Search Results

Search found 21071 results on 843 pages for 'account security'.

Page 19/843 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • mod_proxy security

    - by brad
    I'm on Debian Lenny using apache2. in my proxy.conf I tried adding Allow from localhost as suggested in some other forums to get proxying to work. Didn't work. It only worked if I say Allow from all My question is this. Are there any security implications to this Allow from all directive? Most people were saying to make this as limited as possible, but "all" is the client right? I want anyone regardless of their IP to be forwarded properly. Is there a better way to configure this?

    Read the article

  • Setting Sql server security rights for multiple situations

    - by DanDan
    We have an application which uses an instance of Sql Server locally for its backend storage. The administrator windows login has had its sysadmin right revoked, and instead two sql logins have been created; one for the application with a secret password and one read only login we let users view the raw data with. This was working fine until we moved on FileStreams, which requires intergrated windows authentication. So now the sql server logins must be replaced. As a result, I am now reviewing all of our logins but I am not sure how it is possible. It seems that the application needs full read/write access, yet I still need to lock down writing to the tables so the user cannot login into the database and delete data randomly. Does anyone have any tips for setting multiple levels of security using intergrated windows logins, or can you direct me to any further reading? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Security question pertaining web application deployment

    - by orokusaki
    I am about to deploy a web application (in a couple months) with the following set-up (perhaps anyways): Ubuntu Lucid Lynx with: IP Tables firewall (white-list style with only 3 ports open) Custom SSH port (like 31847 or something) No "root" SSH access Long, random username (not just "admin" or something) with a long password (65 chars) PostgreSQL which only listens to localhost 256 bit SSL Cert Reverse proxy from NGINX to my application server (UWSGI) Assume that my colo is secure (Physical access isn't my concern for the time being) Application-level security (SQL injection, XSS, Directory Traversal, CSRF, etc) Perhaps IP masquerading (but I don't really understand this yet) Does this sound like a secure setup? I hear about people's web apps getting hacked all the time, and part of me thinks, "maybe they're just neglecting something", but the other part of me thinks, "maybe there's nothing you can do to protect your server, and those things are just measures to make it a little harder for script kiddies to get in". If I told you all of this, gave you my IP address, and told you what ports were available, would it be possible for you to get in (assuming you have a penetration testing tool), or is this really protected well.

    Read the article

  • ssh port forwarding / security risk

    - by jcooper
    Hi there, I want to access a web application running on a web server behind my office firewall from an external machine. We have a bastion host running sshd that is accessible from the Internet. I want to know if this solution is a bad idea: Create an account on the bastion host with shell=/bin/false and no password ('testuser') Create a ssh RSA key on the external machine Add the public RSA key to the testuser's authorized_keys file ssh to the bastion host from the external host using: ssh -N 8888:targethost:80 run my tests from the external host shut down the ssh tunnel I understand that if my RSA private key were compromised then someone could ssh to the bastion host. But are there other reasons this solution is a bad idea? thank you!

    Read the article

  • modsecurity apache mod-security.conf missing

    - by TechMedicNYC
    Greetings Serverfaultians. I'm not a server guy as you can see from my noob score of 1 point. But maybe those more versed can help me. I'm using Ubuntu v13.10 32-bit Server and Apache2 v2.4.6 and I'm trying to set up and configure modsecurity and modevasive on an internet-exposed production/test server. I am trying to follow this tutorial: http://www.thefanclub.co.za/how-to/how-install-apache2-modsecurity-and-modevasive-ubuntu-1204-lts-server. But at step 3: Now add these rules to Apache2. Open a terminal window and enter: sudo vi /etc/apache2/mods-available/mod-security.conf This file does not exist. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Chrome - SSL Security issue on Windows platforms?

    - by al nik
    Fortify.net is a service that displays what's the currently encryption key used by your browser in a https connection. If I browse this site with Chrome 4.1.249.1042 in WinXp SP3 the key used is RC4 cipher, 128-bit key This encryption is weak, and it's the one used by old browsers like IE6. Chrome works fine on Fedora9 and it uses AES cipher, 256-bit key as more modern browsers do (i.e.Firefox) I consider this a security issue. I'm considering to switch back to Firefox in Windows. Do you know if it's possible to change the default encryption key in Chrome?

    Read the article

  • Apache security for multi-user development web server.

    - by mrmartinblue
    I've been searching and reading through documents all morning and understand that I need to use some combination of chown and probably 'jailing' to securely give programmers access to directories on my centos webserver. Here's the situation: I have an apache web server that has any number of virtual sites located in /var/www/site1 /var/www/site2 etc.. I have different developers that need full access both ssh and vsFTP to only the site they are working on. What is the best way to create and maintain security in this scenario. My thought would be to create a new user for each coder, jail that user to the website directory they are allowed to work in, add their user to a group and set the webroot's owner to that group. Any thoughts? Good, bad, ugly? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Security issue on Linux with Netbeans

    - by WebDevHobo
    In order to edit some files in Netbeans, I had to do a chmod 777 on the parent-folder. Reason being that anything else would result in Netbeans not wanting to accept the folder, as it could not be written. Is there an other way to do this besides doing a chmod 777? I'm on Ubuntu 9.10, using Netbeans 6.7.1 And after that, I manually have to give each file the needed rights. There should be an easier way, I just don't know it. EDIT: I am running XAMPP and the files I'm trying to edit are in the htdocs folder. I'm running Netbeans as my local user account, which is how it starts if I have it run from the applications-menu.

    Read the article

  • Set security on pattern of sub folders (Server 2003)

    - by Mark Major
    I have a folder structure similar to the one shown below these paragraphs. How do I change security on every 'Photos' folder without clicking through each individually in Windows Explorer? There are about 50 top level folders (Bob, Jim, Eva, etc, etc) which have the same layout of folders inside. I am keen for any suggestions, either scripting or GUI. I am on Windows Server 2003. Cheap/free method would be good, as the company is part of a registered charity. Ideally I would like to do this via DFS path. E.G. \\mycompany.local\Shared\Staff\Bob\ Thanks for reading. Thanks for any info. Mark Bob Review Profile Photos Jim Review Profile Photos Eva Review Profile Photos

    Read the article

  • Editing the Microsoft Security Essentials context-menu

    - by GPX
    As all MSE users would know, the context-menu item that it adds to Explorer is really long, with one whole sentence "Scan with Microsoft Security Essentials...". Is there a way to edit this and shorten it? I figured out the the file shellext.dll is responsible for registering the context menu. I used ResEdit to edit the DLL and changed the string table entry from Scan with ($BrandName) to Scan with MSE. But it still won't change. I've also tried de-registering the DLL and then registering it again. No luck! Any ideas? Or am I doing something wrong?

    Read the article

  • Security measures for CentOS

    - by cappuccinodrinker
    I have been tightening up my web server security and wanted to know what else I can do. I am running CentOS 5 with these measures: - All passwords to FTP, MySQL etc are generated from grc.com/passwords.htm and microsoft.com/protect/fraud/passwords/create.aspx (for the ones which cannot be too long). - Running iptables with all ports shut off except for http mail and smtp, the important ports like FTP SSH are blocked to all except my static office IP. There is also no response to pings. - Rootkit Hunter running daily - The server is PCI compliant according to Comodo - Not running any crappy made php apps, we use Zend Framework for our stuff and do have kayako installed and keep them up to date. Can't really think of anything else I can do... I could implement a brute force measure, but I think I already have by simply changing my SSH port to a number above 10000 and blocking it off with iptables.

    Read the article

  • Linux Security/Sysadmin Courses in London?

    - by mister k
    Hi, My employer has offered to send me on a couple of training courses and I'm just looking for some recommendations. I'm mainly looking to improve my security and general sysadmin skills. I would like to do something focused on UNIX as I mainly work with Linux boxes (but also a couple of FreeBSD boxes). I don't want to do a study-from-home course, so I would need to find somewhere based in London. It would be great to hear from anyone who has some experience with this kind of course. The courses I've found so far are: www.learningtree.co.uk/courses/uk433.htm www.city.ac.uk/cae/cfa/computing/systems_it/linux.html www.city.ac.uk/cae/cfa/computing/systems_it/unix_tools_ss.html I'm not sure the City University courses are advanced enough as I already have experience... Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Security considerations for my first eStore.

    - by Rohit
    I have a website through which I am going to sell few products. It is hosted on a simple shared-hosting and does not have SSL. On the products page, each product has a Buy Now button created from my PayPal Merchant account. PayPal recommends to use it's Button Factory to create secure buttons and save it inside PayPal itself. I have followed the same advice and the code of any button is secure and does not disclose any information on either a product or it's price. When the user clicks on a Buy Now button, he/she is taken to PayPal site where a page is opened in SSL for the user to fill in the credit card and shipping details. After a successful transaction, the control is passed back to my site. I want to know whether there is still any chance when security could be compromised.

    Read the article

  • Security considerations in providing VPN access to non-company issued computers [migrated]

    - by DKNUCKLES
    There have been a few people at my office that have requested the installation of DropBox on their computers to synchronize files so they can work on them at home. I have always been wary about cloud computing, mainly because we are a Canadian company and enjoy the privacy and being outside the reach of the Patriot Act. The policy before I started was that employees with company issued notebooks could be issued a VPN account, and everyone else had to have a remote desktop connection. The theory behind this logic (as I understand it) was that we had the potential to lock down the notebooks whereas the employees home computers were outside of our grasp. We had no ability to ensure they weren't running as administrator all the time / were running AV so they were a higher risk at being infected with malware and could compromise network security. With the increase in people wanting DropBox I'm curious as to whether or not this policy is too restrictive and overly paranoid. Is it generally safe to provide VPN access to an employee without knowing what their computing environment looks like?

    Read the article

  • Installing a personal security certificate for Windows Server 2008 Terminal Services user

    - by Rick
    We use StoneEdge Order Manager, which runs under Microsoft Access, on several Windows computers as well as through Terminal Services on Windows Server 2008. Terminal Services users are unable to process credit cards using the First Data Global Gateway on the server. We have followed the necessary setup instructions provided under the user account, which involves adding a certificate in the Internet Options control panel. The Windows XP desktops require this to be done, or a generic 'unable to connect' message is shown when attempting to charge a card. On the server, this message is shown regardless of whether the certificate has been installed. Is there anything else that needs to be done that is specific to Windows Server that is not mentioned in the workstation instructions? Setup Instructions

    Read the article

  • [GEEK SCHOOL] Network Security 2: Preventing Disaster with User Account Control

    - by Ciprian Rusen
    In this second lesson in our How-To Geek School about securing the Windows devices in your network, we will talk about User Account Control (UAC). Users encounter this feature each time they need to install desktop applications in Windows, when some applications need administrator permissions in order to work and when they have to change different system settings and files. UAC was introduced in Windows Vista as part of Microsoft’s “Trustworthy Computing” initiative. Basically, UAC is meant to act as a wedge between you and installing applications or making system changes. When you attempt to do either of these actions, UAC will pop up and interrupt you. You may either have to confirm you know what you’re doing, or even enter an administrator password if you don’t have those rights. Some users find UAC annoying and choose to disable it but this very important security feature of Windows (and we strongly caution against doing that). That’s why in this lesson, we will carefully explain what UAC is and everything it does. As you will see, this feature has an important role in keeping Windows safe from all kinds of security problems. In this lesson you will learn which activities may trigger a UAC prompt asking for permissions and how UAC can be set so that it strikes the best balance between usability and security. You will also learn what kind of information you can find in each UAC prompt. Last but not least, you will learn why you should never turn off this feature of Windows. By the time we’re done today, we think you will have a newly found appreciation for UAC, and will be able to find a happy medium between turning it off completely and letting it annoy you to distraction. What is UAC and How Does it Work? UAC or User Account Control is a security feature that helps prevent unauthorized system changes to your Windows computer or device. These changes can be made by users, applications, and sadly, malware (which is the biggest reason why UAC exists in the first place). When an important system change is initiated, Windows displays a UAC prompt asking for your permission to make the change. If you don’t give your approval, the change is not made. In Windows, you will encounter UAC prompts mostly when working with desktop applications that require administrative permissions. For example, in order to install an application, the installer (generally a setup.exe file) asks Windows for administrative permissions. UAC initiates an elevation prompt like the one shown earlier asking you whether it is okay to elevate permissions or not. If you say “Yes”, the installer starts as administrator and it is able to make the necessary system changes in order to install the application correctly. When the installer is closed, its administrator privileges are gone. If you run it again, the UAC prompt is shown again because your previous approval is not remembered. If you say “No”, the installer is not allowed to run and no system changes are made. If a system change is initiated from a user account that is not an administrator, e.g. the Guest account, the UAC prompt will also ask for the administrator password in order to give the necessary permissions. Without this password, the change won’t be made. Which Activities Trigger a UAC Prompt? There are many types of activities that may trigger a UAC prompt: Running a desktop application as an administrator Making changes to settings and files in the Windows and Program Files folders Installing or removing drivers and desktop applications Installing ActiveX controls Changing settings to Windows features like the Windows Firewall, UAC, Windows Update, Windows Defender, and others Adding, modifying, or removing user accounts Configuring Parental Controls in Windows 7 or Family Safety in Windows 8.x Running the Task Scheduler Restoring backed-up system files Viewing or changing the folders and files of another user account Changing the system date and time You will encounter UAC prompts during some or all of these activities, depending on how UAC is set on your Windows device. If this security feature is turned off, any user account or desktop application can make any of these changes without a prompt asking for permissions. In this scenario, the different forms of malware existing on the Internet will also have a higher chance of infecting and taking control of your system. In Windows 8.x operating systems you will never see a UAC prompt when working with apps from the Windows Store. That’s because these apps, by design, are not allowed to modify any system settings or files. You will encounter UAC prompts only when working with desktop programs. What You Can Learn from a UAC Prompt? When you see a UAC prompt on the screen, take time to read the information displayed so that you get a better understanding of what is going on. Each prompt first tells you the name of the program that wants to make system changes to your device, then you can see the verified publisher of that program. Dodgy software tends not to display this information and instead of a real company name, you will see an entry that says “Unknown”. If you have downloaded that program from a less than trustworthy source, then it might be better to select “No” in the UAC prompt. The prompt also shares the origin of the file that’s trying to make these changes. In most cases the file origin is “Hard drive on this computer”. You can learn more by pressing “Show details”. You will see an additional entry named “Program location” where you can see the physical location on your hard drive, for the file that’s trying to perform system changes. Make your choice based on the trust you have in the program you are trying to run and its publisher. If a less-known file from a suspicious location is requesting a UAC prompt, then you should seriously consider pressing “No”. What’s Different About Each UAC Level? Windows 7 and Windows 8.x have four UAC levels: Always notify – when this level is used, you are notified before desktop applications make changes that require administrator permissions or before you or another user account changes Windows settings like the ones mentioned earlier. When the UAC prompt is shown, the desktop is dimmed and you must choose “Yes” or “No” before you can do anything else. This is the most secure and also the most annoying way to set UAC because it triggers the most UAC prompts. Notify me only when programs/apps try to make changes to my computer (default) – Windows uses this as the default for UAC. When this level is used, you are notified before desktop applications make changes that require administrator permissions. If you are making system changes, UAC doesn’t show any prompts and it automatically gives you the necessary permissions for making the changes you desire. When a UAC prompt is shown, the desktop is dimmed and you must choose “Yes” or “No” before you can do anything else. This level is slightly less secure than the previous one because malicious programs can be created for simulating the keystrokes or mouse moves of a user and change system settings for you. If you have a good security solution in place, this scenario should never occur. Notify me only when programs/apps try to make changes to my computer (do not dim my desktop) – this level is different from the previous in in the fact that, when the UAC prompt is shown, the desktop is not dimmed. This decreases the security of your system because different kinds of desktop applications (including malware) might be able to interfere with the UAC prompt and approve changes that you might not want to be performed. Never notify – this level is the equivalent of turning off UAC. When using it, you have no protection against unauthorized system changes. Any desktop application and any user account can make system changes without your permission. How to Configure UAC If you would like to change the UAC level used by Windows, open the Control Panel, then go to “System and Security” and select “Action Center”. On the column on the left you will see an entry that says “Change User Account Control settings”. The “User Account Control Settings” window is now opened. Change the position of the UAC slider to the level you want applied then press “OK”. Depending on how UAC was initially set, you may receive a UAC prompt requiring you to confirm this change. Why You Should Never Turn Off UAC If you want to keep the security of your system at decent levels, you should never turn off UAC. When you disable it, everything and everyone can make system changes without your consent. This makes it easier for all kinds of malware to infect and take control of your system. It doesn’t matter whether you have a security suite or antivirus installed or third-party antivirus, basic common-sense measures like having UAC turned on make a big difference in keeping your devices safe from harm. We have noticed that some users disable UAC prior to setting up their Windows devices and installing third-party software on them. They keep it disabled while installing all the software they will use and enable it when done installing everything, so that they don’t have to deal with so many UAC prompts. Unfortunately this causes problems with some desktop applications. They may fail to work after you enable UAC. This happens because, when UAC is disabled, the virtualization techniques UAC uses for your applications are inactive. This means that certain user settings and files are installed in a different place and when you turn on UAC, applications stop working because they should be placed elsewhere. Therefore, whatever you do, do not turn off UAC completely! Coming up next … In the next lesson you will learn about Windows Defender, what this tool can do in Windows 7 and Windows 8.x, what’s different about it in these operating systems and how it can be used to increase the security of your system.

    Read the article

  • Security and the Mobile Workforce

    - by tobyehatch
    Now that many organizations are moving to the BYOD philosophy (bring your own devices), security for phones and tablets accessing company sensitive information is of paramount importance. I had the pleasure to interview Brian MacDonald, Principal Product Manager for Oracle Business Intelligence (BI) Mobile Products, about this subject, and he shared some wonderful insight about how the Oracle Mobile Security Tool Kit is addressing mobile security and doing some pretty cool things.  With the rapid proliferation of phones and tablets, there is a perception that mobile devices are a security threat to corporate IT, that mobile operating systems are not secure, and that there are simply too many ways to inadvertently provide access to critical analytic data outside the firewall. Every day, I see employees working on mobile devices at the airport, while waiting for their airplanes, and using public WIFI connections at coffee houses and in restaurants. These methods are not typically secure ways to access confidential company data. I asked Brian to explain why. “The native controls for mobile devices and applications are indeed insufficiently secure for corporate deployments of Business Intelligence and most certainly for businesses where data is extremely critical - such as financial services or defense - although it really applies across the board. The traditional approach for accessing data from outside a firewall is using a VPN connection which is not a viable solution for mobile. The problem is that once you open up a VPN connection on your phone or tablet, you are creating an opening for the whole device, for all the software and installed applications. Often the VPN connection by itself provides insufficient encryption – if any – which means that data can be potentially intercepted.” For this reason, most organizations that deploy Business Intelligence data via mobile devices will only do so with some additional level of control. So, how has the industry responded? What are companies doing to address this very real threat? Brian explained that “Mobile Device Management (MDM) and Mobile Application Management (MAM) software vendors have rapidly created solutions for mobile devices that provide a vast array of services for controlling, managing and establishing enterprise mobile usage policies. On the device front, vendors now support full levels of encryption behind the firewall, encrypted local data storage, credential management such as federated single-sign-on as well as remote wipe, geo-fencing and other risk reducing features (should a device be lost or stolen). More importantly, these software vendors have created methods for providing these capabilities on a per application basis, allowing for complete isolation of the application from the mobile operating system. Finally, there are tools which allow the applications themselves to be distributed through enterprise application stores allowing IT organizations to manage who has access to the apps, when updates to the applications will happen, and revoke access after an employee leaves. So even though an employee may be using a personal device, access to company data can be controlled while on or near the company premises. So do the Oracle BI mobile products integrate with the MDM and MAM vendors? Brian explained that our customers use a wide variety of mobile security vendors and may even have more than one in-house. Therefore, Oracle is ensuring that users have a choice and a mechanism for linking together Oracle’s BI offering with their chosen vendor’s secure technology. The Oracle BI Mobile Security Toolkit, which is a version of the Oracle BI Mobile HD application, delivered through the Oracle Technology Network (OTN) in its component parts, helps Oracle users to build their own version of the Mobile HD application, sign it with their own enterprise development certificates, link with their security vendor of choice, then deploy the combined application through whichever means they feel most appropriate, including enterprise application stores.  Brian further explained that Oracle currently supports most of the major mobile security vendors, has close relationships with each, and maintains strong partnerships enabling both Oracle and the vendors to test, update and release a cooperating solution in lock-step. Oracle also ensures that as new versions of the Oracle HD application are made available on the Apple iTunes store, the same version is also immediately made available through the Security Toolkit on OTN.  Rest assured that as our workforce continues down the mobile path, company sensitive information can be secured.  To listen to the entire podcast, click here. To learn more about the Oracle BI Mobile HD, click  here To learn more about the BI Mobile Security Toolkit, click here 

    Read the article

  • Mac Management and Security

    - by Bart Silverstrim
    I was going through some literature on managing OS X laptops and asked someone some questions about usage scenarios when using the MacBooks. I asked someone more knowledgeable than I about whether it was possible for my Mac to be taken over if I were visiting another site for a conference or if I went on a wifi network at a local coffee house with policies from an OS X Server with workgroup manager (either legit for the site or someone running a version of OS X Server on hardware they have hidden somewhere on the network), which apparently could be set up to do things like limit my access to Finder or impose other neat whiz-bang management features. He said that it is indeed possible for it to happen as it would be assigned via the DHCP server and the OS X server would assume my Mac is a guest and could hand out restrictions and apparently my Mac will happily accept them without notifying me or giving me an option, unlike Windows which I believe would need to be joined to a domain before it becomes "managed" by Active Directory. So my question is as network admins and sysadmins with users traveling with MacBooks, is there a way to reasonably protect your users from having their machines hijacked without resorting to just turning off networking all the time? Or isn't this much of a security hazard? What threat does this pose to the road warriors in your businesses?

    Read the article

  • Online Storage and security concerns

    - by Megge
    I plan to set up a small fileserver. I already own a small server at HostEurope (VirtualServer L, 250GB space), but they don't offer enough space (there is the HostEurope Cloud, but paying for bandwidth isn't an option here, video-streaming should be possible) Requirements summarized: Storage: 2TB, Users: ~15, Filesizes: < 100GB, should be easily reachable (Mount as a networkdrive or at least have solid "communication" software) My first question would be: Where can I get halfway affordable online storages? And how should I connect them to my server? Getting an additional server is a bit overkill, as I know no hoster which allows 2 TB on a small 2 Ghz Dual Core 2 GB RAM thingy (that would be enough by far, I just need much space), and connecting it via NFS or FTP over Internet seems a bit strange and cripples performance. Do you have any advice where I could get that storage service from? (I sent HostEurope a custom request today, but they didn't answer till now. If they can provide me with that space, this question will be irrelevant, but the 2nd one is the more important one anway, don't do much more than recommend me some based on experience, you don't have to crawl hours through hosting services) livedrive for example offers 5 TB for 17€ / month, I'd be happy with 2 TB for 20 €, the caveat is: It doesn't allow multiple users, which leads me to my second question: Where are the security problems? Which protocol is sufficient (I want private and "public" folders etc. the usual "every user has its own and a public space"-thing), secure and fast? (I'd tend to (S)FTP, problem with FTP is: Most of those hosting services don't even allow FTP with mutliple users and single users lead me into "hacking" a solution (you could map the basic folder structure on the main server and just mount every subfolder from the storage, things get difficult with a public folder with 644 permissions though) Is useing something like PKI or 802.1X overkill for private uses?

    Read the article

  • Managing Apache to Compensate for WebDAV's Security Masking

    - by Tohuw
    When a user creates a file via WebDAV, the default behavior is that the file is owned by the user and group running the Apache process, with a umask of 022. Unfortunately, this makes it impossible for unprivileged users to write to the files by other means without being a member of the group Apache runs under (which strikes me as a particularly bad idea). My current solution is to set umask 000 in Apache's envvars and remove all world permissions from the webdav parent directory for the user. So, if the WebDAV share is /home/foo/www, then /home/foo/www is owned by www-data:foo with permissions of 770. This keeps other unprivileged users out, more or less, but it's hokey at best and a security disaster awaiting at worst. From my research and poking around at mod_dav and Apache, I cannot find a reasonable solution short of a cron job flipping all the permissions back (I'd rather not have the load and increased complexity on the server). SuExec won't work, either, because WebDAV operations are not going to execute as a different user. Any thoughts on this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Security Essentials & MsMpEng.exe hogging resources

    - by Mike
    I've been using MSE for a couple months now, never had a single problem. All of a sudden the process "MsMpEng.exe" will randomly go crazy and hog all my system resources so I can't do anything unless I kill it in the task manager. (I've quit the program for now and my comp is running smooth). When I restart the program, reboot, whatever, it goes off and hogs all the resources again after a couple minutes. If I kill the process it will go away and then come back a couple minutes later and do the same thing. I've scanned with MSE, another antivirus and malware with no probs. Any ideas? Should I uninstall and find something else? The thing is I've liked it so far. I'm running Win7 64-bit. Also, I'm not running any other conflicting security programs. This is the only one on my PC right now. Windows Defender is also off.

    Read the article

  • Mac Management Without Permission and Security

    - by Bart Silverstrim
    I was going through some literature on managing OS X laptops and asked someone some questions about usage scenarios when using the MacBooks. I asked someone more knowledgeable than I about whether it was possible for my Mac to be taken over if I were visiting another site for a conference or if I went on a wifi network at a local coffee house with policies from an OS X Server with workgroup manager (either legit for the site or someone running a version of OS X Server on hardware they have hidden somewhere on the network), which apparently could be set up to do things like limit my access to Finder or impose other neat whiz-bang management features. He said that it is indeed possible for it to happen as it would be assigned via the DHCP server and the OS X server would assume my Mac is a guest and could hand out restrictions and apparently my Mac will happily accept them without notifying me or giving me an option, unlike Windows which I believe would need to be joined to a domain before it becomes "managed" by Active Directory. So my question is as network admins and sysadmins with users traveling with MacBooks, is there a way to reasonably protect your users from having their machines hijacked without resorting to just turning off networking all the time? Or isn't this much of a security hazard? What threat does this pose to the road warriors in your businesses?

    Read the article

  • Resources for Smartphone Security

    - by Shial
    My organization is currently working on improving our data and network security due to increasing HIPAA laws and a general need to get a better grasp on controlling our health related information. We are a non-profit working with people with developmental disabilities so we handle a lot of medical related information. One area that has been identified as a risk is our use of smartphones, specifically at this time Windows Mobile 6.1 devices from T-Mobile. We do not utilize the VPNs on the phones so there isn't any way they can access our databases or file servers (username/password for VPNs is not the domain logons). What would be exposed however is the particular user's email account since you could extract out the username/password and access the email either on the device or on our web email (Exchange 2003) which could contain HIPAA protected confidential information about clients and services and this would be an incident that would have to be reported. What resources or ideas would help us secure these devices? I'm not worried about data interception (using SSL) but more about physical theft or loss of the device. Are there websites that I just have not found with guidelines and suggestions or particualar products that would help protect us? I also don't want to limit the discussion to windows Mobile either. I myself am looking at an android 2.0 device and there is always the eventual possibility we could get pushed to enable the VPNs. I know this is a subject that likely won't have any particular correct answer and it is something we should all be aware of since there devices are sitting outside of our immediate control most of the time.

    Read the article

  • Can I disable this Windows (XP) Security Warning?

    - by FumbleFingers
    I recently reformatted my hard drive and reinstalled Windows XP (I know I'll have to take the plunge and commit to Win8 "real soon, now", but I'm just not quite ready for the upheaval yet! :) I used to use WinRar (and later, when I got fed up with the "nag" messages, 7-Zip), but I haven't installed either of them in my new configuration, so I must be using the built-in XP facility when I open *.zip files. For years, I've been opening downloaded *.zip archives, and using "drag & drop" to copy to a File Explorer window open on the folder where I want the files to end up (usually, My Documents\Downloads). But now I find that when I "drop" the file(s), I get a pop-up Windows Security Warning saying Are you sure you want to copy or move files to this folder? You should only move or copy files from locations that you trust Can anyone explain why I'm getting this message, and is there any (reasonably easy, please! :) way to suppress it? Since I've already put the *.zip file on my computer, it seems a bit late to ask if I trust it. (Thus far, the files in question have always been plain text, so it's not a matter of dodgy programs, etc.) Apologies for the low quality image - I don't have the appropriate tools or knowledge to do any better, and it doesn't help that my "PrtScr" screen capture has included what would have been on my second monitor (TV) if it had been turned on. If you can't read it, trust me - I have copied the text verbatim.

    Read the article

  • Securing SSH/SFTP and best practices on security

    - by MultiformeIngegno
    I'm on a fresh VPS with Ubuntu Server 12.04. I wanted to ask you the good practices to apply to enhance security over a stock Ubuntu-server. This is what I did up to now: I added Google Authenticator to SSH, then I created a new user (whom I'll use instead of 'root' for SSH & SFTP access) which I added to my /etc/sudoers list below 'root', so now it's: # User privilege specification root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL new_user ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL Then I edited sshd_config and set PermitRootLogin to 'no'. Then restarted the ssh service. Is this ok? There are a few things I'd like to ask you though: 1) What's the sense of adding a new (sudoer) user whilst the root user still exist (ok it can't access with root privilege but it's still there..)? 2) System files are owned by 'root'.. I want to use my new_user to access via SFTP but with it I can't edit those files!! Should I mass-CHMOD 'em so that new_user has write perms too? What's the good practice on this? Thanks in advance, I hope you'll tell me if I did something wrong and/or other ways to secure the system. :)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >