Search Results

Search found 21719 results on 869 pages for 'password security'.

Page 180/869 | < Previous Page | 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187  | Next Page >

  • Remove identifying information from SSH.

    - by The Rook
    When I do an nmap -sV 127.0.0.1 -p 22 of my system I get the following information: SF-Port22-TCP:V=4.62%I=7%D=11/9%Time=4916402C%P=i686-pc-linux-gnu%r(NULL,2 SF:7,"SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_5.1p1\x20Debian-3ubuntu1\r\n"); How do I go about chaining these two pieces of information? i686-pc-linux-gnu and SSH-2\.0-OpenSSH_5\.1p1\x20Debian-3ubuntu1.

    Read the article

  • TeamViewer - only allow domain logins

    - by BloodyIron
    I recently started a Systems Admin job where teamviewer is used pretty frequently here. Another admin recently left, and the concern is they still have access to all our systems due to how teamviewer works. I want to migrate the entire environment to domain authentication. The documentation shows that setting up windows auth (domain) is easy, but I want to be sure that it is the only way to be authenticated with a teamviewer session here. I cannot yet find anything which explicitly says this. We have licensing for teamviewer 5 and 6, I think. Right now we have 7 in the environment, but I think most are in a trial version, so I am likely to revert to 5 or 6.

    Read the article

  • Can a malicious hacker share Linux distributions which trust bad root certificates?

    - by iamrohitbanga
    Suppose a hacker launches a new Linux distro with firefox provided with it. Now a browser contains the certificates of the root certification authorities of PKI. Because firefox is a free browser anyone can package it with fake root certificates. Thus a fake root certificate would contain a the certification authority that is not actually certified. Can this be used to authenticate some websites. How? Many existing linux distros are mirrored by people. They can easily package software containing certificates that can lead to such attacks. Is the above possible? Has such an attack taken place before?

    Read the article

  • Using the right folder for the right job. Article link, please?

    - by Droogans
    There are specific folders designed for specific tasks. /var/www holds your web sites, /usr/bin contains files to run your applications...yet I still find myself putting nearly all of my work in ~. Is it possible to overuse my home directory? Will it come back to haunt me? Anyone have a good link to an article of best practices for organizing your files so that they are placed in their "correct" place? Is there even such a thing in Linux? I am referring specifically to user-generated content. I do not compile applications from source, I use apt-get for those tasks. This article has a great introduction to what I'm looking for. Table 3-2, "Subdirectories of the root directory" is the sort of thing I'm looking for, but with more details/examples.

    Read the article

  • Network tools not working with a 3G connection

    - by gAMBOOKa
    Some of my network tools stopped working after I switched to a 3G connection from a DSL one. Cain and Abel's sniffer, Metasploit, even the NMAP scanner. I'm using Windows 7. The 3G device in question is the Huawei E180. Here's the error I get when running NMAP WARNING: Using raw sockets because ppp2 is not an ethernet device. This probably won't work on Windows. pcap_open_live(ppp2, 100, 0, 2) FAILED. Reported error: Error opening adapter: The system cannot find the device specified. (20). Will wait 5 seconds then retry. pcap_open_live(ppp2, 100, 0, 2) FAILED. Reported error: Error opening adapter: The system cannot find the device specified. (20). Will wait 25 seconds then retry. Call to pcap_open_live(ppp2, 100, 0, 2) failed three times. Reported error: Error opening adapter: The system cannot find the device specified. (20) Metasploit's refused connection to my websites too.

    Read the article

  • How do I securely execute commands as root via a web control panel?

    - by Chris J
    I would like to build a very simple PHP based web based control panel to add and remove users to/from and add and remove sections to/from nginx config files on my linode vps (Ubuntu 8.04 LTS). What is the most secure way of executing commands as root based on input from a web based control panel? I am loathe to run PHP as root (even if behind an IP tables firewall) for the obvious reasons. Suggestions welcome. It must be possible as several commercial (and bloated, for my needs) control panels offer similar functionality. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Creating limited user account on Windows 7

    - by serena
    I'm sharing my PC (Win 7 x64 Home Premium) with a friend, and I wanna create a guest user for her. I don't want her to reach my files, Windows settings, program adjustments etc. She should just surf the net, create/edit her own Word, Excel documents, and simple things like these. How can I create this user account and make the necessary arrangements for limitations?

    Read the article

  • Webserver logs: "Morfeus Fucking Scanner"

    - by Patrick
    I've just found these accesses in my web server log files: ::ffff:218.38.136.38 109.72.95.175 - [10/Jan/2011:02:54:12 +0100] "GET /user/soapCaller.bs HTTP/1.1" 404 345 "-" "Morfeus Fucking Scanner" ::ffff:218.38.136.38 109.72.95.174 - [10/Jan/2011:02:54:12 +0100] "GET /user/soapCaller.bs HTTP/1.1" 404 345 "-" "Morfeus Fucking Scanner" Should I start to worry ? Or is it just a normal attempt to hack my server ? thanks

    Read the article

  • Blocking IP Range in .htaccess Problem

    - by Pedro
    Hi, I'm trying to block the access of one of my webapps using IP Filter in the .htaccess, the problem is that after updating the file with: order allow,deny deny from 58.14.0.0/15 allow from all I get the folowing error: Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request. Please contact the server administrator, [email protected] and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error. More information about this error may be available in the server error log. What is wrong? Regards, Pedro

    Read the article

  • How to disable mod_security2 rule (false positive) for one domain on centos 5

    - by nicholas.alipaz
    Hi I have mod_security enabled on a centos5 server and one of the rules is keeping a user from posting some text on a form. The text is legitimate but it has the words 'create' and an html <table> tag later in it so it is causing a false positive. The error I am receiving is below: [Sun Apr 25 20:36:53 2010] [error] [client 76.171.171.xxx] ModSecurity: Access denied with code 500 (phase 2). Pattern match "((alter|create|drop)[[:space:]]+(column|database|procedure|table)|delete[[:space:]]+from|update.+set.+=)" at ARGS:body. [file "/usr/local/apache/conf/modsec2.user.conf"] [line "352"] [id "300015"] [rev "1"] [msg "Generic SQL injection protection"] [severity "CRITICAL"] [hostname "www.mysite.com"] [uri "/node/181/edit"] [unique_id "@TaVDEWnlusAABQv9@oAAAAD"] and here is /usr/local/apache/conf/modsec2.user.conf (line 352) #Generic SQL sigs SecRule ARGS "((alter|create|drop)[[:space:]]+(column|database|procedure|table)|delete[[:space:]]+from|update.+set.+=)" "id:1,rev:1,severity:2,msg:'Generic SQL injection protection'" The questions I have are: What should I do to "whitelist" or allow this rule to get through? What file do I create and where? How should I alter this rule? Can I set it to only be allowed for the one domain, since it is the only one having the issue on this dedicated server or is there a better way to exclude table tags perhaps? Thanks guys

    Read the article

  • allowing index access only with .htaccess

    - by YsoL8
    Hello I have this in my .htaccess file, in the site root: Options -Indexes <directory ../.*> Deny from all </directory> <Files .htaccess> order allow,deny deny from all </Files> <Files index.php> Order allow,deny allow from all </Files> What I'm trying to achieve is to block folder and file access to anything that isn't called index.php, regardless of which directory is accessed. I have the folder part working perfectly and the deny from all rule is working as well - but my attempt to allow access to index.php is failing. Basically could someone tell me how to get it working?

    Read the article

  • How secure are third party Ubuntu (APT) repository mirrors

    - by bakytn
    Hello! We have locally an Ubuntu mirrors to save a lot of traffic (our external traffic is not free) So whenever I apt-get install "program" it gets from that repository. the question is...basically they can substitute any package with their own? So it's 100% on my own risk and I can be hacked easily on any apt-get upgrade or a-g install or a-g dist-upgrade? for example the very basic ones like "telnet" or any other.

    Read the article

  • allowing index access only with .htaccess

    - by YsoL8
    Hello I have this in my .htaccess file, in the site root: Options -Indexes <directory ../.*> Deny from all </directory> <Files .htaccess> order allow,deny deny from all </Files> <Files index.php> Order allow,deny allow from all </Files> What I'm trying to achieve is to block folder and file access to anything that isn't called index.php, regardless of which directory is accessed. I have the folder part working perfectly and the deny from all rule is working as well - but my attempt to allow access to index.php is failing. Basically could someone tell me how to get it working?

    Read the article

  • Disable mod_security on Dreamhost, for a single cgi script

    - by Hippyjim
    Hi I've searched around a lot, and tried various tweaks to .htaccess files to try to turn off mod_security for a particular cgi script (uber uploader) but it doesn't seem to have any effect. The most popular one I see rehashed all over the web is: # Turn off mod_security filtering. SecFilterEngine Off # The below probably isn't needed, # but better safe than sorry. SecFilterScanPOST Off Which looks relative simple to me - if "SecFilterEngine" is in some way related to mod_security of course. Shame it has absolutely no effect! Does anyone have a suggested way I can simply disable it for a request to any file in my cgi-bin directory?

    Read the article

  • Real benefits of tcp TIME-WAIT and implications in production environment

    - by user64204
    SOME THEORY I've been doing some reading on tcp TIME-WAIT (here and there) and what I read is that it's a value set to 2 x MSL (maximum segment life) which keeps a connection in the "connection table" for a while to guarantee that, "before your allowed to create a connection with the same tuple, all the packets belonging to previous incarnations of that tuple will be dead". Since segments received (apart from SYN under specific circumstances) while a connection is either in TIME-WAIT or no longer existing would be discarded, why not close the connection right away? Q1: Is it because there is less processing involved in dealing with segments from old connections and less processing to create a new connection on the same tuple when in TIME-WAIT (i.e. are there performance benefits)? If the above explanation doesn't stand, the only reason I see the TIME-WAIT being useful would be if a client sends a SYN for a connection before it sends remaining segments for an old connection on the same tuple in which case the receiver would re-open the connection but then get bad segments and and would have to terminate it. Q2: Is this analysis correct? Q3: Are there other benefits to using TIME-WAIT? SOME PRACTICE I've been looking at the munin graphs on a production server that I administrate. Here is one: As you can see there are more connections in TIME-WAIT than ESTABLISHED, around twice as many most of the time, on some occasions four times as many. Q4: Does this have an impact on performance? Q5: If so, is it wise/recommended to reduce the TIME-WAIT value (and what to)? Q6: Is this ratio of TIME-WAIT / ESTABLISHED connections normal? Could this be related to malicious connection attempts?

    Read the article

  • Does ModSecurity 2.7.1 work with ASP.NET MVC 3?

    - by autonomatt
    I'm trying to get ModSecurity 2.7.1 to work with an ASP.NET MVC 3 website. The installation ran without errors and looking at the event log, ModSecurity is starting up successfully. I am using the modsecurity.conf-recommended file to set the basic rules. The problem I'm having is that whenever I am POSTing some form data, it doesn't get through to the controller action (or model binder). I have SecRuleEngine set to DetectionOnly. I have SecRequestBodyAccess set to On. With these settings, the body of the POST never reaches the controller action. If I set SecRequestBodyAccess to Off it works, so it's definitely something to do with how ModSecurity forwards the body data. The ModSecurity debug shows the following (looks to me as if all passed through): Second phase starting (dcfg 94b750). Input filter: Reading request body. Adding request argument (BODY): name "[0].IsSelected", value "on" Adding request argument (BODY): name "[0].Quantity", value "1" Adding request argument (BODY): name "[0].VariantSku", value "047861" Adding request argument (BODY): name "[1].Quantity", value "0" Adding request argument (BODY): name "[1].VariantSku", value "047862" Input filter: Completed receiving request body (length 115). Starting phase REQUEST_BODY. Recipe: Invoking rule 94c620; [file "*********************"] [line "54"] [id "200001"]. Rule 94c620: SecRule "REQBODY_ERROR" "!@eq 0" "phase:2,auditlog,id:200001,t:none,log,deny,status:400,msg:'Failed to parse request body.',logdata:%{reqbody_error_msg},severity:2" Transformation completed in 0 usec. Executing operator "!eq" with param "0" against REQBODY_ERROR. Operator completed in 0 usec. Rule returned 0. Recipe: Invoking rule 5549c38; [file "*********************"] [line "75"] [id "200002"]. Rule 5549c38: SecRule "MULTIPART_STRICT_ERROR" "!@eq 0" "phase:2,auditlog,id:200002,t:none,log,deny,status:44,msg:'Multipart request body failed strict validation: PE %{REQBODY_PROCESSOR_ERROR}, BQ %{MULTIPART_BOUNDARY_QUOTED}, BW %{MULTIPART_BOUNDARY_WHITESPACE}, DB %{MULTIPART_DATA_BEFORE}, DA %{MULTIPART_DATA_AFTER}, HF %{MULTIPART_HEADER_FOLDING}, LF %{MULTIPART_LF_LINE}, SM %{MULTIPART_MISSING_SEMICOLON}, IQ %{MULTIPART_INVALID_QUOTING}, IP %{MULTIPART_INVALID_PART}, IH %{MULTIPART_INVALID_HEADER_FOLDING}, FL %{MULTIPART_FILE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED}'" Transformation completed in 0 usec. Executing operator "!eq" with param "0" against MULTIPART_STRICT_ERROR. Operator completed in 0 usec. Rule returned 0. Recipe: Invoking rule 554bd70; [file "********************"] [line "80"] [id "200003"]. Rule 554bd70: SecRule "MULTIPART_UNMATCHED_BOUNDARY" "!@eq 0" "phase:2,auditlog,id:200003,t:none,log,deny,status:44,msg:'Multipart parser detected a possible unmatched boundary.'" Transformation completed in 0 usec. Executing operator "!eq" with param "0" against MULTIPART_UNMATCHED_BOUNDARY. Operator completed in 0 usec. Rule returned 0. Recipe: Invoking rule 554cbe0; [file "*********************************"] [line "94"] [id "200004"]. Rule 554cbe0: SecRule "TX:/^MSC_/" "!@streq 0" "phase:2,log,auditlog,id:200004,t:none,deny,msg:'ModSecurity internal error flagged: %{MATCHED_VAR_NAME}'" Rule returned 0. Hook insert_filter: Adding input forwarding filter (r 5541fc0). Hook insert_filter: Adding output filter (r 5541fc0). Initialising logging. Starting phase LOGGING. Recording persistent data took 0 microseconds. Audit log: Ignoring a non-relevant request. I can't see anything unusual in Fiddler. I'm using a ViewModel in the parameters of my action. No data is bound if SecRequestBodyAccess is set to On. I'm even logging all the Request.Form.Keys and values via log4net, but not getting any values there either. I'm starting to wonder if ModSecurity actually works with ASP.NET MVC or if there is some conflict with the ModSecurity http Module and the model binder kicking in. Does anyone have any suggestions or can anyone confirm they have ModSecurity working with an ASP.NET MVC website?

    Read the article

  • Disallow root to su on a user which is not listed in /etc/passwd

    - by marc.riera
    Hello, on linux we autenticate users against AD. The AD users are not listed on /etc/passwd. We are about to deploy a NFS solution to mount some extra space for each group of users. If a user(A) with sudo su privileges goes to root, then he can impersonate user(B) just by su user(B) and going to the NFS. Is there any way to disallow root to su user if the user is not listed on /etc/passwd ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • kinit gives me a Kerberos ticket, but no AFS token

    - by Tomas Lycken
    I'm trying to setup access to my university's IT environment from my laptop running Ubuntu 12.04, by (mostly) following the IT-department's guides on AFS and Kerberos. I can get AFS working well enough so that I can navigate to my home folder (located in the nada.kth.se cell of AFS), and I can get Kerberos working well enough to forward tickets and authenticate me when I connect with ssh. However, I don't seem to get any AFS tokens locally, on my machine, so I can't just go to /afs/nada.kth.se/.../folder/file.txt on my machine and edit it. I can't even stand in /afs/nada.kth.se/.../folder and run ls without getting Permission denied errors. Why doesn't kinit -f [email protected] give me an AFS token? What do I need to do to get one?

    Read the article

  • Disable the user of Internet explorer through policies when called from HTML help

    - by Stephane
    Hello, I have a locked down environment where users are prohibited from doing, well, basically anything but run the specific programs we specify. We just switched a program from using the venerable "WinHELP" help format to HTML help (CHM) but that seem to have an unwanted and rather dangerous side effect: when a user click on a hyperlink inside the HTML help, a new internet explorer window is opened and the user is free to browse and do terrible things to my server (well, not that much, but still...) I have checked the session in this case and the IE window is actually hosted within the help engine: there is no iexplore.exe process running in the user session (and it cannot: it's explicitly prohibited). We have disable all help right now until we find a solution. I'm working with the help team to have all external URLs removed from the help file but that is going to be a long and error-prone task. Meanwhile, I've checked all the group policies option but I have to say that I was unable to find anything that would prevent a standalone IE window hosted in a random process from running. I don't want to disable WinHTTP or the IE rendering engine or anything of the sort. But I need to prevent all users members of a specific AD user group from ever having an IE window displayed to them. The servers are running Windows 2003 and Citrix metaframe 4.5. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Network vulnerability and port scanning services

    - by DigitalRoss
    I'm setting up a periodic port scan and vulnerability scan for a medium-sized network implementing a customer-facing web application. The hosts run CentOS 5.4. I've used tools like Nmap and OpenVAS, but our firewall rules have special cases for connections originating from our own facilities and servers, so really the scan should be done from the outside. Rather than set up a VPS or EC2 server and configuring it with various tools, it seems like this could just be contracted out to a port and vulnerability scanning service. If they do it professionally they may be more up to date than something I set up and let run for a year... Any recommendations or experience doing this?

    Read the article

  • Bad ways to secure wireless network.

    - by Moshe
    I was wondering if anybody had any thoughts on this, as I recently saw a Verizon DSL network set up where the WEP key was the last 8 characters of the router's MAC address. (It's bad enough that hey were using WEP in the first place...)

    Read the article

  • Securing DRAC/ILO

    - by The Diamond Z
    This might be a dumb question but DRAC/ILO both have HTTP server interfaces. If I were trolling IP's port 80 on and I came across such a page I'd know it to be a high value target in the sense that if I can crack it, I can take control of the server to some extent (potentially installing another OS). Other than changing the port, what are the best practices for securing DRAC/ILO on public Internet facing machines?

    Read the article

  • Open ports in Windows 7, firewall, public network, port 445

    - by chris
    I selected "public network" in Windows 7. Windows is listening on TCP port 445: TCP 0.0.0.0:445 WIN7TEST:0 ABHÖREN The corresponding incoming firewall rule isn't activated (4th column): When I choose "workplace network" the SMB incoming port 445 rule is still disabled in the advanced windows firewall configuration. I thought "public network" / "workplace network" and so on is influencing the windows firewall rules!? Where's the difference between workplace and public network then? http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=winfire2nxku0.png

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187  | Next Page >