Search Results

Search found 367 results on 15 pages for 'authorize'.

Page 2/15 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • irc client with good logging/autoconnect/authorize upon connect capabilities

    - by ldigas
    I need an IRC client with good logging / autoconnect upon disconnect / authorize upon succesful connect capabilities. Simply, something that will sit in the background and record some channels so I can quickly reread them later. Windows XP platform. Is there something like that on the market ? I knew of one or two 'in the old days' (of ibm terminals :-), but nowadays, all I see are simple gui clients without even the basic features. I know of mIRC (with which I've had some problems with reconnecting after server drops). Anything better out there ? Just to clarify ... I'm not interested in a general irc client ... for that I have mIRC, with which I'm reasonably happy ... I just need something which is really good at the above mentioned three things.

    Read the article

  • MVC JsonResult with the [Authorize] attribute going to Logon but not displaying the view

    - by likestoski
    I am seeing odd behavior with MVC 3 methods that return a JsonResult when used with the Authorize attribute. What looks like happens is the Authorize is correctly evaluated when I am not logged in but instead of redirecting to the logon form the Json response is the logon form. Is there an addition attribute that directs the response to not return a value but instead redirect the user to the logon form, preferebly with the correct returnUrl value? What I did as a demo was to setup a new MVC3 site and added AspNetMembership to my DB using the aspnet_regsql.exe command. All that is setup and logging me in correctly. The behavior of the JsonResult doesn't seem right and I'm hoping I have just missed an attribute to make it work properly. Any help is greatly appreciated, thanks in advance. Here is the Account Controller (leaving out the Post action which is not part of this question). public class AccountController : Controller { public ActionResult LogOn() { return View(); } [Authorize] public JsonResult AuthorizedAction() { return Json("Only returns if I am authorized"); } } Here is the Html markup: <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery-ui-1.8.11.min.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { $("#btnTest").click(function () { $.ajax({ type: "POST", url: "Account/AuthorizedAction", data: {}, success: function (result) { $("#testMe").html(result); }, error: function (result) { $("#testMe").html('Something broke in the ajax request'); } }); }); }); </script> <input type="button" id="btnTest" value="Test me" /> <div id="testMe">I have initial text</div> The Result: 1) When logged in I get 'Only returns if I am authorized' in my test div 2) When not logged and I have a break point in my Logon() method I see this value Request["returnUrl"] "/Account/AuthorizedAction" The test div I have displays the logon form :) this seems like I'm just not handling this properly.

    Read the article

  • "Authorize" attribute and 403 error page

    - by zerkms
    [Authorize] property is nice and handy MS invention, and I hope it can solve the issues I have now To be more specific: When current client isn't authenticated - [Authorize] redirects from secured action to logon page and after logon was successfull - brings user back, this is good. But when current cilent already authenticated but not authorized to run specific action - all I need is to just display my general 403 page. Is it possible without moving authorization logic within controller's body? UPD: The behavior I need in should be semantically equals to this sketch: public ActionResult DoWork() { if (!NotAuthorized()) { return RedirectToAction("403"); } return View(); } so - there should no any redirect and url should be stay the same, but contents of the page should be replaced with 403-page

    Read the article

  • Invoke an action that is using ASP.NET MVC [Authorize] from outside the application

    - by Nate Bross
    Is this possible? I'd like to expose a URL (action) such as http://mysever/myapp/UpdateHeartbeat/. In my MVC application it looks like [Authorize] [AcceptsVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult UpdateHeartbeat() { // update date in DB to DateTime.Now } Now, in my MVC application the user has logged in via FORMS authentication and they can execute that action to their hearts content. What I want to do, is hit that URL progromatically (as part of an API that I wouldl like to build) -- is there a way I can do that without removing the [Authorize] attribute and adding username/password as parameters to the POST?

    Read the article

  • Custom authorize using MVC

    - by Karsten
    Im working a bit with MVC. I need to know something about roles when using the same controller for several users getting and showing pictures. I need to show pictures, but sometimes these pictures should only be shown for those who created them. So now when using the Authorize attribute and if picture and username match thrue my databse I could ofcause use this to make a match. I could ofcause make a match method in the controller. [Authorize] controllGetPicture(Picture ID){ getSomepicture.. return picture } DB relations Relations [User] <- [Pictures] ID FK_UserID Im thinking about just getting the User ID and compare with the Picture FK_UserId at the picture but I think it could be smarter. How?

    Read the article

  • Windows Vista DHCP bug, arp authorize, isc dhcp, workaround

    - by jinanwow
    I am trying to find a workaround for the Windows Vista Force Broadcast bug with ISC DHCP and a Cisco Router. The problem is not windows vista trying to obtain an IP address from us that works fine (with or without the flag enabled). THe problem is we are using a cisco router and the command 'arp authorized' to prevent users from using static IP addresses on the network. The problem is, if Windows Vista sets the boot flag to true the command 'arp authorized' will not work, as it looks for the IP address and destination MAC address in the DHCP Offer Packet to add it to its arp table. The machine will DHCP just fine, but since the ARP table is not aware of the machine, it is unable to access the internet. If I disable the broadcast flag in vista, the next time it DHCPs an arp entry gets created since the DHCP Offer is unicast instead of broadcast. The thing is, we can not tell 500 to 1000 people to edit their registry, so we need a workaround for this issue. I have not had much success in finding a workaround. The question is, is there a way to force or trick ISC DHCP into unicasting a responce back to the user. Either on the Cisco Side, ISC DHCP side or intercepting and rewriting the DHCP Discover UDP packet to turn off the flag before it reaches ISC DHCP?

    Read the article

  • Facebook Chat through XMPP protocol on Pidgin Portable - Will not Authorize

    - by Sara Neff
    I heard you can use facebook chat on desktops now. Thats awsome! What i didn't hear is that it is a pain in the butt! Not awsome! I've followed six nearly identical sets of instructions from six different websides, including the one that facebook generates for you, to get facebook chat connected through Pidgin. Its the latest portable version, so from what i hear the plugin is out of the question. Whenever I go to try and connect i get a message saying "Not Authorized" and buttons to either modify the account info, or retry. NOTHING i have done has fixed this, and I can't find anything remotely usefull anywhere. I am running windows xp, and running pidgin (portable) off of a flash drive. Someone please tell me what i have to do. I read about authorizing the chat on my actual facebook page. I'd have tried that if i could find out how to do it, but if its there they hid it good. HELP?!

    Read the article

  • Can't authorize a server for Amazon RDS

    - by Parris
    We are attempting to slowly migrate a website over to AWS among other things. We decided the first thing to move was the database. We have some dedicated server with a different hosting provider. We only have one IP. I am having trouble authorizing the ip so that the old server can connect to RDS. It simply hangs for a while while using the mysql cli, then responds: ERROR 2003 (HY000): Can't connect to MySQL server on 'db.address.us-east-1.rds.amazonaws.com' (110) It did work on my laptop though. I am not quite sure what is wrong. I have a feeling I don't quite understand CIDR/IP. I simply took the ip address and tacked on /32 at the end. Then I gleaned some information that it also has to do with subnet mask? ifconfig reports: 255.255.255.0 I found a calculator and the IP changed a bit and had /24 at the end. That still didn't work. One other note... perhaps i dont know enough about the differences between OS. The hosting provider is using centOS, while our development machines are all ubuntu. Any insight would be extremely helpful! THANKS :)

    Read the article

  • Can't authorize a server for Amazon RDS

    - by Parris
    We are attempting to slowly migrate a website over to AWS among other things. We decided the first thing to move was the database. We have some dedicated server with a different hosting provider. We only have one IP. I am having trouble authorizing the ip so that the old server can connect to RDS. It simply hangs for a while while using the mysql cli, then responds: ERROR 2003 (HY000): Can't connect to MySQL server on 'db.address.us-east-1.rds.amazonaws.com' (110) It did work on my laptop though. I am not quite sure what is wrong. I have a feeling I don't quite understand CIDR/IP. I simply took the ip address and tacked on /32 at the end. Then I gleaned some information that it also has to do with subnet mask? ifconfig reports: 255.255.255.0 I found a calculator and the IP changed a bit and had /24 at the end. That still didn't work. One other note... perhaps i dont know enough about the differences between OS. The hosting provider is using centOS, while our development machines are all ubuntu. Any insight would be extremely helpful! THANKS :)

    Read the article

  • How to authorize standard users to install drivers on Windows XP

    - by Dr I
    I'm currently looking for a way to autorize my non administrators users to perform an installation of drivers. Here is the speech: All my users are standard users, they got a VirtualBox Hypervisor if they need the administrator rights. But if they put an USB device on the local machine and try to redirect the device to the Virtual Machine, Windows ask for some Administrator rights. I've try to set up those GPO: Allow standard users to install drivers. Install WHQL Drivers: Allow Silently. I don't know how to do this.

    Read the article

  • How to authorize standard users to install drivers

    - by Dr I
    I'm currently looking for a way to autorize my non administrators users to perform an installation of drivers. Here is the speech: All my users are standard users, they got a VirtualBox Hypervisor if they need the administrator rights. But if they put an USB device on the local machine and try to redirect the device to the Virtual Machine, Windows ask for some Administrator rights. I've try to set up those GPO: -Allow standard users to install drivers. -Install WHQL Drivers: Allow Silently. I don't know how to do this.

    Read the article

  • MVC Authorize Attribute + HttpUnauthorizedResult + FormsAuthentication

    - by Anthony
    After browsing the MVC section on CodePlex I noticed that the [Authorize] attribute in MVC returns a HttpUnauthorizedResult() when authorization fails (codeplex AuthorizeAttribute class). In the source of HttpUnauthorizedResult() from CodePlex is the code (I'm not allowed to enter another URL as my rep isn't high enough, but replace the numbers on the URL above with 22929#266476): // 401 is the HTTP status code for unauthorized access - setting this // will cause the active authentication module to execute its default // unauthorized handler context.HttpContext.Response.StatusCode = 401; In particular, the comment describes the authentication module's default unauthorized handler. I can't seem to find any information on this default unauthorized handler. In particular, I'm not using FormsAuthentication and when authorization fails I get an ugly IIS 401 error page. Does anyone know about this default unauthorized handler, and in particular how FormsAuthentication hooks itself in to override it? I'm writing a really simple app for my football team who confirm or deny whether they can play a particular match. If I enable FormsAuthentication in the web.config the redirect works, but I'm not using FormsAuthentication and I'd like to know if there's a workaround.

    Read the article

  • Run both Authorize Filter and Action Filter on unauthenticated ASP.NET MVC request

    - by Bryan Migliorisi
    I have decorated my base controller with a couple of action filters. They work fine. One of those filters sets up the request - does things like set the culture based on the domain, etc. I also have a handful of actions that require authorization using the Authorize attribute. My problem is that when an user attempts to request a page they are not authorized to access, the authorization filter kicks in and redirects them to a page telling them that they cannot vie the page. The issue is that the action filters never run so the culture and other request data is never set. This effectively causes language to be wrong in the view and other data to be missing. I know that authorization filters run first but my question is this: How can I design this such that I can ensure that certain methods are always run before the view is returned, regardless of the authorization. Hope that makes sense.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Authorize by Group

    - by Jimmo
    I have what seems like a common issue with SaaS applications, but have not seen this question on here anywhere. I am using ASP.NET MVC with Forms Authentication. I have implemented a custom membership provider to handle logic, but have one issue (perhaps the issue is in my mental picture of the system). As with many SaaS apps, Customers create accounts and use the app in a way that looks like they are the only ones present (they only see their items, users, etc.) In reality, there are generic controllers and views presenting data depending on their account. When calling something like ValidateUser, I have access to their affiliation in the User object - what I don't have is the context of the request to which to compare it. As an example, One company called ABC goes to abc.mysite.com Another company called XYZ goes to xyz.mysite.com When an ABC user calls http://abc.mysite.com/product/edit/12 I have an [Authorize] attribute on the Edit method in the ProductController to make sure he is signed in and has sufficient permission to do so. If that same ABC user tried to access http://xyz.mysite.com/product/edit/12 I would not want to validate him in the context of that call. In the ValidateUser of the MembershipProvider, I have the information about the user, but not about the request. I can tell that the user is from ABC, but I cannot tell that the request is for XYZ at that point in the code. How should I resolve this?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Authorize by Subdomain

    - by Jimmo
    I have what seems like a common issue with SaaS applications, but have not seen this question on here anywhere. I am using ASP.NET MVC with Forms Authentication. I have implemented a custom membership provider to handle logic, but have one issue (perhaps the issue is in my mental picture of the system). As with many SaaS apps, customers create accounts and use the app in a way that looks like they are the only ones present (they only see their items, users, etc.). In reality, there are generic controllers and views presenting data depending on the customer represented in the URL. When calling something like the MembershipProvider.ValidateUser, I have access to the user's customer affiliation in the User object - what I don't have is the context of the request to compare whether it is a data request for the same customer as the user. As an example, One company called ABC goes to abc.mysite.com Another company called XYZ goes to xyz.mysite.com When an ABC user calls http://abc.mysite.com/product/edit/12 I have an [Authorize] attribute on the Edit method in the ProductController to make sure he is signed in and has sufficient permission to do so. If that same ABC user tried to access http://xyz.mysite.com/product/edit/12 I would not want to validate him in the context of that call. In the ValidateUser of the MembershipProvider, I have the information about the user, but not about the request. I can tell that the user is from ABC, but I cannot tell that the request is for XYZ at that point in the code. How should I resolve this?

    Read the article

  • How can I pre-authorize authopen?

    - by Georg
    I'm using authopen inside one of my programs to modify files owned by root. As can be seen in the screenshot below authopen asks for a admin password. What I'd like to achieve is that the dialog shows my app's name and then passes the authorization to authopen. Code Launching authopen which returns an authorized file descriptor. int pipe[2]; socketpair(AF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0, pipe); if (fork() == 0) { // child // close parent's pipe close(pipe[0]); dup2(pipe[1], STDOUT_FILENO); const char *authopenPath = "/usr/libexec/authopen"; execl(authopenPath, authopenPath, "-stdoutpipe", [self.device.devicePath fileSystemRepresentation], NULL); NSLog(@"Fatal error, quitting."); exit(-1); } // parent // close childs's pipe close(pipe[1]); // get file descriptor through sockets I'd really like not to use AuthorizationExecuteWithPrivileges because then I'd have to get more rights than I want to.

    Read the article

  • Facebook SSO authorize in safari but not in facebook app

    - by Pedro Calero
    My problem: I has developed an app with Facebook SSO in my iPhone/iPad. It was working OK. But I have changed the certificate of my app (so now it has new app ID). I also have changed the "iOS pack ID" property in Facebook: I deleted the old app ID and I added the new one. But now my app doesn't do the Facebook SSO when Facebook app is installed. It does it OK when Facebook app is not installed and it uses Safari. I have read this question and this question that say the problem is the "iOS pack ID" and app ID don't match. I have checked it a lot of times, and it is the same. I have put the old app ID in the "iOS pack ID" property of Facebook, but it still doesn't work. I don't know if Facebook take a time to check if my app ID is valid, and how they show the result. I have been a lot of time with this issue. It seem like the problem is the iOS pack ID is not exactly the app ID, but it is not the problem: they are exactly the same. Thank you very much.

    Read the article

  • twitter oauth must authorize user everytime they login

    - by salmane
    I am adding twitter oauth login to my site . and so far i got it to work using oauth. however every time i login i go through the whole authorization process. ( the prompt that allows the user to request or deny the application) is there a way to by pass that once the user has authorized the app? Perhaps i am misunderstanding the process also if so could you please clarify? thank you

    Read the article

  • Using a WebView widget to authorize access

    - by tunneling
    I am trying to access a server that requires authorization using the WebView widget in Android. I think it's the .htaccess type of authorization. I works with the default browser provided with the OS, but when I try it with a WebView.. it gives a 401 immediately. Any ideas on how I can have a WebView present the dialog to enter the user/pass (and remember it)? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to authorize my app with Facebook

    - by xximjasonxx
    I know I have seen apps that log me in using Facebook but never present me with an authorization screen. I can not, for the life of me, figure out how to do this with Windows Phone 7. The best I have been able to get is using the Facebook for C# SDK to get the authorization screen in a WebView. This looks hideous and the page does not even appear to be mobile ready. I have searched high and low for an answer and have found nothing. Wondering if anyone can point me in the right direction to getting this to work? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • authorizet.net local testing and ssl certificate

    - by Funky Dude
    hi i am integrating authorize.net AIM api into my shopping cart. i have a developer account from auth.net and i am working locally. when i do auth.net api call, i get SSL certificate problem, verify that the CA cert is OK. Details: error:14090086:SSL routines:SSL3_GET_SERVER_CERTIFICATE:certificate verify failed i assume it's because i dont have ssl on my local machine. how do i get over this so i can test on my local machine? thank you

    Read the article

  • How to override [Authorize] attribute in the MVC Web API?

    - by NullReference
    I have a MVC Web Api Controller that uses the [Authorize] attribute at the class level. This makes all of the api methods require authorization but I'd like to create an attribute called [ApiPublic] that overrides the [Authorize] attribute. There is a similar technique described here for normal MVC controllers. I tried creating an AuthorizeAttribute based of the System.Web.Http.AuthorizeAttribute but none of the overridden events are called if I put it on a api method that has the [Authorize] at the class level. Anyone have an idea how to override the authorize for the web api? [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class ApiPublicAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute { protected override void HandleUnauthorizedRequest(System.Web.Http.Controllers.HttpActionContext actionContext) { base.HandleUnauthorizedRequest(actionContext); } public override void OnAuthorization(System.Web.Http.Controllers.HttpActionContext actionContext) { base.OnAuthorization(actionContext); } protected override bool IsAuthorized(System.Web.Http.Controllers.HttpActionContext actionContext) { return true; } }

    Read the article

  • Magento: How do I retrieve values from fields submitted with the payment method?

    - by Joseph
    Ok. This is getting a little frustrating. I am trying to create a custom payment module for Magento. The purpose is to use Authorize.net's CIM so that we don't have to worry so much about PCI compliance. The issue I am having is that the users need to be able to access their previous credit cards and use those for purchasing. I have the previous cards being stored in the database. They are also being displayed in the form in the checkout process. My issue comes when I click continue after selecting the payment method. How do I get the values I submitted in the form? Specifically, the value of the radio button the saved code is attached to? I am not sure what if any code is needed for me to post, so let me know if you need anything in particular. Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >