Search Results

Search found 1428 results on 58 pages for 'pam ldap'.

Page 19/58 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • How can the maximum number of simultaneous users to log in to Ubuntu server be increased?

    - by nixnotwin
    I use ubuntu server 10.04 on a fairly good machine, with 2.40 duel-core processor and 2GB RAM. My users login with ssh or samba. I have setup LDAP with PAM to sync user accounts between unix and samba. When I allowed about 90 users to login over ssh at once the server refused login for many users. I am using dropbear as ssh server. Even samba logins failed for many users. I need to allow at least 100 users to login at once. Is there anyway to do this?

    Read the article

  • Tweaks to allows maximum number of users to login to ubuntu server.

    - by nixnotwin
    I use ubuntu server 10.04 on a fairly good machine, with 2.40 duel-core processor and 2GB RAM. My users login with ssh or samba. I have setup LDAP with PAM to sync user accounts between unix and samba. When I allowed about 90 users to login over ssh at once the server refused login for many users. I am using dropbear as ssh server. Even samba logins failed for many users. I need to allow at least 100 users to login at once. Is there anyway to do this?

    Read the article

  • How can I increase the maximum number of simultaneous users to log in to a server?

    - by nixnotwin
    I use ubuntu server 10.04 on a fairly good machine, with 2.40 dual-core processor and 2GB RAM. My users login with ssh or samba. I have setup LDAP with PAM to sync user accounts between unix and samba. When I allowed about 90 users to login over ssh at once the server refused login for many users. I am using dropbear as ssh server. Even samba logins failed for many users. I need to allow at least 100 users to login at once. Is there anyway to do this?

    Read the article

  • TLS (STARTTLS) Failure After 10.6 Upgrade to Open Directory Master

    - by Thomas Kishel
    Hello, Environment: Mac OS X 10.6.3 install/import of a MacOS X 10.5.8 Open Directory Master server. After that upgrade, LDAP+TLS fails on our MacOS X 10.5, 10.6, CentOS, Debian, and FreeBSD clients (Apache2 and PAM). Testing using ldapsearch: ldapsearch -ZZ -H ldap://gnome.darkhorse.com -v -x -b "dc=darkhorse,dc=com" '(uid=donaldr)' uid ... fails with: ldap_start_tls: Protocol error (2) Testing adding "-d 9" fails with: res_errno: 2, res_error: <unsupported extended operation>, res_matched: <> Testing without requiring STARTTLS or with LDAPS: ldapsearch -H ldap://gnome.darkhorse.com -v -x -b "dc=darkhorse,dc=com" '(uid=donaldr)' uid ldapsearch -H ldaps://gnome.darkhorse.com -v -x -b "dc=darkhorse,dc=com" '(uid=donaldr)' uid ... succeeds with: # donaldr, users, darkhorse.com dn: uid=donaldr,cn=users,dc=darkhorse,dc=com uid: donaldr # search result search: 2 result: 0 Success # numResponses: 2 # numEntries: 1 result: 0 Success (We are specifying "TLS_REQCERT never" in /etc/openldap/ldap.conf) Testing with openssl: openssl s_client -connect gnome.darkhorse.com:636 -showcerts -state ... succeeds: CONNECTED(00000003) SSL_connect:before/connect initialization SSL_connect:SSLv2/v3 write client hello A SSL_connect:SSLv3 read server hello A depth=1 /C=US/ST=Oregon/L=Milwaukie/O=Dark Horse Comics, Inc./OU=Dark Horse Network/CN=DHC MIS Department verify error:num=19:self signed certificate in certificate chain verify return:0 SSL_connect:SSLv3 read server certificate A SSL_connect:SSLv3 read server done A SSL_connect:SSLv3 write client key exchange A SSL_connect:SSLv3 write change cipher spec A SSL_connect:SSLv3 write finished A SSL_connect:SSLv3 flush data SSL_connect:SSLv3 read finished A --- Certificate chain 0 s:/C=US/ST=Oregon/L=Milwaukie/O=Dark Horse Comics, Inc./OU=MIS/CN=gnome.darkhorse.com i:/C=US/ST=Oregon/L=Milwaukie/O=Dark Horse Comics, Inc./OU=Dark Horse Network/CN=DHC MIS Department 1 s:/C=US/ST=Oregon/L=Milwaukie/O=Dark Horse Comics, Inc./OU=Dark Horse Network/CN=DHC MIS Department i:/C=US/ST=Oregon/L=Milwaukie/O=Dark Horse Comics, Inc./OU=Dark Horse Network/CN=DHC MIS Department --- Server certificate -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- <deleted for brevity> -----END CERTIFICATE----- subject=/C=US/ST=Oregon/L=Milwaukie/O=Dark Horse Comics, Inc./OU=MIS/CN=gnome.darkhorse.com issuer=/C=US/ST=Oregon/L=Milwaukie/O=Dark Horse Comics, Inc./OU=Dark Horse Network/CN=DHC MIS Department --- No client certificate CA names sent --- SSL handshake has read 2640 bytes and written 325 bytes --- New, TLSv1/SSLv3, Cipher is AES256-SHA Server public key is 1024 bit Compression: NONE Expansion: NONE SSL-Session: Protocol : TLSv1 Cipher : AES256-SHA Session-ID: D3F9536D3C64BAAB9424193F81F09D5C53B7D8E7CB5A9000C58E43285D983851 Session-ID-ctx: Master-Key: E224CC065924DDA6FABB89DBCC3E6BF89BEF6C0BD6E5D0B3C79E7DE927D6E97BF12219053BA2BB5B96EA2F6A44E934D3 Key-Arg : None Start Time: 1271202435 Timeout : 300 (sec) Verify return code: 0 (ok) So we believe that the slapd daemon is reading our certificate and writing it to LDAP clients. Apple Server Admin adds ProgramArguments ("-h ldaps:///") to /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/org.openldap.slapd.plist and TLSCertificateFile, TLSCertificateKeyFile, TLSCACertificateFile, and TLSCertificatePassphraseTool to /etc/openldap/slapd_macosxserver.conf when enabling SSL in the LDAP section of the Open Directory service. While that appears enough for LDAPS, it appears that this is not enough for TLS. Comparing our 10.6 and 10.5 slapd.conf and slapd_macosxserver.conf configuration files yields no clues. Replacing our certificate (generated with a self-signed ca) with an Apple Server Admin generated self signed certificate results in no change in ldapsearch results. Setting -d to 256 in /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/org.openldap.slapd.plist logs: 4/13/10 5:23:35 PM org.openldap.slapd[82162] conn=384 op=0 EXT oid=1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.20037 4/13/10 5:23:35 PM org.openldap.slapd[82162] conn=384 op=0 do_extended: unsupported operation "1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.20037" 4/13/10 5:23:35 PM org.openldap.slapd[82162] conn=384 op=0 RESULT tag=120 err=2 text=unsupported extended operation Any debugging advice much appreciated. -- Tom Kishel

    Read the article

  • Cannot join Win7 workstations to Win2k8 domain

    - by wfaulk
    I am trying to connect a Windows 7 Ultimate machine to a Windows 2k8 domain and it's not working. I get this error: Note: This information is intended for a network administrator. If you are not your network's administrator, notify the administrator that you received this information, which has been recorded in the file C:\Windows\debug\dcdiag.txt. DNS was successfully queried for the service location (SRV) resource record used to locate a domain controller for domain "example.local": The query was for the SRV record for _ldap._tcp.dc._msdcs.example.local The following domain controllers were identified by the query: dc1.example.local dc2.example.local However no domain controllers could be contacted. Common causes of this error include: Host (A) or (AAAA) records that map the names of the domain controllers to their IP addresses are missing or contain incorrect addresses. Domain controllers registered in DNS are not connected to the network or are not running. The client is in an office connected remotely via MPLS to the data center where our domain controllers exist. I don't seem to have anything blocking connectivity to the DCs, but I don't have total control over the MPLS circuit, so it's possible that there's something blocking connectivity. I have tried multiple clients (Win7 Ultimate and WinXP SP3) in the one office and get the same symptoms on all of them. I have no trouble connecting to either of the domain controllers, though I have, admittedly, not tried every possible port. ICMP, LDAP, DNS, and SMB connections all work fine. Client DNS is pointing to the DCs, and "example.local" resolves to the two IP addresses of the DCs. I get this output from the NetLogon Test command line utility: C:\Windows\System32>nltest /dsgetdc:example.local Getting DC name failed: Status = 1355 0x54b ERROR_NO_SUCH_DOMAIN I have also created a separate network to emulate that office's configuration that's connected to the DC network via LAN-to-LAN VPN instead of MPLS. Joining Windows 7 computers from that remote network works fine. The only difference I can find between the two environments is the intermediate connectivity, but I'm out of ideas as to what to test or how to do it. What further steps should I take? (Note that this isn't actually my client workstation and I have no direct access to it; I'm forced to do remote hands access to it, which makes some of the obvious troubleshooting methods, like packet sniffing, more difficult. If I could just set up a system there that I could remote into, I would, but requests to that effect have gone unanswered.) 2011-08-25 update: I had DCDIAG.EXE run on a client attempting to join the domain: C:\Windows\System32>dcdiag /u:example\adminuser /p:********* /s:dc2.example.local Directory Server Diagnosis Performing initial setup: Ldap search capabality attribute search failed on server dc2.example.local, return value = 81 This sounds like it was able to connect via LDAP, but the thing that it was trying to do failed. But I don't quite follow what it was trying to do, much less how to reproduce it or resolve it. 2011-08-26 update: Using LDP.EXE to try and make an LDAP connection directly to the DCs results in these errors: ld = ldap_open("10.0.0.1", 389); Error <0x51: Fail to connect to 10.0.0.1. ld = ldap_open("10.0.0.2", 389); Error <0x51: Fail to connect to 10.0.0.2. ld = ldap_open("10.0.0.1", 3268); Error <0x51: Fail to connect to 10.0.0.1. ld = ldap_open("10.0.0.2", 3268); Error <0x51: Fail to connect to 10.0.0.2. This would seem to point fingers at LDAP connections being blocked somewhere. (And 0x51 == 81, which was the error from DCDIAG.EXE from yesterday's update.) I could swear I tested this using TELNET.EXE weeks ago, but now I'm thinking that I may have assumed that its clearing of the screen was telling me that it was waiting and not that it had connected. I'm tracking down LDAP connectivity problems now. This update may become an answer.

    Read the article

  • Migrate openldap users and groups

    - by user53864
    I have an OpenLDAP server running on one of my ubuntu 8.10 servers. I used command-line only for OpenLdap installation and some basic configurations, everything else I'll configure with the Webmin gui tool. I'm trying to migrate to ubuntu 10.04 and I was able to migrate all other servies, application and databases but not the ldap. I'm an ldap beginner: I have installed OpenLDAP server and client on ubuntu 10.04 server using the link and used the following command to export and import ldap users and groups To export from 8.10 server slapcat > ldap.ldif To import to 10.04 server Stop ldap and slapadd -l ldap.ldif and Start ldap Then I accessed Webmin and checked in Ldap users and groups and I could see all the users and groups of my old ldap server.Whenever I create an ldap user from the webmin(in 8.10 or 10.04) a unix user is also created with the home directory under /home. But the imported users in 10.04 from 8.10 are not present as a unix user(/etc/passwd). How could I make the ldap users available as a unix user, is there any perfect way to export and import?. I also wanted to check the ldap users from the terminal that if password is exported properly but I don't know how to access the ldap users which are not available as unix users. On 8.10, I just use su - ldapuser and it is not working in the 10.04 as unix users are not created for the exported ldap users. If every thing works fine then the CVS works as it is using ldap authentication. Anybody could help me?

    Read the article

  • Ping Unknown Host on CentOS at EC2

    - by organicveggie
    Weird problem. We have a collection of servers running CentOS 5 on EC2. The setup includes two DNS servers and two LDAP servers. DNS has a CNAME pointing at the primary LDAP server. One machine (and only one machine) is giving me problems. I can ssh into the server using LDAP authentication. But once I'm on the machine, ping won't resolve the LDAP host even though DNS seems to work fine. Here's ping: $ ping ldap.mycompany.ec2 ping: unknown host ldap.mycompany.ec2 Here's the output of dig: $ dig ldap.mycompany.ec2 ; <<>> DiG 9.3.6-P1-RedHat-9.3.6-4.P1.el5_5.3 <<>> ldap.studyblue.ec2 ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 2893 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;ldap.mycompany.ec2. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: ldap.mycompany.ec2. 3600 IN CNAME ec2-hostname.compute-1.amazonaws.com. ec2-hostname.compute-1.amazonaws.com. 55 IN A aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd ;; Query time: 12 msec ;; SERVER: 10.32.159.xxx#53(10.32.159.xxx) ;; WHEN: Tue May 31 11:16:30 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 107 And here is resolv.conf: $ cat /etc/resolv.conf search mycompany.ec2 nameserver 10.32.159.xxx nameserver 10.244.19.yyy And here is my hosts file: $ cat /etc/hosts 10.122.15.zzz bamboo4 bamboo4.mycompany.ec2 127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain And here's nsswitch.conf $ cat /etc/nsswitch.conf passwd: files ldap shadow: files ldap group: files ldap sudoers: ldap files hosts: files dns bootparams: nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files ethers: files netmasks: files networks: files protocols: files rpc: files services: files netgroup: files ldap publickey: nisplus automount: files ldap aliases: files nisplus So DNS works the way I would expect. And I can ping the ldap server by ip address. And I can even access the box with SSH using LDAP authentication. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Apache setting mod_auth_ldap require settings per sub-directory

    - by Anthony
    I would like to set up a primary directory that has one set of LDAP-based restrictions and then have various sub-directories use other restrictions, but only have the actual LDAP search done in the base directory. For example: .htaccess per directory /Primary_Directory AuthLDAPURL "ldap://ldap1.airius.com:389/ou=People, o=Airius?uid?sub?(objectClass=*)" Require group cn=admins ../Open2All Require valid-user ../No_Admins_Allowed Require group cn!=admins So basically, the primary directory (in this example) can only be accessed by users who are in the admins group, while the first sub-directory can be accessed by anyone in the directory, and the second sub-folder can be reached by anyone who is NOT in the admin-group. But I only want to set the Require line for the sub-directories, and not re-setup the LDAP query on each sub-directory. Is this possible, even though there are clear permissions conflicts from level to level? Does the deepest .htaccess file know that the Require line refers to the LDAP search in the parent folder?

    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

  • credit or minclass does not work well with pam_cracklib.so in common-password (opeSuSe 11.3)

    - by Mario
    I'm trying to implement password complexities on my pdc. It's a samba PDC with openLDAP backend. I tried cracklib-check but it looks like that I should have a decent and localize version of password library since the library out there usually comes in english. I also have another consideration that we will allow users to use any kind of password - even though it's dictionary based - as long as their passwords integrated with low/upper alphabet, digits, and other characters such as '$' or '_' (pam_cracklib.so calls them as classes). So here is my /etc/pam.d/common-password: #password requisite pam_pwcheck.so nullok cracklib password requisite pam_cracklib.so minclass=4 reject_username ##password requisite pam_cracklib.so \ ## dcredit=-1 ucredit=-1 lcredit=-1 ocredit=-1 reject_username password optional pam_gnome_keyring.so use_autht_ok password required pam_unix2.so use_authtok nullok The first commented line (with #) was the default configuration of openSuse 11.3. The 2nd/3rd (with leading ##) is another configuration I use when minclass=4 line is commented out. By the way, I have 'check password script' = /usr/local/sbin/crackcheck -d /usr/share/cracklib/pw_dict and passdb backend = ldapsam:ldap://127.0.0.1 parameters in smb.conf and cracklib-check works fine too. So here is the test I conduct. I logon to windows and then change my password. Sometimes it works fine that it trows error message - which what I wanted, but simple password with only lower alphabets can pass windows change password. Maybe I should make a new library which incorporates local vocabularies, but a guy out there (raise your hand please if you read this :) ) also experienced the same trouble with english word. Besides, what we really want is to let user to choose 2 or 3 format password out of 4 classes. Is there a bug or something with pam module in openSuse 11.3? Thank you in advance. Regards, Mario

    Read the article

  • How to import certificate for Apache + LDAPS?

    - by user101956
    I am trying to get ldaps to work through Apache 2.2.17 (Windows Server 2008). If I use ldap (plain text) my configuration works great. LDAPTrustedGlobalCert CA_DER C:/wamp/certs/Trusted_Root_Certificate.cer LDAPVerifyServerCert Off <Location /> AuthLDAPBindDN "CN=corpsvcatlas,OU=Service Accounts,OU=u00958,OU=00958,DC=hca,DC=corpad,DC=net" AuthLDAPBindPassword ..removed.. AuthLDAPURL "ldaps://gc-hca.corpad.net:3269/dc=hca,dc=corpad,dc=net?sAMAccountName?sub" AuthType Basic AuthName "USE YOUR WINDOWS ACCOUNT" AuthBasicProvider ldap AuthUserFile /dev/null require valid-user </Location> I also tried the other encryption choices besides CA_DER just to be safe, with no luck. Finally, I also needed this with Apache tomcat. For tomcat I used the tomcat JRE and ran a line like this: keytool -import -trustcacerts -keystore cacerts -storepass changeit -noprompt -alias mycert -file Trusted_Root_Certificate.cer After doing the above line ldaps worked greate via tomcat. This lets me know that my certificate is a-ok. Update: Both ldap modules are turned on, since using ldap instead of ldaps works fine. When I run a git clone this is the error returned: C:\Tempgit clone http://eqb9718@localhost/git/Liferay.git Cloning into Liferay... Password: error: The requested URL returned error: 500 while accessing http://eqb9718@loca lhost/git/Liferay.git/info/refs fatal: HTTP request failed access.log has this: 127.0.0.1 - eqb9718 [23/Nov/2011:18:25:12 -0600] "GET /git/Liferay.git/info/refs service=git-upload-pack HTTP/1.1" 500 535 127.0.0.1 - eqb9718 [23/Nov/2011:18:25:33 -0600] "GET /git/Liferay.git/info/refs HTTP/1.1" 500 535 apache_error.log has nothing. Is there any more verbose logging I can turn on or better tests to do?

    Read the article

  • SquidGuard and Active Directory: how to deal with multiple groups?

    - by Massimo
    I'm setting up SquidGuard (1.4) to validate users against an Active Directory domain and apply ACLs based on group membership; this is an example of my squidGuard.conf: src AD_Group_A { ldapusersearch ldap://my.dc.name/dc=domain,dc=com?sAMAccountName?sub?(&(sAMAccountName=%s)(memberOf=cn=Group_A%2cdc=domain%2cdc=com)) } src AD_Group_B { ldapusersearch ldap://my.dc.name/dc=domain,dc=com?sAMAccountName?sub?(&(sAMAccountName=%s)(memberOf=cn=Group_B%2cdc=domain%2cdc=com)) } dest dest_a { domainlist dest_a/domains urllist dest_b/urls log dest_a.log } dest dest_b { domainlist dest_b/domains urllist dest_b/urls log dest_b.log } acl { AD_Group_A { pass dest_a !dest_b all redirect http://some.url } AD_Group_B { pass !dest_a dest_b all redirect http://some.url } default { pass !dest_a !dest_b all redirect http://some.url } } All works fine if an user is member of Group_A OR Group_B. But if an user is member of BOTH groups, only the first source rule is evaluated, thus applying only the first ACL. I understand this is due to how source rule matching works in SquidGuard (if one rule matches, evaluation stops there and then the related ACL is applied); so I tried this, too: src AD_Group_A_B { ldapusersearch ldap://my.dc.name/dc=domain,dc=com?sAMAccountName?sub?(&(sAMAccountName=%s)(memberOf=cn=Group_A%2cdc=domain%2cdc=com)) ldapusersearch ldap://my.dc.name/dc=domain,dc=com?sAMAccountName?sub?(&(sAMAccountName=%s)(memberOf=cn=Group_B%2cdc=domain%2cdc=com)) } acl { AD_Group_A_B { pass dest_a dest_b all redirect http://some.url } [...] } But this doesn't work, too: if an user is member of either one of those groups, the whole source rule is matched anyway, so he can reach both destinations (which is of course not what I want). The only solution I found so far is creating a THIRD group in AD, and assign a source rule and an ACL to it; but this setup grows exponentially with more than two or three destination sets. Is there any way to handle this better?

    Read the article

  • arch openldap authentication failure

    - by nonus25
    I setup the openldap, all look fine but i cant setup authentication, #getent shadow | grep user user:*::::::: tuser:*::::::: tuser2:*::::::: #getent passwd | grep user git:!:999:999:git daemon user:/:/bin/bash user:x:10000:2000:Test User:/home/user/:/bin/zsh tuser:x:10000:2000:Test User:/home/user/:/bin/zsh tuser2:x:10002:2000:Test User:/home/tuser2/:/bin/zsh from root i can login as a one of these users #su - tuser2 su: warning: cannot change directory to /home/tuser2/: No such file or directory 10:24 tuser2@juliet:/root i cant login via ssh also passwd is not working #ldapwhoami -h 10.121.3.10 -D "uid=user,ou=People,dc=xcl,dc=ie" ldap_bind: Server is unwilling to perform (53) additional info: unauthenticated bind (DN with no password) disallowed 10:30 root@juliet:~ #ldapwhoami -h 10.121.3.10 -D "uid=user,ou=People,dc=xcl,dc=ie" -W Enter LDAP Password: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49) typed password by me is correct /etc/openldap/slapd.conf access to dn.base="" by * read access to dn.base="cn=Subschema" by * read access to * by self write by users read by anonymous read access to * by dn="uid=root,ou=Roles,dc=xcl,dc=ie" write by users read by anonymous auth access to attrs=userPassword,gecos,description,loginShell by self write access to attrs="userPassword" by dn="uid=root,ou=Roles,dc=xcl,dc=ie" write by anonymous auth by self write by * none access to * by dn="uid=root,ou=Roles,dc=xcl,dc=ie" write by dn="uid=achmiel,ou=People,dc=xcl,dc=ie" write by * search access to attrs=userPassword by self =w by anonymous auth access to * by self write by users read database hdb suffix "dc=xcl,dc=ie" rootdn "cn=root,dc=xcl,dc=ie" rootpw "{SSHA}AM14+..." there are some parts of that conf file /etc/openldap/ldap.conf looks : BASE dc=xcl,dc=ie URI ldap://192.168.10.156/ TLS_REQCERT allow TIMELIMIT 2 so my question is what i am missing that ldap not allow me login by using password ?

    Read the article

  • The Story of secure user-authentication in squid

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry if the story is boring and messy, but most of it is real! =) /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry for this boring and messy story! /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid: The Story

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry for this boring and messy story! /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • Simple NAS setup for Ubuntu

    - by Sean Houlihane
    So, I want to connect my shiny new NAS (QNAP TS-210p II) to my Ubuntu 11.10 box. I have a 2nd Ubuntu machine, but I don't use that enough to be too worried about it. Use is ideally to offload all storage except for system (which can then run off a 30GB flash drive). The main machine also runs Myth front/backends. Both are on a wired network currently. I have got a basic setup working, mounted over NFS, but have some issues, and whenever I look for answers, I seem to get unto the UbuntuServer domain, with what seems like more detail than I want in an answer. Questions I have identified so far: 1) Sharing UIDs to get file permissions correct. LDAP or something else? What is necessary to make this work? 2) Mounting an NFS device reliably. Do I just add it in fstab or is some sort of auto-mount advisable? Its a wired network, but I shouldn't need to worry about reboot after power-outages and sequencing...

    Read the article

  • Setup LDAP In WAMP

    - by Cory Dee
    I'm having a really tough time getting the LDAP extensions to work in PHP on a WAMP server. Here is what I've done: Went to C:\Program Files\Apache Software Foundation\Apache2.2\modules and made sure that mod_ldap.so exists. I've gone into C:\Program Files\Apache Software Foundation\Apache2.2\conf\httpd.conf and made sure that this line is not commented out: LoadModule ldap_module modules/mod_ldap.so I've gone into C:\Program Files\PHP\php.ini and made sure this line is not commented out: extension=php_ldap.dll I've made sure C:\Program Files\PHP is in the Path I've made sure C:\Program Files\PHP contains libeay32.dll and ssleay32.dll Restart apache phpinfo() still doesn't show mod_ldap as being turned on. It shows util_ldap under Loaded Modules, but that's the only reference anywhere to LDAP. For a bit more background, I originally posted this on SO.

    Read the article

  • Redmine Subversion: LDAP _and_ local auth

    - by Frank Brenner
    I need to set up a subversion repository with apache authentication against both an external LDAP server as well as the local Redmine database. That is, we have users whose accounts exist only in the LDAP directory and some users whose accounts only exist in the local Redmine db - all should be able to access the repo. I can't quite seem to get the apache config right for this. I know I saw a how-to for this at some point, I think using Redmine.pm, but I can't seem to find it anymore.. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic group membership to work around no nested security group support for Active Directory

    - by Bernie White
    My problem is that I have a number of network administration applications like SAN switches that do not support nested groups from Active Directory Domain Services (AD DS). These legacy administration applications use either LDAP or LDAPS. I am fairly sure I can use Active Directory Lightweight Directory Services (AD LDS) and possibly Windows Authorization Manager to work around this issue; however I am not really sure where to start. I want to end up with: A single group that can be queried over LDAP/LDAPS for all it’s direct members LDAP proxy for user name and password credentials to AD DS Easy way to admin the group, ideally the group would aggregate the nested membership in AD DS. a native solution using freely available components from the Windows stack. If you have any suggestions or solutions that you have previously used to solve this issue please let me know.

    Read the article

  • Connecting to a LDAPS server

    - by Pavanred
    I am working on a development machine and I am trying to connect to my LDAP server. This is what I do - telnet ldaps- 686 then the response is - Could not open connection to the host on port 686 : connect failed But, the strange part is when I connect to my server - telnet ldap- 389 then the connection is successful. My question is, why does this happen? Do I have to install SSL certificate on the client machine where I make the call from? I do not know much about this. I know for a fact that the LDAP server is working fine because other applications are successfully using it currently.

    Read the article

  • iPlanet Authentication provider

    - by Travis
    Good day. I have stepped into project that requires a server migration that would change the means of authentication for our CAC/PKI SSL enabled website. We are using iPlanet 7 and Oracle Directory Server Enterprise 7 as our LDAP server. The situation is that the site is still CAC/PKI enabled, but at the firewall. The information we want to authenticate against is now in the http header. How do I configure iPlanet and LDAP to authenticate against the header instead of SSL? Thanks. Edit, Can this be done with IIS keeping the Directory Server EE LDAP in tact or is the ACL iPlanet only?

    Read the article

  • Limiting Failed SSH Logins

    - by nitins
    I would like to limit failure retries on my Fedora machine to 5. I think I can accomplish it with PAM. But was unable to to do this. I have referred to this article to do this http://www.puschitz.com/SecuringLinux.shtml Please provide suggestions

    Read the article

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