--configure)

    - by Korrigan Nagirrok
    Here's the deal and reason I'm asking for your help. Last night I went on upgrading my Xubuntu 12.10 installation to 13.04, so at tty1 I run the command sudo do-release-upgrade and everything seemed to went well except that after rebooting and when I run sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade I get this error: sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring Release.gpg Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates Release.gpg Hit http://dl.google.com stable Release.gpg Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports Release.gpg Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring Release Hit http://archive.canonical.com raring Release.gpg Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net raring Release.gpg Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates Release Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com raring Release.gpg Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports Release Hit http://dl.google.com stable Release Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/main Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/restricted Sources Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com raring Release Hit http://archive.canonical.com raring Release Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net raring Release.gpg Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/universe Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/multiverse Sources Hit http://dl.google.com stable/main i386 Packages Get:1 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security Release.gpg [933 B] Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/main i386 Packages Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com raring/main Sources Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net raring Release Hit http://archive.canonical.com raring/partner i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/restricted i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/universe i386 Packages Hit http://extras.ubuntu.com raring/main i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/multiverse i386 Packages Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net raring Release Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/main Translation-en Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net raring/main Sources Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net raring/main i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/multiverse Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/restricted Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/universe Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/main Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/restricted Sources Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net raring/main Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/universe Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/multiverse Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/main i386 Packages Hit http://ppa.launchpad.net raring/main i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/restricted i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/universe i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/multiverse i386 Packages Ign http://dl.google.com stable/main Translation-en_US Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/main Translation-en Ign http://archive.canonical.com raring/partner Translation-en_US Ign http://extras.ubuntu.com raring/main Translation-en_US Ign http://dl.google.com stable/main Translation-en Ign http://archive.canonical.com raring/partner Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/multiverse Translation-en Ign http://extras.ubuntu.com raring/main Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/restricted Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/universe Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/main Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/restricted Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/universe Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/multiverse Sources Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/main i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/restricted i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/universe i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/multiverse i386 Packages Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/main Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/multiverse Translation-en Get:2 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security Release [40.8 kB] Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/restricted Translation-en Hit http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/universe Translation-en Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net raring/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net raring/main Translation-en Get:3 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/main Sources [2,109 B] Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net raring/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ppa.launchpad.net raring/main Translation-en Get:4 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/restricted Sources [14 B] Get:5 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/universe Sources [14 B] Get:6 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/multiverse Sources [14 B] Get:7 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/main i386 Packages [3,670 B] Get:8 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/restricted i386 Packages [14 B] Get:9 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/universe i386 Packages [2,824 B] Get:10 http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/multiverse i386 Packages [14 B] Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/main Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/main Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/multiverse Translation-en_US Hit http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/main Translation-en Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-updates/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/main Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/restricted Translation-en_US Hit http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/multiverse Translation-en Ign http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com raring-backports/universe Translation-en_US Hit http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/restricted Translation-en Hit http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/universe Translation-en Ign http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/main Translation-en_US Ign http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://security.ubuntu.com raring-security/universe Translation-en_US Fetched 50.4 kB in 6s (7,454 B/s) Reading package lists... Done Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. 2 not fully installed or removed. Need to get 0 B/373 kB of archives. After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue [Y/n]? Y dpkg: error processing sudo (--configure): Package is in a very bad inconsistent state - you should reinstall it before attempting configuration. No apport report written because MaxReports is reached already dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of ubuntu-minimal: ubuntu-minimal depends on sudo; however: Package sudo is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing ubuntu-minimal (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured No apport report written because MaxReports is reached already Errors were encountered while processing: sudo ubuntu-minimal E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) I've tried everything I thought logical, like sudo dpkg --configure -a dpkg: error processing sudo (--configure): Package is in a very bad inconsistent state - you should reinstall it before attempting configuration. dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of ubuntu-minimal: ubuntu-minimal depends on sudo; however: Package sudo is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing ubuntu-minimal (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: sudo ubuntu-minimal sudo apt-get install -f Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. 2 not fully installed or removed. Need to get 0 B/373 kB of archives. After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used. dpkg: error processing sudo (--configure): Package is in a very bad inconsistent state - you should reinstall it before attempting configuration. dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of ubuntu-minimal: ubuntu-minimal depends on sudo; however: Package sudo is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing ubuntu-minimal (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured No apport report written because MaxReports is reached already No apport report written because MaxReports is reached already Errors were encountered while processing: sudo ubuntu-minimal E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Can someone help me, please. Edit: Here's some more info that could be of help for anyone. The output of apt-cache policy linux-image-generic-pae linux-generic-pae is linux-image-generic-pae: Installed: (none) Candidate: 3.8.0.19.35 Version table: 3.8.0.19.35 0 500 http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ raring/main i386 Packages linux-generic-pae: Installed: (none) Candidate: 3.8.0.19.35 Version table: 3.8.0.19.35 0 500 http://pt.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ raring/main i386 Packages

    Read the article

  • Steps to take when technical staff leave

    - by Tom O'Connor
    How do you handle the departure process when privileged or technical staff resign / get fired? Do you have a checklist of things to do to ensure the continuing operation / security of the company's infrastructure? I'm trying to come up with a nice canonical list of things that my colleagues should do when I leave (I resigned a week ago, so I've got a month to tidy up and GTFO). So far I've got: Escort them off the premises Delete their email Inbox (set all mail to forward to a catch-all) Delete their SSH keys on server(s) Delete their mysql user account(s) ... So, what's next. What have I forgotten to mention, or might be similarly useful? (endnote: Why is this off-topic? I'm a systems administrator, and this concerns continuing business security, this is definitely on-topic.)

    Read the article

  • new ActiveXObject('Word.Application') creates new winword.exe process when IE security does not allo

    - by Mark Ott
    We are using MS Word as a spell checker for a few fields on a private company web site, and when IE security settings are correct it works well. (Zone for the site set to Trusted, and trusted zone modified to allow control to run without prompting.) The script we are using creates a word object and closes it afterward. While the object exists, a winword.exe process runs, but it is destroyed when the word object is closed. If our site is not set in the trusted zone (Internet zone with default security level) the call that creates the word object fails as expected, but the winword.exe process is still created. I do not have any way to interact with this process in the script, so the process stays around until the user logs off (users have no way to manually destroy the process, and it wouldn't be a good solution even if they did.) The call that attempts to create the object is... try { oWordApplication = new ActiveXObject('Word.Application'); } catch(error) { // irrelevant code removed, described in comments.. // notify user spell check cannot be used // disable spell check option } So every time the page is loaded this code may be run again, creating yet another orphan winword.exe process. oWordApplication is, of course, undefined in the catch block. I would like to be able to detect the browser security settings beforehand, but I have done some searching on this and do not think that it is possible. Management here is happy with it as it is. As long as IE security is set correctly it works, and it works well for our purposes. (We may eventually look at other options for spell check functionality, but this was quick, inexpensive, and does everything we need it to do.) This last problem bugs me and I'd like to do something about it, but I'm out of ideas and I have other things that are more in need of my attention. Before I put it aside, I thought I'd ask for suggestions here...

    Read the article

  • Understanding LinkDemand Security on a webserver

    - by robertpnl
    Hi, After deployment an ASP.Net application on a webserver, I get this error message by using code from a external assembly: "LinkDemand The type of the first permission that failed was: System.Security.PermissionSet The Zone of the assembly that failed was: MyComputer the error ". The assembly is include in the \bin folder and not in the GAC. I try to know what linkdemand exactly is and why this message will raised. But looking for more information, I don't get exactly the problem. I try also to add the PermissionSetAttribute on the class where the exception message happens: [System.Security.Permissions.PermissionSetAttribute(System.Security.Permissions.SecurityAction.LinkDemand, Name = "FullTrust")] Then the exception will be raised on another class of the assembly. And so on.. My questions ares: - what exactly is going wrong here? Is it true that I understand that .Net cannot check the code during Jit? - Is there maybe a security policy that block this (machine.config)? - Can I set the PermissionAttribute for all classes between a assembly? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Spring HandlerInterceptor or Spring Security to protect resource

    - by richever
    I've got a basic Spring Security 3 set up using my own login page. My configuration is below. I have the login and sign up page accessible to all as well as most everything else. I'm new to Spring Security and understand that if a user is trying to access a protected resource they will be taken to the defined login page. And upon successful login they are taken to some other page, home in my case. I want to keep the latter behavior; however, I'd like specify that if a user tries to access certain resources they are taken to the sign up page, not the login page. Currently, in my annotated controllers I check the security context to see if the user is logged in and if not I redirect them to the sign up page. I only do this currently with two urls and no others. This seemed redundant so I tried creating a HandlerInterceptor to redirect for these requests but realized that with annotations, you can't specify specific requests to be handled - they all are. So I'm wondering if there is some way to implement this type of specific url handling in Spring Security, or is going the HandlerInterceptor route my only option? Thanks! <http auto-config="true" use-expressions="true"> <intercept-url pattern="/login*" access="permitAll"/> <intercept-url pattern="/signup*" access="permitAll"/> <intercept-url pattern="/static/**" filters="none" /> <intercept-url pattern="/" access="permitAll"/> <form-login login-page="/login" default-target-url="/home"/> <logout logout-success-url="/home"/> <anonymous/> <remember-me/> </http>

    Read the article

  • Spring Security 3.0 - Intercept-URL - All pages require authentication but one

    - by gav
    Hi All, I want any user to be able to submit their name to a volunteer form but only administrators to be able to view any other URL. Unfortunately I don't seem to be able to get this correct. My resources.xml are as follows; <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <beans:beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/security" xmlns:beans="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-3.0.xsd http://www.springframework.org/schema/security http://www.springframework.org/schema/security/spring-security-3.0.xsd"> <http realm = "BumBumTrain Personnel list requires you to login" auto-config="true" use-expressions="true"> <http-basic/> <intercept-url pattern="/person/volunteer*" access=""/> <intercept-url pattern="/**" access="isAuthenticated()" /> </http> <authentication-manager alias="authenticationManager"> <authentication-provider> <user-service> <user name="admin" password="admin" authorities="ROLE_ADMIN"/> </user-service> </authentication-provider> </authentication-manager> </beans:beans> Specifically I am trying to achieve the access settings I described via; <intercept-url pattern="/person/volunteer*" access=""/> <intercept-url pattern="/**" access="isAuthenticated()" /> Could someone please describe how to use intercept-url to achieve the outcome I've described? Thanks Gav

    Read the article

  • CakePHP 1.26: Bug in 'Security' component?

    - by Steve
    Okay, for those of you who may have read this earlier, I've done a little research and completely revamped my question. I've been having a problem where my form requests get blackholed by the Security component, although everything works fine when the Security component is disabled. I've traced it down to a single line in a form: <?php echo $form->create('Audition');?> <fieldset> <legend><?php __('Edit Audition');?></legend> <?php echo $form->input('ensemble'); echo $form->input('position'); echo $form->input('aud_date'); // The following line works fine... echo $form->input('owner'); // ...but the following line blackholes when Security included // and the form is submitted: // echo $form->input('owner', array('disabled'=>'disabled'); ?> </fieldset> <?php echo $form->end('Submit');?> (I've commented out the offending line for clarity) I think I'm following the rules by using the form helper; as far as I can tell, this is a bug in the Security component, but I'm too much of a CakePHP n00b to know for sure. I'd love to get some feedback, and if it's a real bug, I'll submit it to the CakePHP team. I'd also love to know if I'm just being dumb and missing something obvious here.

    Read the article

  • SOAP security in Salesforce

    - by Dean Barnes
    I am trying to change the wsdl2apex code for a web service call header that currently looks like this: <env:Header> <Security xmlns="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/oasis-wss-wssecurity-secext-1.1.xsd"> <UsernameToken Id="UsernameToken-4"> <Username>test</Username> <Password>test</Password> </UsernameToken> </Security> </env:Header> to look like this: <soapenv:Header> <wsse:Security xmlns:wsse="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-secext-1.0.xsd"> <wsse:UsernameToken wsu:Id="UsernameToken-4" xmlns:wsu="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-utility-1.0.xsd"> <wsse:Username>Test</wsse:Username> <wsse:Password Type="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-username-token-profile-1.0#PasswordText">Test</wsse:Password> </wsse:UsernameToken> </wsse:Security> </soapenv:Header> One problem is that I can't work out how to change the namespaces for elements (or even if it matters what name they have). A secondary problem is putting the Type attribute onto the Password element. Can any provide any information that might help? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Automatically check for Security Updates on CentOS or Scientific Linux?

    - by Stefan Lasiewski
    We have machines running RedHat-based distros such as CentOS or Scientific Linux. We want the systems to automatically notify us if there are any known vulnerabilities to the installed packages. FreeBSD does this with the ports-mgmt/portaudit port. RedHat provides yum-plugin-security, which can check for vulnerabilities by their Bugzilla ID, CVE ID or advisory ID. In addition, Fedora recently started to support yum-plugin-security. I believe this was added in Fedora 16. Scientific Linux 6 did not support yum-plugin-security as of late 2011. It does ship with /etc/cron.daily/yum-autoupdate, which updates RPMs daily. I don't think this handles Security Updates only, however. CentOS does not support yum-plugin-security. I monitor the CentOS and Scientific Linux mailinglists for updates, but this is tedious and I want something which can be automated. For those of us who maintain CentOS and SL systems, are there any tools which can: Automatically (Progamatically, via cron) inform us if there are known vulnerabilities with my current RPMs. Optionally, automatically install the minimum upgrade required to address a security vulnerability, which would probably be yum update-minimal --security on the commandline? I have considered using yum-plugin-changelog to print out the changelog for each package, and then parse the output for certain strings. Are there any tools which do this already?

    Read the article

  • java.security.AccessControlException: access denied using Java Web Start

    - by killiancomputers
    I am having some issues with accessing files using JWS (Java Web Start). The program adds a new label and image. The program runs fine on my local computer but gives me pages of errors when I run the program on my remote server using JWS. Here's a sample of the error: Exception in thread "AWT-EventQueue-0" java.security.AccessControlException: access denied (java.io.FilePermission add2.png read) at java.security.AccessControlContext.checkPermission(Unknown Source) at java.security.AccessController.checkPermission(Unknown Source) at java.lang.SecurityManager.checkPermission(Unknown Source) This occurs even after making sure the images have read access. Ideas?

    Read the article

  • problem with overriding autologin in spring security?

    - by sword101
    greetings everybody iam using spring security 3 remember me service as follows <http> <remember-me/> ....</http> and i want to perform some logic in the autologin so i tried to override the AbstractRememberMeServices as follows: package com.foo; import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest; import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletResponse; import org.springframework.security.core.Authentication; import org.springframework.security.web.authentication.RememberMeServices; public abstract class AbstractRememberMeServices implements RememberMeServices{ @Override public Authentication autoLogin(HttpServletRequest arg0, HttpServletResponse arg1) { System.out.println("Auto Login"); return null; } @Override public void loginSuccess(HttpServletRequest arg0, HttpServletResponse arg1, Authentication arg2) { System.out.println("Login Success"); } } but the autologin occurs with no action,the user auto login but the print statement is not printed? what's wrong?

    Read the article

  • .NET Code Access Security: Useful or just overcomplicated?

    - by routeNpingme
    see also Is “Code Access Security” of any real world use? I want to get some other opinions on this... I like the idea of Code Access Security for desktop applications. But in the lifetime of .NET I have to admit I've never actually had a situation where CAS has actually blocked something to my benefit. I have, however, had many times where something as simple as sharing a quick .NET application across a mapped drive becomes an enterprise code access nightmare. Having to break out caspol.exe to create trusted path rules and having no clear way of knowing why something failed makes it seem like CAS adds way more frustration to the development and deployment process than it offers in security. I'd like to hear either some situations where CAS has actually helped more than hurt, or if there are other people out there frustrated with its current implementation and defaults.

    Read the article

  • "java.security.AccessControlException: access denied" executing a signet Java Applet

    - by logoff
    I have a little Java Applet and I have an annoying issue. I have signed my JAR with my own keystore using jarsigner tool (following these instructions). The Java Applet downloads a signed JAR and tries to launch it with an extended class of URLClassLoader. This JAR tries to execute this line of code: ClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader().getResource("aResource"); It fails with a large stack trace finished by: Caused by: java.security.AccessControlException: access denied ("java.lang.RuntimePermission" "getClassLoader") at java.security.AccessControlContext.checkPermission(AccessControlContext.java:366) at java.security.AccessController.checkPermission(AccessController.java:555) at java.lang.SecurityManager.checkPermission(SecurityManager.java:549) at java.lang.Thread.getContextClassLoader(Thread.java:1451) ... 21 more When the Java Applet is launched, the user is prompted to accept the certificate if he/she trusts the publisher: Even if I accept it, the exception occurred. Even if I install the certificate, and the prompt message is automatically accepted, the exception occurred. Any help would be appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Certificate Information from WCF Service using Transport security mode

    - by Langdon
    Is there any way to pull information about which client certificate was used inside of my web service method when using <security mode="Transport>? I sifted through OperationContext.Current but couldn't find anything obvious. My server configuration is as follows: <basicHttpBinding> <binding name="SecuredBasicBindingCert"> <security mode="Transport"> <message clientCredentialType="Certificate" /> </security> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> I'm working with a third party pub/sub system who is unfortunately using DataPower for authentication. It seems like if I'm using WCF with this configuration, then I'm unable to glean any information about the caller (since no credentials are actually sent). I somehow need to be able to figure out whose making calls to my service without changing my configuration or asking them to change their payload.

    Read the article

  • Careers in Computer Security? [closed]

    - by Joey Green
    I have the opportunity to go back for MSCS and the closest college's main research is in computer security and forensics. I've always been interested in computer networks and security but I have no interest whatsoever to run cables or add users to the network( which is what the network people do where I currently work ). I wanted to know how may I find out the types of day to day task a computer security expert does? I don't mean the jobs you find on dice or indeed. I'm talking about the type of careers that start out at the NSA or DIA. Also, I'm wondering what the pay is like for these types of fields? Thanks to all that reply.

    Read the article

  • security roles in grails portlets

    - by srinath
    Hi, How to include security roles in grails portlets for liferay ? After deploying war in tomcat i added manually these lines for roles liferay-portlet.xml : <role-mapper> <role-name>administrator</role-name> <role-link>Administrator</role-link> </role-mapper> portlet.xml : <security-role-ref> <role-name>administrator</role-name> </security-role-ref> But How to add these roles settings in grails app before creating war ?? Please suggest me . thanks in advance sri..

    Read the article

  • Why don't stacks grow upwards (for security)?

    - by AshleysBrain
    This is related to the question 'Why do stacks typically grow downwards?', but more from a security point of view. I'm generally referring to x86. It strikes me as odd that the stack would grow downwards, when buffers are usually written to upwards in memory. For example a typical C++ string has its end at a higher memory address than the beginning. This means that if there's a buffer overflow you're overwriting further up the call stack, which I understand is a security risk, since it opens the possibility of changing return addresses and local variable contents. If the stack grew upwards in memory, wouldn't buffer overflows simply run in to dead memory? Would this improve security? If so, why hasn't it been done? What about x64, do those stacks grow upwards and if not why not?

    Read the article

  • Historical security flaws of popular PHP CMS's?

    - by VirtuosiMedia
    I'm creating a PHP CMS, one that I hope will be used by the public. Security is a major concern and I'd like to learn from some of the popular PHP CMS's like Wordpress, Joomla, Drupal, etc. What are some security flaws or vulnerabilities that they have they had in the past that I can avoid in my application and what strategies can I use to avoid them? What are other issues that I need to be concerned with that they perhaps didn't face as a vulnerability because they handled it correctly from the start? What additional security features or measures would you include? Please be as specific as possible. I'm generally aware of most of the usual attack vectors, but I want to make sure that all the bases are covered, so don't be afraid to mention the obvious as well. Assume PHP 5.2+.

    Read the article

  • Spring-Security http-basic auth in addition to other authentication types

    - by Keith
    I have a pretty standard existing webapp using spring security that requires a database-backed form login for user-specific paths (such as /user/**), and some completely open and public paths (such as /index.html). However, as this webapp is still under development, I'd like to add a http-basic popup across all paths (/**) to add some privacy. Therefore, I'm trying to add a http-basic popup that asks for a universal user/pass combo (ex admin/foo) that would be required to view any path, but then still keep intact all of the other underlying authentication mechanisms. I can't really do anything with the <http> tag, since that will confuse the "keep out the nosy crawlers" authentication with the "user login" authentication, and I'm not seeing any way to associate different paths with different authentication mechanisms. Is there some way to do this with spring security? Alternatively, is there some kind of a dead simple filter that I can apply independently of spring-security's authentication mechanisms?

    Read the article

  • Server-side application configuration security. Best practices

    - by Andrew Florko
    We publish server-side application to our customer workstation and customer's security guys are concerned about configuration connection strings safety. Connection strings are stored as plain text right now, but as configuration file is not in the public/shared folder we supposed that workstation security itself is enough. What are the ways to improve connection strings security further? It is a big step forward to encrypt password and keep a decryption key on the same workstation? What are the steps we can take to keep connection strings (and alike) information more and more securable? Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • Is Cloud Security Holding Back Social SaaS?

    - by Mike Stiles
    The true promise of social data co-mingling with enterprise data to influence and inform social marketing (all marketing really) lives in cloud computing. The cloud brings processing power, services, speed and cost savings the likes of which few organizations could ever put into action on their own. So why wouldn’t anyone jump into SaaS (Software as a Service) with both feet? Cloud security. Being concerned about security is proper and healthy. That just means you’re a responsible operator. Whether it’s protecting your customers’ data or trying to stay off the radar of regulatory agencies, you have plenty of reasons to make sure you’re as protected from hacking, theft and loss as you can possibly be. But you also have plenty of reasons to not let security concerns freeze you in your tracks, preventing you from innovating, moving the socially-enabled enterprise forward, and keeping up with competitors who may not be as skittish regarding SaaS technology adoption. Over half of organizations are transferring sensitive or confidential data to the cloud, an increase of 10% over last year. With the roles and responsibilities of CMO’s, CIO’s and other C’s changing, the first thing you should probably determine is who should take point on analyzing cloud software options, providers, and policies. An oft-quoted Ponemon Institute study found 36% of businesses don’t have a cloud security policy at all. So that’s as good a place to start as any. What applications and data are you comfortable housing in the cloud? Do you have a classification system for data that clearly spells out where data types can go and how they can be used? Who, both internally and at the cloud provider, will function as admins? What are the different levels of admin clearance? Will your security policies and procedures sync up with those of your cloud provider? The key is verifiable trust. Trust in cloud security is actually going up. 1/3 of organizations polled say it’s the cloud provider who should be responsible for data protection. And when you look specifically at SaaS providers, that expectation goes up to 60%. 57% “strongly agree” or “agree” there’s more confidence in cloud providers’ ability to protect data. In fact, some businesses bypass the “verifiable” part of verifiable trust. Just over half have no idea what their cloud provider does to protect data. And yet, according to the “Private Cloud Vision vs. Reality” InformationWeek Report, 82% of organizations say security/data privacy are one of the main reasons they’re still holding the public cloud at arm’s length. That’s going to be a tough position to maintain, because just as social is rapidly changing the face of marketing, big data is rapidly changing the face of enterprise IT. Netflix, who’s particularly big on the benefits of the cloud, says, "We're systematically disassembling the corporate IT components." An enterprise can never realize the full power of big data, nor get the full potential value out of it, if it’s unwilling to enable the integrations and dataset connections necessary in the cloud. Because integration is called for to reduce fragmentation, a standardized platform makes a lot of sense. With multiple components crafted to work together, you’re maximizing scalability, optimization, cost effectiveness, and yes security and identity management benefits. You can see how the incentive is there for cloud companies to develop and add ever-improving security features, making cloud computing an eventual far safer bet than traditional IT. @mikestilesPhoto: stock.xchng

    Read the article

  • Code Access Security and Sharepoint WebParts

    - by Gordon Carpenter-Thompson
    I've got a vague handle on how Code Access Security works in Sharepoint. I have developed a custom webpart and setup a CAS policy in my Manifest <CodeAccessSecurity> <PolicyItem> <PermissionSet class="NamedPermissionSet" version="1" Description="Permission set for Okana"> <IPermission class="Microsoft.SharePoint.Security.SharePointPermission, Microsoft.SharePoint.Security, Version=12.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=71e9bce111e9429c" version="1" ObjectModel="True" Impersonate="True" /> <IPermission class="SecurityPermission" version="1" Flags="Assertion, Execution, ControlThread, ControlPrincipal, RemotingConfiguration" /> <IPermission class="AspNetHostingPermission" version="1" Level="Medium" /> <IPermission class="DnsPermission" version="1" Unrestricted="true" /> <IPermission class="EventLogPermission" version="1" Unrestricted="true"> <Machine name="localhost" access="Administer" /> </IPermission> <IPermission class="EnvironmentPermission" version="1" Unrestricted="true" /> <IPermission class="System.Configuration.ConfigurationPermission, System.Configuration, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a" version="1" Unrestricted="true"/> <IPermission class="System.Net.WebPermission, System, Version=1.0.5000.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" version="1" Unrestricted="true" /> <IPermission class="System.Net.WebPermission, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" Unrestricted="true" /> <IPermission class="System.Security.Permissions.FileIOPermission, mscorlib, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089" version="1" Unrestricted="true" PathDiscovery="*AllFiles*" /> <IPermission class="IsolatedStorageFilePermission" version="1" Allowed="AssemblyIsolationByUser" UserQuota="9223372036854775807" /> <IPermission class="PrintingPermission" version="1" Level="DefaultPrinting" /> <IPermission class="PerformanceCounterPermission" version="1"> <Machine name="localhost"> <Category name="Enterprise Library Caching Counters" access="Write"/> <Category name="Enterprise Library Cryptography Counters" access="Write"/> <Category name="Enterprise Library Data Counters" access="Write"/> <Category name="Enterprise Library Exception Handling Counters" access="Write"/> <Category name="Enterprise Library Logging Counters" access="Write"/> <Category name="Enterprise Library Security Counters" access="Write"/> </Machine> </IPermission> <IPermission class="ReflectionPermission" version="1" Unrestricted="true"/> <IPermission class="SecurityPermission" version="1" Flags="SerializationFormatter, UnmanagedCode, Infrastructure, Assertion, Execution, ControlThread, ControlPrincipal, RemotingConfiguration, ControlAppDomain,ControlDomainPolicy" /> <IPermission class="SharePointPermission" version="1" ObjectModel="True" /> <IPermission class="SmtpPermission" version="1" Access="Connect" /> <IPermission class="SqlClientPermission" version="1" Unrestricted="true"/> <IPermission class="WebPartPermission" version="1" Connections="True" /> <IPermission class="WebPermission" version="1"> <ConnectAccess> <URI uri="$OriginHost$"/> </ConnectAccess> </IPermission> </PermissionSet> <Assemblies> .... </Assemblies> This is correctly converted into a wss_custom_wss_minimaltrust.config when it is deployed onto the Sharepoint server and mostly works. To get the WebPart working fully, however I find that I need to modify the wss_custom_wss_minimaltrust.config by hand after deployment and set Unrestricted="true" on the permissions set <PermissionSet class="NamedPermissionSet" version="1" Description="Permission set for MyApp" Name="mywebparts.wsp-86d8cae1-7db2-4057-8c17-dc551adb17a2-1"> to <PermissionSet class="NamedPermissionSet" version="1" Description="Permission set for MyApp" Name="mywebparts.wsp-86d8cae1-7db2-4057-8c17-dc551adb17a2-1" Unrestricted="true"> It's all because I'm loading a User Control from the webpart. I don't believe there is a way to enable that using CAS but am willing to be proven wrong. Is there a way to set something in the manifest so I don't need to make this fix by hand? Thanks

    Read the article

  • repeated failing passwords in linux security log (/var/log/secure)

    - by wallyk
    Recently, I opened up the SSH port through my firewalls (and redirecting to my server) so I could check on the (http) server while on the road. The first week or two there was nothing different. But now, three or four weeks later, I see lots of this: Mar 20 08:38:28 localhost sshd[21895]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=mail.queued.net user=root Mar 20 08:38:31 localhost sshd[21895]: Failed password for root from 207.210.101.209 port 2854 ssh2 Mar 20 15:38:31 localhost sshd[21896]: Received disconnect from 207.210.101.209: 11: Bye Bye Mar 20 08:38:32 localhost unix_chkpwd[21900]: password check failed for user (root) Mar 20 08:38:32 localhost sshd[21898]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=mail.queued.net user=root Mar 20 08:38:34 localhost sshd[21898]: Failed password for root from 207.210.101.209 port 3729 ssh2 Mar 20 15:38:35 localhost sshd[21899]: Received disconnect from 207.210.101.209: 11: Bye Bye Mar 20 08:38:36 localhost unix_chkpwd[21903]: password check failed for user (root) Mar 20 08:38:36 localhost sshd[21901]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=mail.queued.net user=root Mar 20 08:38:38 localhost sshd[21901]: Failed password for root from 207.210.101.209 port 4313 ssh2 Mar 20 15:38:38 localhost sshd[21902]: Received disconnect from 207.210.101.209: 11: Bye Bye Mar 20 08:38:40 localhost unix_chkpwd[21906]: password check failed for user (root) Mar 20 08:38:40 localhost sshd[21904]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=mail.queued.net user=root Mar 20 08:38:42 localhost sshd[21904]: Failed password for root from 207.210.101.209 port 4869 ssh2 Mar 20 15:38:43 localhost sshd[21905]: Received disconnect from 207.210.101.209: 11: Bye Bye Mar 20 08:38:44 localhost unix_chkpwd[21909]: password check failed for user (root) Mar 20 08:38:44 localhost sshd[21907]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): authentication failure; logname= uid=0 euid=0 tty=ssh ruser= rhost=mail.queued.net user=root Mar 20 08:38:46 localhost sshd[21907]: Failed password for root from 207.210.101.209 port 2512 ssh2 Mar 20 15:38:47 localhost sshd[21908]: Received disconnect from 207.210.101.209: 11: Bye Bye Mar 20 15:38:57 localhost sshd[21912]: Connection closed by 207.210.101.209 There are about 1100 lines of these for March 20th, zero for the 19th, and 800 or so for the 18th—all related to the same IP. What does it mean? What should I do? Why isn't it chronological?

    Read the article

  • Server Security

    - by mahatmanich
    I want to run my own root server (directly accessible from the web without a hardware firewall) with debian lenny, apache2, php5, mysql, postfix MTA, sftp (based on ssh) and maybe dns server. What measures/software would you recomend, and why, to secure this server down and minimalize the attack vector? Webapplications aside ... This is what I have so far: iptables (for gen. packet filtering) fail2ban (brute force attack defense) ssh (chang default, port disable root access) modsecurity - is really clumsy and a pain (any alternative here?) ?Sudo why should I use it? what is the advantage to normal user handling thinking about greensql for mysql www.greensql.net is tripwire worth looking at? snort? What am I missing? What is hot and what is not? Best practices? I like "KISS" - Keep it simple secure, I know it would be nice! Thanks in advance ...

    Read the article

  • Linux Debian Security Breach - what now? [closed]

    - by user897075
    Possible Duplicate: My server's been hacked EMERGENCY I installed Debian (Squeeze) a while back in my home network to host some personal sites (thank god). During the installation it prompted me to enter a user other than root - so in a rush I used my name as user and pass (alex/alex for what its worth). I know it's horrible practice but during the setup of this server I'm always logged in as root to perform configurations, etc. Few days or a week passes and I forget to change the password. Then I finally get my web site finished and I open the port forwarding on my router and DynDNS to point to my server in my home. I've done this many times in the past never had issues but I use a cryptic root password and I guess disabled regular accounts. Today I reformat my Windows 7 and after spending all day tweaking and updating SP1 I look for cloning apps and find clonezilla and see it supports SSH cloning, so I go through the process only to discover I need a user, so I log into my web-server and see I have the user 'alex' already in and realize I don't know the password. So I change the password to something cryptic and visit the directory 'home' only to realize their are contents such as passfile, bengos, etc. My heart sinks, I've been hacked!!! Sure as hell there are all sort of scripts and password files. I run a 'last' command and it seems they last logged in april 3rd. Question: What can I do to see if they did anything destructive? Should I reformat and reinstall? How restrictive is Debian/Squeeze in terms of user permissions out of the box - all my personal website stuff was created using 'root' so changing files does not seem to have occured. How did they determine there was a user 'alex' on the machine? Can you query any machine and figure this out? What the users are? Looks like they tried to run a IP scan...other nodes on the network are running Windows 7. One of which seems a little wonky as of late - is it possible they buggered up that system? What corrective action can I take to avoid this from happening again? And figure out what might have changed or been hacked? I'm hoping debian out of box is fairly secure and at best he managed to read some of my source code. :p Regards, Alex

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >