Search Results

Search found 54190 results on 2168 pages for 'http authentication'.

Page 19/2168 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • What is correct HTTP status code when redirecting to a login page?

    - by PHP_Jedi
    When a user is not logged in and tries to access an page that requires login, what is the correct HTTP status code for a redirect to the login page? I don't feel that any of the 3xx fit that description. 10.3.1 300 Multiple Choices The requested resource corresponds to any one of a set of representations, each with its own specific location, and agent- driven negotiation information (section 12) is being provided so that the user (or user agent) can select a preferred representation and redirect its request to that location. Unless it was a HEAD request, the response SHOULD include an entity containing a list of resource characteristics and location(s) from which the user or user agent can choose the one most appropriate. The entity format is specified by the media type given in the Content- Type header field. Depending upon the format and the capabilities of the user agent, selection of the most appropriate choice MAY be performed automatically. However, this specification does not define any standard for such automatic selection. If the server has a preferred choice of representation, it SHOULD include the specific URI for that representation in the Location field; user agents MAY use the Location field value for automatic redirection. This response is cacheable unless indicated otherwise. 10.3.2 301 Moved Permanently The requested resource has been assigned a new permanent URI and any future references to this resource SHOULD use one of the returned URIs. Clients with link editing capabilities ought to automatically re-link references to the Request-URI to one or more of the new references returned by the server, where possible. This response is cacheable unless indicated otherwise. The new permanent URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s). If the 301 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued. Note: When automatically redirecting a POST request after receiving a 301 status code, some existing HTTP/1.0 user agents will erroneously change it into a GET request. 10.3.3 302 Found The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection might be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field. The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s). If the 302 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued. Note: RFC 1945 and RFC 2068 specify that the client is not allowed to change the method on the redirected request. However, most existing user agent implementations treat 302 as if it were a 303 response, performing a GET on the Location field-value regardless of the original request method. The status codes 303 and 307 have been added for servers that wish to make unambiguously clear which kind of reaction is expected of the client. 10.3.4 303 See Other The response to the request can be found under a different URI and SHOULD be retrieved using a GET method on that resource. This method exists primarily to allow the output of a POST-activated script to redirect the user agent to a selected resource. The new URI is not a substitute reference for the originally requested resource. The 303 response MUST NOT be cached, but the response to the second (redirected) request might be cacheable. The different URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s). Note: Many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 303 status. When interoperability with such clients is a concern, the 302 status code may be used instead, since most user agents react to a 302 response as described here for 303. 10.3.5 304 Not Modified If the client has performed a conditional GET request and access is allowed, but the document has not been modified, the server SHOULD respond with this status code. The 304 response MUST NOT contain a message-body, and thus is always terminated by the first empty line after the header fields. The response MUST include the following header fields: - Date, unless its omission is required by section 14.18.1 If a clockless origin server obeys these rules, and proxies and clients add their own Date to any response received without one (as already specified by [RFC 2068], section 14.19), caches will operate correctly. - ETag and/or Content-Location, if the header would have been sent in a 200 response to the same request - Expires, Cache-Control, and/or Vary, if the field-value might differ from that sent in any previous response for the same variant If the conditional GET used a strong cache validator (see section 13.3.3), the response SHOULD NOT include other entity-headers. Otherwise (i.e., the conditional GET used a weak validator), the response MUST NOT include other entity-headers; this prevents inconsistencies between cached entity-bodies and updated headers. If a 304 response indicates an entity not currently cached, then the cache MUST disregard the response and repeat the request without the conditional. If a cache uses a received 304 response to update a cache entry, the cache MUST update the entry to reflect any new field values given in the response. 10.3.6 305 Use Proxy The requested resource MUST be accessed through the proxy given by the Location field. The Location field gives the URI of the proxy. The recipient is expected to repeat this single request via the proxy. 305 responses MUST only be generated by origin servers. Note: RFC 2068 was not clear that 305 was intended to redirect a single request, and to be generated by origin servers only. Not observing these limitations has significant security consequences. 10.3.7 306 (Unused) The 306 status code was used in a previous version of the specification, is no longer used, and the code is reserved. 10.3.8 307 Temporary Redirect The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection MAY be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field. The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s) , since many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 307 status. Therefore, the note SHOULD contain the information necessary for a user to repeat the original request on the new URI. If the 307 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued. I'm using 302 for now, until I find THE correct answer.

    Read the article

  • Setting a Forms Authentication cookie from a .NET client application

    - by Jon DellOro
    We currently have a .NET 2.0 web app that uses forms authentication via cookies. Associated with this web app is an old VB6 client application that has its own login system. Currently, the users have to login to the VB6 app, and then when they click on a link, need to authenticate themselves again with the .NET forms authentication system. I'm wondering if it's possible to create a client side .NET application, give it the username and password, and set the forms authentication cookie (without the browser being opened). Is that possible??

    Read the article

  • Parsing every part of an HTTP header field-value

    - by brickner
    Hi all. I'm parsing HTTP data directly from packets (either TCP reconstructed or not, you can assume it is). I'm looking for the best way to parse HTTP as accurately as possible. The main issue here is the HTTP header. Looking at the basic RFC of HTTP/1.1, it seems that HTTP header parsing would be complex. The RFC describes very complex regular expressions for different parts of the header. Should I write these regular expressions to parse the different parts of the HTTP header? The basic parsing I've written so far for HTTP header is for the generic HTTP header: message-header = field-name ":" [ field-value ] And I've included replacing inner LWS with SP and repeating headers with the same field-name with comma separated values as described in section 4.2. However, looking at section 14.9 for example would show that in order to parse the different parts of the field-value I need a much more complex parsing scheme. How do you suggest I should handle the complex parts of HTTP parsing (specifically the field-value) assuming I want to give the parser users the full capabilities of HTTP and to parse every part of HTTP? Design suggestions for this would also be appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to write a custom (odd) authentication plugins for Wordpress, Joomla and MediaWiki

    - by Bart van Heukelom
    On our network (a group of related websites - not a LAN) we have a common authentication system which works like this: On a network site ("consumer") the user clicks on a login link This redirects the user to a login page on our auth system ("RAS"). Upon successful login the user is directed back to the consumer site. Extra data is passed in the query string. This extra data does not include any information about the user yet. The consumer site's backend contacts RAS to get the information about the logged in user. So as you can see, the consumer site knows nothing about the authentication method. It doesn't know if it's by username/password, fingerprint, smartcard, or winning a game of poker. This is the main problem I'm encountering when trying to find out how I could write custom authentication plugins for these packages, acting as consumer sites: Wordpress Joomla MediaWiki For example Joomla offers a pretty simple auth plugin system, but it depends on a username/password entered on the Joomla site. Any hints on where to start?

    Read the article

  • Use of WebDAV to access OWA (exchange 2003) mails with Basic authentication and SSL

    - by Mayuresh
    I have got a working C# code for accessing OWA mails using WebDAV against a FBA enabled exchange 2003 (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/891748/en-us/) But my client's OWA (exchange 2003) has Basic authentication and SSL (i-e when I try to access the web mail link through browser I get a grey login box instead of a web page I can log into the mail box once I enter the correct details) But my same fails with a 401 error against this mailbox. I got the simple request working for the Basic authentication using – String usernamePassword = strUserName + ":" + strPassword; WebReq.Headers.Add("Authorization", "Basic " + Convert.ToBase64String(new ASCIIEncoding().GetBytes(usernamePassword))); But the subsequent WebDAV SEARCH request fails with 404 (resource not found) error. Can we use WebDAV against an exchange 2k3 with SSL and Basic authentication?

    Read the article

  • How to Run Pam Face Authentication

    - by Supriyo Banerjee
    I am using Ubuntu 11.10. I went to the following URL to download the software 'Pam Face Authentication': http://ppa.launchpad.net/antonio.chiurazzi/ppa/ubuntu/pool/main/p/pam-face-authentication/ and downloaded the version for natty narhwall. I installed the software using the following commands: sudo apt-get install build-essential cmake qt4-qmake libx11-dev libcv-dev libcvaux-dev libhighgui2.1 libhighgui-dev libqt4-dev libpam0g-dev checkinstall cd /tmp && wget http://pam-face-authentication.googlecode.com /files/pam-face-authentication-0.3.tar.gz sudo add-apt-repository ppa:antonio.chiurazzi sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get install pam-face-authentication cat << EOF | sudo tee /usr/share/pam-configs/face_authentication /dev/null Name: face_authentication profile Default: yes Priority: 900 Auth-Type: Primary Auth: [success=end default=ignore] pam_face_authentication.so enableX EOF sudo pam-auth-update --package face_authentication The software installed and I can run the qt-facetrainer. But the problem is when I restarted my system, I saw that the default login screen is appearing where I should put my password to login. The webcam is not starting at all. And I cannot login with my face. Which means I think that pam face authentication programme is not starting at all. Please let me know how I can login with my face using pam face authentication programme.

    Read the article

  • .htaccess blocking images on some internal pages

    - by jethomas
    I'm doing some web design for a friend and I noticed that everywhere else on her site images will load fine except for the subdirectory I'm working in. I looked in her .htaccess file and sure enough it is setup to deny people from stealing her images. Fair Enough, except the pages i'm working on are in her domain and yet I still get the 403 error. I'm pasting the .htaccess contents below but I replaced the domain names with xyz, 123 and abc. So specifically the page I'm on (xyz.com/DesignGallery.asp) pulls images from (xyz.com/machform/data/form_1/files) and it results in a forbidden error. RewriteEngine on <Files 403.shtml> order allow,deny allow from all </Files> RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://xyz.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://xyz.com/machform/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://xyz.com/machform/data/form_1/files/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://xyz.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://abc.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://abc.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://abc.xyz.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://abc.xyz.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://123.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://123.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://123.xyz.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://123.xyz.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.xyz.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.xyz.com/machform/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.xyz.com/machform/$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.xyz.com/machform/data/form_1/files/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.xyz.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.abc.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.abc.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.abc.xyz.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.abc.xyz.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.123.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.123.com$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.123.xyz.com/.*$ [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://www.123.xyz.com$ [NC] RewriteRule .*\.(jpg|jpeg|gif|png|bmp)$ - [F,NC] deny from 69.49.149.17 RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^vendors\.html$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Design_Gallery_1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^vendors\.asp$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Design_Gallery_1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^ArtGraphics\.html$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Art_Gallery_1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^ArtGraphics\.asp$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Art_Gallery_1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^Gear\.asp$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Gear_Gallery_1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^Gear\.html$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Gear_Gallery_1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^NewsletterSign\-Up\.html$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Newsletter\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^NewsletterSign\-Up\.asp$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Newsletter\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^KidzStuff\.html$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/KidzStuff1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^KidzStuff\.asp$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/KidzStuff1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^Vendors\.html$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Design_Gallery_1\.htm" [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^.*$ RewriteRule ^Vendors\.asp$ "http\:\/\/www\.xyz\.com\/Design_Gallery_1\.htm" [R=301,L]

    Read the article

  • http://localhost does not work, http://127.0.0.1 works

    - by dskanth
    Iam running Zend with Apache and got to see a strange behaviour.... If i type http://127.0.0.1 in my browser url, it works fine, but after typing: http://localhost, i will get a file download window, saying file type as: application/x-httpd-php And in my httpd.conf file, i have the following under VirtualHost *:80 definition: ServerName localhost DocumentRoot E:\zend\Apache2\htdocs\my_project\public Directory E:\zend\Apache2\htdocs\my_project\public Perhaps some configuration problem... can anyone guide me..

    Read the article

  • HTTP: can GET and POST requests from a same machine come from different IPs?

    - by NoozNooz42
    I'm pretty sure I remember reading --but cannot find back the links anymore-- about this: on some ISP (including at least one big ISP in the U.S.) it is possible to have a user's GET and POST request appearing to come from different IPs. (note that this is totally programming related, and I'll give an example below) I'm not talking about having your IP adress dynamically change between two requests. I'm talking about this: IP 1: 123.45.67.89 IP 2: 101.22.33.44 The same user makes a GET, then a POST, then a GET again, then a POST again and the servers see this: - GET from IP 1 - POST from IP 2 - GET from IP 1 - POST from IP 2 So altough it's the same user, the webserver sees different IPs for the GET and the POSTs. Surely seen that HTTP is a stateless protocol this is perfectly legit right? I'd like to find back the explanation as to how/why certain ISP have their networks configured such that this may happen. I'm asking because someone asked me to implement the following IP filter and I'm pretty sure it is fundamentally broken code (breaking havoc for at least one major american ISP users). Here's a Java servlet filter that is supposed to protect against some attacks. The reasoning is that: "For any session filter checks that IP address in the request is the same that was used when session was created. So in this case session ID could not be stolen for forming fake sessions." http://www.servletsuite.com/servlets/protectsessionsflt.htm However I'm pretty sure this is inherently broken because there are ISPs where you may see GET and POST coming from different IPs. Any info on this subject is very welcome.

    Read the article

  • Application loses authentication when performing redirect to a virtual directory

    - by nuhusky2003
    I have the following setup: http://www.example.com/dir1/ and http://www.example.com/dir2/ Each virtual directory is configured on IIS6.0 as an application with own AppPool. When redirecting authenticated user from dir1 to dir2 using response.redirect I lose authentication information for the user and the user is being redirected to the login page. This issue was not coming up with each app (dir1 and dir2) were configured under subdomain, ex: http://dir1.example.com and http://dir2.example.com. I have resolved the issue by adding a machine key to the machine.config file. Can someone explain to me why it's not working on a http://www.example.com/dir1 configuration?

    Read the article

  • Intranet Site Authentication Issues on SBS 2008

    - by mwillmott
    Hello, Simply, the Sharepoint intranet site that is automatically installed with SBS 2008 is bound to port 5555 in IIS so to get to it you can browse to server-name:5555 and then authenticate using domain credentials. I have added another binding on port 80 using a host header so intranet.localdomain.local (and added the required record in the DNS). This works fine from any computer on the domain, you can go to the nicer address and authenticate no problem. However, when you browse to the port 80 binding on the local server it reaches it but fails to authenticate. I cannot figure out why and it is really annoying. Not essential to fix but it would be nice. Any ideas? Michael

    Read the article

  • OSX AFP authentication

    - by Jason S
    I've enabled file sharing (AFP) on my iMac so that I can access it via our MacBook. I've also created a directory ~/shared/family that I have shared to specific user accounts. When I use the Finder on my MacBook, I see my iMac computer listed, and I can see my ~/Public directory on the iMac, but I can't see ~/shared/family. How do I authenticate from my MacBook to my iMac? That seems like it's the missing step.

    Read the article

  • Debugging UI Problems in IE8 (Was IE8 on Windows 7 Authentication Mess)

    - by alharaka
    UPDATE: I think the real question I need to ask here is: how does a technician debug UI problems with Internet Explorer, and not HTML rendering issues that have pretty good tools? I am aware of the SysInternals tools and others mentioned below, but maybe I am not harnessing their power properly. Someone else in the TechNet forum I mentioned had a similar issue. Again, I have lots of data, I am not sure how to properly interpret it. ORIGINAL POST: So I tried the venerable Technet Forums to solve this isse. In short, the Windows Security dialog has no place to put credentials, rendering pretty much useless. This happens to apply for a whole bunch of our intranet websites, and only a select number of users with a few laptops have this problem. It ends up looking like this. Things I have tried so far: Disabling local Group Policy (not domain connected) Disabling local Security Policy Resetting IE settings A few system restores Re-registering a bunch of IE DLL's and all other steps here Reinstalling IE8 (dism /online /disable-feature /featurename:"internet-explorer-optional-x86, reboot, dism /online /enable-feature /featurename:"internet-explorer-optional-x86, and reboot) And SFC scan, which found nothing Still, nothing. Not only am I fed up, but I have begun to really work with APIExplorer and Procmon as mentioned in the Technet original because I want to know WHAT is happening, not just fix it. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Samba authentication problem when attempting to connect from Windows client

    - by Camsoft
    I've got a Linux server running Ubuntu and Samba. I've created two shares in Samba that point to directories that are owned by the user "cameron". When I attempt to connect to these shares on Windows 7 is connects and allows me to see the files but they are read-only. This is the desired action for guest users but not for authenticated users. My user on the Windows client is "Cameron" and has the same password as the Linux user "cameron". I don't think my Windows user has authenticated against the Linux user. I even created a users.map file to map the user cameron (linux) to Cameron (windows) but still it does not work. Here is my samba config file (UPDATED): [global] server string = %h server (Samba, Ubuntu) map to guest = Bad User passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u passwd chat = *Enter\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *Retype\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* . username map = /etc/samba/users.map syslog = 0 log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m max log size = 1000 os level = 65 preferred master = Yes dns proxy = No wins support = Yes usershare allow guests = Yes panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d valid users = cameron write list = cameron [www] path = /usr/local/apache2/htdocs write list = @www-data force group = www-data guest ok = Yes [cameron] path = /home/cameron write list = @www-data force group = www-data guest ok = Yes

    Read the article

  • Debugging UI Problems in IE8 (Was IE8 on Windows 7 Authentication Mess)

    - by alharaka
    UPDATE: I think the real question I need to ask here is: how does a technician debug UI problems with Internet Explorer, and not HTML rendering issues that have pretty good tools? I am aware of the SysInternals tools and others mentioned below, but maybe I am not harnessing their power properly. Someone else in the TechNet forum I mentioned had a similar issue. Again, I have lots of data, I am not sure how to properly interpret it. ORIGINAL POST: So I tried the venerable Technet Forums to solve this isse. In short, the Windows Security dialog has no place to put credentials, rendering pretty much useless. This happens to apply for a whole bunch of our intranet websites, and only a select number of users with a few laptops have this problem. It ends up looking like this. Things I have tried so far: Disabling local Group Policy (not domain connected) Disabling local Security Policy Resetting IE settings A few system restores Re-registering a bunch of IE DLL's and all other steps here Reinstalling IE8 (dism /online /disable-feature /featurename:"internet-explorer-optional-x86, reboot, dism /online /enable-feature /featurename:"internet-explorer-optional-x86, and reboot) And SFC scan, which found nothing Still, nothing. Not only am I fed up, but I have begun to really work with APIExplorer and Procmon as mentioned in the Technet original because I want to know WHAT is happening, not just fix it. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Nginx with PAM authentication through pam_script

    - by Envek
    Have anyone set up such a configuration? It's not work for me. So, I've installed nginx-extras on Ubuntu 12.04 (it's built with PAM module), and write to site config: location ^~ /restricted_place/ { auth_pam "Please specify login and password from main_site"; auth_pam_service_name "nginx"; } Afterwards, in /etc/pam.d/nginx: auth required pam_script.so dir=/path/to/my/auth_scripts And wrote simplest /path/to/my/auth_scripts/pam_script_auth (also I've tried to write complicated scripts) #!/bin/sh exit 0 # should allow anyone Doesn't work. The script is launched (I've wrote full functional script, that successfully executes, check credentials, writes to its own log and returns correct exit code, and executes noticeably long). But no access granted. Only rejected. In /var/log/nginx/error.log appears next record: 2012/09/13 10:44:42 [alert] 1666#0: waitpid() failed (10: No child processes) If I'm specify in /etc/pam.d/nginx: auth required pam_unix.so and grant for www-data user right to read /etc/shadow, unix authorization works fine. But script auth doesn't work. Can't understand, where is trouble. In nginx module, or in pam_script module.

    Read the article

  • SMTP authentication error using PHPMailer

    - by Javier
    I am using PHPMailer to send a basic form to an email address but I get the following error: SMTP Error: Could not authenticate. Message could not be sent. Mailer Error: SMTP Error: Could not authenticate. SMTP server error: VXNlcm5hbWU6 The weird thing is that if I try to send it again, IT WORKS! Every time I submit the form after that first error it works. But if I leave it for a few minutes and then try again I get the same error again. The username and password have to be right as sometimes it works fine. I even created the following (very basic) script just to test it and I got the same result <?php require("phpmailer/class.phpmailer.php"); $mail = new PHPMailer(); $mail->IsSMTP(); $mail->Host = "smtp.host.com"; $mail->SMTPAuth = true; $mail->Username = "[email protected]"; $mail->Password = "password"; $mail->From = "[email protected]"; $mail->FromName = "From Name"; $mail->AddAddress("[email protected]"); $mail->AddReplyTo("[email protected]"); $mail->IsHTML(true); $mail->Subject = "Here is the subject"; $mail->Body = "This is the HTML message body <b>in bold!</b>"; $mail->AltBody = "This is the body in plain text for non-HTML mail clients"; if(!$mail->Send()) { echo "Message could not be sent. <p>"; echo "Mailer Error: " . $mail->ErrorInfo; exit; } echo "Message has been sent"; ?> I don't think this is relevant, but I just changed my hosting to a Linux shared server. Any idea why this is happening? Thanks! ***UPDATED 02/06/2012 I've been doing some tests. The results: I tested the script in an IIS server and it worked fine. The error seems to happen only in the Linux server. Also, if I use the gmail mail server it works fine in both, IIS and Linux. Could it be a problem with the configuration of my Linux server??

    Read the article

  • Domain authentication over OPEN wireless pre-logon (Windows 7 Pro) - No logon servers avail

    - by Shadow00Caster
    I have a plethora of laptops that are joined to an AD domain. I have an enterprise wireless system setup, the users of these laptops will be using an OPEN unsecured SSID which will ultimately have a captive portal that uses Radius-AD auth and firewall rules to allow access pre-captive portal auth to the proper ip's/ports of DC's etc for auth etc. I already have other laptops/users connecting to another SSID with 802.11x and SSO, all works perfectly pre-logon etc. My problem is with this open network, for some reason I cannot get the machines to auth to AD. The laptops connect to the wireless network, I confirm this on the controller and can ping the laptop at startup. I sharked the wires on the 2 DC's that these machines auth to, I can see a DNS SOA update from a laptop im testing with and can ping that test laptop from both DC's. When I try to logon, "There are currently no logon servers available to service the logon request." The shark shows no incoming connections to either DC even though the laptop is connected and pingable. Any help is greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • VPN authentication and MAC addresses

    - by zakk
    I have to set up a VPN (various clients connecting to a web service on a server, which is also the VPN server) and I want to make sure that no user will share his/her credentials with third parties. I know that this problem is not solvable completely, but I'd want to set up some additional security checks... Some idea I have: 1) An additional check on MAC address, but... are MAC addresses preserved thru VPN? 2) Some kind of extra identification of the client (User Agent, open ports, I want to make sure that is the very same client I authorized). 3) I would like to avoid commercial solutions like a security token... I realize it would be the perfect solution, but it will be to expensive, I suppose... Do you feel that these options are viable? Do you have any other ideas? Thanks in advance for your replies!

    Read the article

  • Custom authentication method for GDM

    - by FMC
    I am trying to find a way of authenticating users on public computers through GDM, but I have a few things to be taken in account. The users do not have a login/password, they only thing they are given is a string. This string is unique and will allow us to identify them. You can see this string as a login without a password. The users must be present in a remote database The users must have the rights to login on the computer they are on at that time. A remote database would check if a booking on the computer had been set for that time by that user. Or if no booking had been made, allow to login. A default user id/home/gid has to be set to the user once logged in I have found ways to deal with most of those requirements, but not altogether. PAM looks nice to set up a custom way of checking if the user booked its computer. NSS MySQL looks nice to set up the environment. Would you know how to set up the environment by myself using a custom PAM module (using pam_python would be preferred)? Or any other method that could help me? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Web authentication using LDAP and Apache?

    - by Stephen R
    I am working on a project of setting up a web administered inventory database for my work (or if they don't want it then i'll enjoy learning about it) and hit the problem of allowing only authorized users to access the website (In its testing/development phase, I allow all people to navigate to the website to add entries to the database and query it). I am trying to make it so only particular users in the domain (Active Directory) are allowed to access the website after they are queried about their credentials. I read that Apache (I am using a LAMP server) has a means of asking visitors to the website to provide LDAP credentials in order to gain access to the site, but I wasn't sure if that was exactly what I was looking for. If anyone has experience in the LDAP configurations for Apache that I mentioned or any other means of securely authenticating with websites I would greatly appreciate advice or a direction to go Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Exchange\AD Authentication Using Alternate Email Domain

    - by Aaron Wurthmann
    I did this once. I can't recall how to do it anymore AND/OR it works differently in Windows 2008 than it did in Windows 2003. I recall it being an Exchange hosting feature. I would like users to login with their email addresses instead of only with their domain name. EXAMPLE: User: John Doe User logon name: [email protected] User logon name (pre-Windows 2000): DOMAIN\jdoe E-mail: [email protected] I would like for jdoe to be able to login as [email protected]

    Read the article

  • LameUser trying - apache2 webserver authentication - IP range to access without pass prompt others with it

    - by Mikee
    I have (maybe silly) question regarding the apache2 webserver and security - I am trying to archieve this: Users connecting from 192.168.1.24 not to be prompted for password and allowed Others asked for username and password if correct then connect. I am trying to do this for the whole directory /var/www No matter whether I put the code into .htaccess file or in httpd.conf it doesn't work for me. Order deny,allow Deny from all AuthName "PassRequest" AuthType Basic AuthUserFile /var/.htpasswd Require valid-user Allow from 192.168.1.24 Satisfy Any If I try to connect to the page I am allowed from both the allowed IP or any other, If I remove the satisfy any line then I am prompted for password, if I remove the password too and try to connect from different IP I am NOT REFUSED ... is there some module that needs to be activated or why is the IP directive skipped ? It needs to be put in every folder or /var/www/.htaccess is enough ? can I just put it in httpd.conf instead or not ?? I spend last 4 hours trying to google up why it is acting like that, Any help will be highly appreciated :-))

    Read the article

  • SharePoint domain authentication

    - by JL
    I have a local domain controller setup, which is MYDOMAIN.com, and on a seperate local server I have a MOSS site running. the DNS is all working fine but when I try to connect to the MOSS site using domain credentials I can't use syntax: MYDOMAIN/MyAccount it is expecting [email protected] What can I do to fix this issue, so I have normal domain login capabilities like every other sharepoint site out there?

    Read the article

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