Search Results

Search found 92246 results on 3690 pages for 'user authentication'.

Page 2/3690 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • System user authentication via web interface [closed]

    - by donodarazao
    Background: We have one pretty slow and expensive satellite Internet connection that is shared in a network with 5-50 users. To limit traffic, users shall pay a certain sum of money per hour. Routing and traffic accounting on user basis is done by a opensuse 10.3 server. Login is done via pppoe, and for each connection, username, bytes_sent, bytes_rcvd, start_time, end_time,etc are written into a mysql database. Now it was decided that we want to change from time-based to volume-based pricing. As the original developer who installed the system a couple of years ago isn't available, I'm trying to do the changes. Although I'm absolutely new to all this, there is some progress. However, there's one point I'm absolutely stuck. Up to now, only administrators can access connection details and billing information via a web interface. But as volume-based prices are less transparent to users than time-based prices, it is essential that users themselves can check their connections and how much they cost via the web interface. For this, we need some kind of user authentication. Actual question: How to develop such a user authentication? Every user has a linux system user account. With this user name and password, connection to the pppoe-server is made by the client machines. I thought about two possibles ways to authenticate users: First possibility: Users type username and password in a form. This is then somehow checked. We already have to possibilities to change passwords via the web interface. Here are parts of the code: Part of the Perl script the homepage is linked to: #!/usr/bin/perl use CGI; use CGI::Carp qw(fatalsToBrowser); use lib '../lib'; use own_perl_module; my @error; my $data; $query = new CGI; $username = $query->param('username') || ''; $oldpasswd = $query->param('oldpasswd') || ''; $passwd = $query->param('passwd') || ''; $passwd2 = $query->param('passwd2') || ''; own_perl_module::connect(); if ($query->param('submit')) { my $benutzer = own_perl_module::select_benutzer(username => $username) or push @error, "user not exists"; push @error, "your password?!?" unless $passwd; unless (@error) { own_perl_module::update_benutzer($benutzer->{id}, { oldpasswd => $oldpasswd, passwd => $passwd, passwd2 => $passwd2 }, error => \@error) and push @error, "Password changed."; } } Here's part of the sub update_benutzer in the own_perl_module: if ($dat-{passwd} ne '') { my $username = $dat-{username} || $select-{username}; my $system = "./chpasswd.pl '$username' '$dat-{passwd}'" . (defined($dat-{oldpasswd}) ? " '$dat-{oldpasswd}'" : undef); my $answer = $system; if ($? != 0) { chomp($answer); push @$error, $answer || "error changing password ($?)"; Here's chpasswd.pl: #!/usr/bin/perl use FileHandle; use IPC::Open3; local $username = shift; local $passwd = shift; local $oldpasswd = shift; local $chat = { 'Old Password: $' => sub { print POUT "$oldpasswd\n"; }, 'New password: $' => sub { print POUT "$passwd\n"; }, 'Re-enter new password: $' => sub { print POUT "$passwd\n"; }, '(.*)\n$' => sub { print "$1\n"; exit 1; } }; local $/ = \1; my $command; if (defined($oldpasswd)) { $command = "sudo -u '$username' /usr/bin/passwd"; } else { $command = "sudo /usr/bin/passwd '$username'"; } $pid = open3(\*POUT, \*PIN, \*PERR, $command) or die; my $buffer; LOOP: while($_ = <PERR>) { $buffer .= $_; foreach (keys(%$chat)) { if ($buffer =~ /$_/i) { $buffer = undef; &{$chat->{$_}}; } } } exit; Could this somehow be adjusted to verify users, but not changing user passwords? The second possibility I see: all pppoe connections are logged in the mysql database. If I could somehow retrieve the username (or uid) of the user connected by pppoe, this could be used to authenticate users. Users could only check their internet connections and costs when they are online (and thus paying money), but this could be tolerated. Here's a line of the script that inserts connections into the database: my $username = $ENV{PEERNAME}; I thought it would be easy to use this variable, but $username seems to be always empty in test-scripts (print $username). Any idea how to retrieve the user connected to the pppoe server? Sorry for the long question! Any help would be very much appreciated. :)

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting Windows Authentication problems (no challenge) in IIS 7.5?

    - by Aaronaught
    I know that there are thousands of reports of people having trouble getting Integrated Windows Authentication to work with IIS, but they all seem to lead to web pages that don't apply or solutions that I've already tried. I've deployed dozens of sites like this before, so either there's something bizarre going on with the server/configuration, or I've been looking at this too long and not seeing the obvious. Simply put, everything works perfectly on my local machine, but falls apart on the production server, which as far as I can tell has the exact same configuration. On the local machine: The machine is running Windows 7 Ultimate, Service Pack 1, IIS 7.5. The site has been tested successfully, using both IIS and the VS Web Development Server. The IIS site config has all authentication methods disabled except Windows Authentication. The local machine is not on any domain. The Providers set up are Negotiate and NTLM (not Negotiate:Kerberos). Extended Protection is Off. All browsers tested (IE, Firefox, Chrome) show the challenge prompt and allow me to log in to the localhost domain with my (local) Windows account. All browsers tested also work using an opaque local IP address - so the browsers themselves don't seem to care whether the site appears "local" or "remote". I've added a display line to the web page which shows the currently-logged-in user and it shows exactly what I would expect (whichever local user I logged in with). On the remote machine: The server is running Windows Server 2008 R2, IIS 7.5. Loading the web page results in an immediate 401.2 error: You are not authorized to view this page due to invalid authentication headers. No challenge prompt ever appears. The IIS site config has all authentication methods disabled except Windows Authentication. The remote machine is not on any domain. The Providers set up are Negotiate and NTLM (not Negotiate:Kerberos). Extended Protection is Off. On the remote machine (remote desktop session), the same error appears in Internet Explorer regardless of whether the domain is localhost or the external IP address. If I try to view the remote web site from my local machine, the error is still 401, but a slightly different 401. No subcode, with the text: Access is denied due to invalid credentials. The Windows Authentication IIS role feature is installed. The WindowsAuthentication Module is added (at the Server level). The exact same error occurs if I turn off Windows Authentication and enable Basic Authentication. The site does load if I turn off Windows Authentication and enable Anonymous (obviously). I've already followed all of the troubleshooting steps on Microsoft Support: Troubleshooting HTTP 401 errors in IIS I've already tried the workaround shown on another Microsoft support page (supposedly to force NTLM as the only method). Last but not least, I tried turning on FREB for 401.2 errors and the results don't seem to tell me anything useful, all I see is the following warning: MODULE_SET_RESPONSE_ERROR_STATUS ModuleName IIS Web Core Notification 2 HttpStatus 401 HttpReason Unauthorized HttpSubStatus 2 ErrorCode 2147942405 ConfigExceptionInfo Notification AUTHENTICATE_REQUEST ErrorCode Access is denied. (0x80070005) ...this seems to just be telling me what I already know (that it's simply rejecting the request instead of negotiating the credentials). The trace does indicate that the WindowsAuthentication module is correctly loaded because there is a NOTIFY_MODULE_START line with ModuleName = WindowsAuthentication (and various other ASP.NET follow-up events - [un]fortunately, no interesting errors or warnings here). Can anyone tell me what I might be missing here? Quick Update: I'm a little uncomfortable sending a whole Wireshark dump as it would reveal IPs, URLs and other stuff, but I did a side-by-side comparison of the HTTP responses from localhost and the remote server in Fiddler, and it seems fairly self-evident what the problem is: Localhost: HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized Cache-Control: private Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5 WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate WWW-Authenticate: NTLM X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 23:42:34 GMT Content-Length: 6399 Proxy-Support: Session-Based-Authentication Remote: HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized Content-Type: text/html Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 23:43:13 GMT Content-Length: 1293 Aside from a few seemingly-inconsequential differences like cache-control, the main difference is that the remote server is not sending the WWW-Authenticate headers back to the client. So, I guess that narrows the question down to: Why is IIS not sending WWW-Authenticate headers when Windows Authentication appears to be installed, loaded, and exclusively enabled?

    Read the article

  • Replacing ASP.NET Forms Authentication with WIF Session Authentication (for the better)

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    ASP.NET Forms Authentication and WIF Session Authentication (which has *nothing* to do with ASP.NET sessions) are very similar. Both inspect incoming requests for a special cookie that contains identity information, if that cookie is present it gets validated and if that is successful, the identity information is made available to the application via HttpContext.User/Thread.CurrentPrincipal. The main difference between the two is the identity to cookie serialization engine that sits below. Whereas ForsmAuth can only store the name of the user and an additional UserData string. It is limited to a single cookie and hardcoded to protection via the machine key. WIF session authentication in turn has these additional features: Can serialize a complete ClaimsPrincipal (including claims) to the cookie(s). Has a cookie overflow mechanism when data gets too big. In total it can create up to 8 cookies (á 4 KB) per domain (not that I would recommend round tripping that much data). Supports server side caching (which is an extensible mechanism). Has an extensible mechanism for protection (DPAPI by default, RSA as an option for web farms, and machine key based protection is coming in .NET 4.5) So in other words – session authentication is the superior technology, and if done cleverly enough you can replace FormsAuth without any changes to your application code. The only features missing is the redirect mechanism to a login page and an easy to use API to set authentication cookies. But that’s easy to add ;) FormsSessionAuthenticationModule This module is a sub class of the standard WIF session module, adding the following features: Handling EndRequest to do the redirect on 401s to the login page configured for FormsAuth. Reads the FormsAuth cookie name, cookie domain, timeout and require SSL settings to configure the module accordingly. Implements sliding expiration if configured for FormsAuth. It also uses the same algorithm as FormsAuth to calculate when the cookie needs renewal. Implements caching of the principal on the server side (aka session mode) if configured in an AppSetting. Supports claims transformation via a ClaimsAuthenticationManager. As you can see, the whole module is designed to easily replace the FormsAuth mechanism. Simply set the authentication mode to None and register the module. In the spirit of the FormsAuthentication class, there is also now a SessionAuthentication class with the same methods and signatures (e.g. SetAuthCookie and SignOut). The rest of your application code should not be affected. In addition the session module looks for a HttpContext item called “NoRedirect”. If that exists, the redirect to the login page will *not* happen, instead the 401 is passed back to the client. Very useful if you are implementing services or web APIs where you want the actual status code to be preserved. A corresponding UnauthorizedResult is provided that gives you easy access to the context item. The download contains a sample app, the module and an inspector for session cookies and tokens. Let’s hope that in .NET 4.5 such a module comes out of the box. HTH

    Read the article

  • Forms authentication for users and Windows for Database?

    - by scyonx
    On our production servers, the admins created a WebUser active directory account which is users for anonymous access to IIS and is also used to authenticate database access with our SQL Server instances using Integrated Security=SSPI in the connection string and identity impersonate="true" in the web.config. I've often come across situations where I would like to or even need to use forms authentication. However, I using forms authentication, Integrated Security seems to use the logged in user's credentials to authenticate against the database. In these cases I have changed the connection string to use the credentials of a SQL Server users instead. I would prefer to not have a hard coded username and password in the connection string or rather worse in code. Is it possible to use forms authentication just for user authentication for users and windows authentication with the IIS user for database access? What would be the best practice in such a situation?

    Read the article

  • Best way to implement user-powered data validation

    - by vegetables
    I run a product recommendation engine and I'm hitting a few snags. I'm looking to see if anyone has any recommendations on what I should do to minimize these issues. Here's how the site works: Users come to the site and are presented with product recommendations based on some criteria. If a user knows of a product that is not in our system, they can add it by providing the product name and manufacturer. We take that information, and: Hit one API to gather all the product meta-data (and to validate the product spelling, etc). If the product is not in this first API, we do not allow it in our system. Use the information from step 1 to hit another API for pricing information (gathered from many places online). For the sake of discussion, assume that I am searching both APIs in the most efficient/successful manner possible. For the most part, this works very well. I'd say ~80% of our data is perfectly accurate, but there are a few issues: Sometimes the pricing API (Step 2) doesn't have any information for the product. The way the pricing API is built, it will always return something (theoretically, the closest possible match), and there's no guarantee that the product name is spelled exactly the same way in both APIs, so there's no automated way of knowing if it's the right product. When the pricing API finds the right product, occasionally it has outdated, or even invalid pricing data (e.g. if it screen-scraped the wrong price from a website). Since the site was fairly small at first, I was able to manually verify every product that was added to the website. However, the site has grown to the point where this is taking several hours per day, and is just not efficient use of my time. So, my question is: Aside from hiring someone (or getting an intern) to validate all the data manually, what would be the best system of letting my userbase self-manage the data. Specifically, how can I allow users to edit the data while minimizing the risk of someone ambushing my website, or accidentally setting the data incorrectly.

    Read the article

  • How to implement a no-login authentication system

    - by mrwooster
    I am looking to build a very loose authentication system that can track a user and link submitted data/comments to a specific user. The submissions are essentially anonymous, but a user may want to edit his submission/comment at a later date. I want the experience to be as smooth as possible so do not want to ask users to sign up for an account and then login each time. There is no point as their submissions are not in their name and to another user browsing the site, there is no way of linking a submission to a specific user (think anonymous comments on a blog post or pastie). However, the user should have the ability to edit (at least in the short term) the content they have posted. The way I imagine doing this would be to place a unique identifier in a cookie on the users machine. This would enable me to link a submission to a user, and while that cookie remained on the users machine, I would allow them to edit their content. Of course, if the cookie is lost, or the user accesses the site from a different browser, then they would not be able to edit their content, but this is not really an issue, they can always resubmit a new piece of content. Is there a better way of doing this? How can I implement this so that the user can edit their data for the longest possible amount of time.

    Read the article

  • Yelp Like Adjective Rating System

    - by clifgray
    I am building a website that has users list their outdoor adventures (skydiving, surfing, base jumping, etc) and the other people can comment on them. I want to have a rating system like Yelp which has "Useful, Funny, or Cool" but with different adjectives. I have thought of a few such as Daring, Adventurous, and Unique but I wanted to get some feedback on what a few other good adjectives would be. Also does anyone have experience with other such systems or advice for better systems? Primarily I just want the user to have somewhat more descriptive voting options than u and down or 1 though 5.

    Read the article

  • Sequence for authentication on a decoupled client?

    - by A T
    Using a sequence diagram and example code could you explain to me how authentication works when the client is completely separated from the server? I.e.: you haven't generated any of the client using a server-side template engine, rather you are communicating using REST (SOAP xor HTTP) xor RPC (XML xor JSON) with javascript on the client-side. Specifically I would like to know the sequence of: Authenticating using basic auth (user+pass) with "my" server Authenticating using OAuth2, e.g.: with Facebook, with facebook's server then whatever extra steps are needed for "my" server And how it could be implemented. (feel free to use psuedo-code [like below] or [preferably] prototyped simply using BackboneJS, AngularJS, EmberJS, BatmanJS, AgilityJS, SammyJS xor ActiveJS. if cookie.status in [Expired, Tampered, Wrong IP, Invalid, Not Found]: try auth(user,pass): if user is in my db: try authenticate(user,pass) if successful: login user # give session-cookie here? else: present user with "auth failed" msg else if user not in db: redirect to "edit-profile" page PS: I have written an example (editable) auth sequence diagram; based on facebooks' documentation.

    Read the article

  • Authentication failure!

    - by veera
    At the time of installation i gave login password and that was the login keyring password and authentication password.. then once in user accounts-login options in dat for password options i set as none and then i locked.. after that the passwd which i gave at the time of installation remained as login keyring passwd but wen i entered that passwd for authentication while installing some packages it's showing authentication failure.pls try again.. so i couldnt download any packages or updates.. is there any possibilities to change/reset the authentication password.. pls help me..

    Read the article

  • Move data from others user accounts in my user account

    - by user118136
    I had problems with compiz setting and I make multiple accounts, now I want to transfer my information from all deleted users in my current account, some data I can not copy because I am not right to read, I type in terminal "sudo nautilus" and I get the permission for read, but the copied data is available only for superusers and I must charge the permissions for each file and each folder. How I can copy the information with out the superuser rights OR how I can charge the permissions for selected folder and all files and folders included in it?

    Read the article

  • windows authentication vs sql server authentication for asp.net forms authentication site

    - by Brij
    I have a database and a site having forms authentication. It is working fine with VS2008. This time, I am using "Trusted_connection =True". But when it is opened from outside or directly from browser then I am getting error "Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'." I know this is due to permission. SQL server is based on windows authentication. What is the best approach to manage user to connect sql server? Should I enable sql server authentication? Let me know what to do so that it makes the production feel and there wouldn't be any problem during deployment. Note: Sql server is installed on domain server.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – guest User and MSDB Database – Enable guest User on MSDB Database

    - by pinaldave
    I have written a few articles recently on the subject of guest account. Here’s a quick list of these articles: SQL SERVER – Disable Guest Account – Serious Security Issue SQL SERVER – Force Removing User from Database – Fix: Error: Could not drop login ‘test’ as the user is currently logged in. SQL SERVER – Detecting guest User Permissions – guest User Access Status One of the advices which I gave in all the three blog posts was: Disable the guest user in the user-created database. Additionally, I have mentioned that one should let the user account become enabled in MSDB database. I got many questions asking if there is any specific reason why this should be kept enabled, questions like, “What is the reason that MSDB database needs guest user?” Honestly, I did not know that the concept of the guest user will create so much interest in the readers. So now let’s turn this blog post into questions and answers format. Q: What will happen if the guest user is disabled in MSDB database? A:  Lots of bad things will happen. Error 916 - Logins can connect to this instance of SQL Server but they do not have specific permissions in a database to receive the permissions of the guest user. Q: How can I determine if the guest user is enabled or disabled for any specific database? A: There are many ways to do this. Make sure that you run each of these methods with the context of the database. For an example for msdb database, you can run the following code: USE msdb; SELECT name, permission_name, state_desc FROM sys.database_principals dp INNER JOIN sys.server_permissions sp ON dp.principal_id = sp.grantee_principal_id WHERE name = 'guest' AND permission_name = 'CONNECT' There are many other methods to detect the guest user status. Read them here: Detecting guest User Permissions – guest User Access Status Q: What is the default status of the guest user account in database? A: Enabled in master, TempDb, and MSDB. Disabled in model database. Q: Why is the default status of the guest user disabled in model database? A: It is not recommended to enable the guest in user database as it can introduce serious security threat. It can seriously damage the database if configured incorrectly. Read more here: Disable Guest Account – Serious Security Issue Q: How to disable guest user? A: REVOKE CONNECT FROM guest Q: How to enable guest user? A: GRANT CONNECT TO guest Did I miss any critical question in the list? Please leave your question as a comment and I will add it to this list. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Security, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • User generated articles, how to do meta description?

    - by Tom Gullen
    If users submit a lot of good quality articles on the site, what is the best way to approach the meta description tag? I see two options: Have a description box and rely on them to fill it sensibly and in a good quality way Just exclude the meta description Method 1 is bad initially, but I'm willing to put time in going through and editing/checking all of them on a permanent basis. Method 2 is employed by the stack exchange site, and lets the search bots extract the best part of the page in the SERP. Thoughts? Ideas? I'm thinking a badly formed description tag is more damaging than not having one at all at the end of the day. I don't expect content to ever become unwieldy and too much to manage.

    Read the article

  • user generated / user specific functions

    - by pedalpete
    I'm looking for the most elegant and secure method to do the following. I have a calendar, and groups of users. Users can add events to specific days on the calendar, and specify how long each event lasts for. I've had a few requests from users to add the ability for them to define that events of a specific length include a break, of a certain amount of time, or require that a specific amount of time be left between events. For example, if event is 2 hours, include a 20min break. for each event, require 30 minutes before start of next event. The same group that has asked for an event of 2 hours to include a 20 min break, could also require that an event 3 hours include a 30 minute break. In the end, what the users are trying to get is an elapsed time excluding breaks calculated for them. Currently I provide them a total elapsed time, but they are looking for a running time. However, each of these requests is different for each group. Where one group may want a 30 minute break during a 2 hour event, and another may want only 10 minutes for each 3 hour event. I was kinda thinking I could write the functions into a php file per group, and then include that file and do the calculations via php and then return a calculated total to the user, but something about that doesn't sit right with me. Another option is to output the groups functions to javascript, and have it run client-side, as I'm already returning the duration of the event, but where the user is part of more than one group with different rules, this seems like it could get rather messy. I currently store the start and end time in the database, but no 'durations', and I don't think I should be storing the calculated totals in the db, because if a group decides to change their calculations, I'd need to change it throughout the db. Is there a better way of doing this? I would just store the variables in mysql, but I don't see how I can then say to mysql to calculate based on those variables. I'm REALLY lost here. Any suggestions? I'm hoping somebody has done something similar and can provide some insight into the best direction. If it helps, my table contains eventid, user, group, startDate, startTime, endDate, endTime, type The json for the event which I return to the user is {"eventid":"'.$eventId.'", "user":"'.$userId.'","group":"'.$groupId.'","type":"'.$type.'","startDate":".$startDate.'","startTime":"'.$startTime.'","endDate":"'.$endDate.'","endTime":"'.$endTime.'","durationLength":"'.$duration.'", "durationHrs":"'.$durationHrs.'"} where for example, duration length is 2.5 and duration hours is 2:30.

    Read the article

  • Tips on creating user interfaces and optimizing the user experience

    - by Saif Bechan
    I am currently working on a project where a lot of user interaction is going to take place. There is also a commercial side as people can buy certain items and services. In my opinion a good blend of user interface, speed and security is essential for these types of websites. It is fairly easy to use ajax and JavaScript nowadays to do almost everything, as there are a lot of libraries available such as jQuery and others. But this can have some performance and incompatibility issues. This can lead to users just going to the next website. The overall look of the website is important too. Where to place certain buttons, where to place certain types of articles such as faq and support. Where and how to display error messages so that the user sees them but are not bothering him. And an overall color scheme is important too. The basic question is: How to create an interface that triggers a user to buy/use your services I know psychology also plays a huge role in how users interact with your website. The color scheme for example is important. When the colors are irritating on a website you just want to click away. I have not found any articles that explain those concept. Does anyone have any tips and/or recourses where i can get some articles that guide you in making the correct choices for your website.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET - Manual authentication system

    - by Gal V
    Hello all, Wer'e developing an ASP.NET C# application, which will contain an authentication system that authenticates users in multiple levels (user, admin, super-admin, etc.). Our idea is NOT to use the built in ASP.NET forms authentication feature. Our plan is to create a whole 'new' system for it- based on the Session object, and SQL database contains users' info such as username & password. Is there any SERIOUS different between our idea to the Forms authentication feature? What security risks do we take? How do we solve them? Is this a good alternative for the forms authentication feature? Thanks in advance !

    Read the article

  • Token based Authentication for WCF HTTP/REST Services: Authentication

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    This post shows some of the implementation techniques for adding token and claims based security to HTTP/REST services written with WCF. For the theoretical background, see my previous post. Disclaimer The framework I am using/building here is not the only possible approach to tackle the problem. Based on customer feedback and requirements the code has gone through several iterations to a point where we think it is ready to handle most of the situations. Goals and requirements The framework should be able to handle typical scenarios like username/password based authentication, as well as token based authentication The framework should allow adding new supported token types Should work with WCF web programming model either self-host or IIS hosted Service code can rely on an IClaimsPrincipal on Thread.CurrentPrincipal that describes the client using claims-based identity Implementation overview In WCF the main extensibility point for this kind of security work is the ServiceAuthorizationManager. It gets invoked early enough in the pipeline, has access to the HTTP protocol details of the incoming request and can set Thread.CurrentPrincipal. The job of the SAM is simple: Check the Authorization header of the incoming HTTP request Check if a “registered” token (more on that later) is present If yes, validate the token using a security token handler, create the claims principal (including claims transformation) and set Thread.CurrentPrincipal If no, set an anonymous principal on Thread.CurrentPrincipal. By default, anonymous principals are denied access – so the request ends here with a 401 (more on that later). To wire up the custom authorization manager you need a custom service host – which in turn needs a custom service host factory. The full object model looks like this: Token handling A nice piece of existing WIF infrastructure are security token handlers. Their job is to serialize a received security token into a CLR representation, validate the token and turn the token into claims. The way this works with WS-Security based services is that WIF passes the name/namespace of the incoming token to WIF’s security token handler collection. This in turn finds out which token handler can deal with the token and returns the right instances. For HTTP based services we can do something very similar. The scheme on the Authorization header gives the service a hint how to deal with an incoming token. So the only missing link is a way to associate a token handler (or multiple token handlers) with a scheme and we are (almost) done. WIF already includes token handler for a variety of tokens like username/password or SAML 1.1/2.0. The accompanying sample has a implementation for a Simple Web Token (SWT) token handler, and as soon as JSON Web Token are ready, simply adding a corresponding token handler will add support for this token type, too. All supported schemes/token types are organized in a WebSecurityTokenHandlerCollectionManager and passed into the host factory/host/authorization manager. Adding support for basic authentication against a membership provider would e.g. look like this (in global.asax): var manager = new WebSecurityTokenHandlerCollectionManager(); manager.AddBasicAuthenticationHandler((username, password) => Membership.ValidateUser(username, password));   Adding support for Simple Web Tokens with a scheme of Bearer (the current OAuth2 scheme) requires passing in a issuer, audience and signature verification key: manager.AddSimpleWebTokenHandler(     "Bearer",     "http://identityserver.thinktecture.com/trust/initial",     "https://roadie/webservicesecurity/rest/",     "WFD7i8XRHsrUPEdwSisdHoHy08W3lM16Bk6SCT8ht6A="); In some situations, SAML token may be used as well. The following configures SAML support for a token coming from ADFS2: var registry = new ConfigurationBasedIssuerNameRegistry(); registry.AddTrustedIssuer( "d1 c5 b1 25 97 d0 36 94 65 1c e2 64 fe 48 06 01 35 f7 bd db", "ADFS"); var adfsConfig = new SecurityTokenHandlerConfiguration(); adfsConfig.AudienceRestriction.AllowedAudienceUris.Add( new Uri("https://roadie/webservicesecurity/rest/")); adfsConfig.IssuerNameRegistry = registry; adfsConfig.CertificateValidator = X509CertificateValidator.None; // token decryption (read from config) adfsConfig.ServiceTokenResolver = IdentityModelConfiguration.ServiceConfiguration.CreateAggregateTokenResolver();             manager.AddSaml11SecurityTokenHandler("SAML", adfsConfig);   Transformation The custom authorization manager will also try to invoke a configured claims authentication manager. This means that the standard WIF claims transformation logic can be used here as well. And even better, can be also shared with e.g. a “surrounding” web application. Error handling A WCF error handler takes care of turning “access denied” faults into 401 status codes and a message inspector adds the registered authentication schemes to the outgoing WWW-Authenticate header when a 401 occurs. The next post will conclude with authorization as well as the source code download.   (Wanna learn more about federation, WIF, claims, tokens etc.? Click here.)

    Read the article

  • Windows service fails to start with custom user until started once with local user

    - by Gauls
    All of a sudden my Windows service application after installation does not start. (Some services stop automatically if they have no work to do.) The service uses a custom user. If I change the logon setting to use the local system account, the service starts fine. Then when I go back and change the login setting to use this custom account (local user - custom user under user group), the service will start. Why doesn't it work in the first place?

    Read the article

  • Silverlight RIA Services - how to do Windows Authentication?

    - by Gustavo Cavalcanti
    I am building my first Silverlight 3 + RI Services application and need some help. It will be deployed in an controlled corporate intranet, 100% windows clients. I have started from the Silverlight Business Application template. These are my requirements: Upon launch the application needs to recognize the currently logged-in user. The application needs to have access to other properties of the user in AD, such as email, full name, and group membership. Group membership is used to grand certain features in the application. A "login as a different user" link is to be always available - Some machines are available throughout the enterprise, logged-in as a certain generic user (verified by the absence of certain membership groups). In this case one can enter credentials and log in (impersonate) to the application as a user different from the one already logged-into the machine. This user is to be used in service calls I have modified the following in the default Business Application template: App.xaml: appsvc:WindowsAuthentication instead of the default FormsAuthentication Web.config: authentication mode="Windows" With these modifications I resolve requirement #1 (get the currently logged-in user). But when I examine RiaContext.Current.User, I don't have access to other properties from AD, such as group memberships. How can I achieve my other requirements? Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • Password not working for sudo ("Authentication failure")

    - by Souta
    Before I mention anything further, DO NOT give me a response saying that terminal won't show password input. I'm AWARE of that. I'm typing my user password in (not a capslock issue), and for some reason it still says 'Authentication Failure'. Is there some other password (one I'm not aware of) I'm supposed to be using other than my user password? I've had this ubuntu before, on another hard drive and I didn't have this problem. (And it was the same ubuntu, ubuntu 12.04 LTS) ai@AiNekoYokai:~$ groups ai adm cdrom sudo dip plugdev lpadmin sambashare ai@AiNekoYokai:~$ lsb_release -rd Description: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Release: 12.04 ai@AiNekoYokai:~$ pkexec cat /etc/sudoers # # This file MUST be edited with the 'visudo' command as root. # # Please consider adding local content in /etc/sudoers.d/ instead of # directly modifying this file. # # See the man page for details on how to write a sudoers file. # Defaults env_reset Defaults secure_path="/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin" # Host alias specification # User alias specification # Cmnd alias specification # User privilege specification root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL # Members of the admin group may gain root privileges %admin ALL=(ALL) ALL # Allow members of group sudo to execute any command %sudo ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL # See sudoers(5) for more information on "#include" directives: #includedir /etc/sudoers.d I can log in with my password, but it's not accepted as valid for authentication <-- That is pretty much my issue. (Although, I haven't gone into recovery mode.) I've ran: ai@AiNekoYokai:~$ ls /etc/sudoers.d README And also reinstalled sudo with: pkexec apt-get update pkexec apt-get --purge --reinstall install sudo pkexec usermod -a -G admin $USER <- Says admin does not exist su $USER <- worked for me, however, my password still does not do much (in sense of not working for other things) I changed my password with pkexec passwd $USER. I was able to change it no problem. gksudo xclock was something I was able to get into, no problem. (Clock showed) ai@AiNekoYokai:~$ gksudo xclock

    Read the article

  • Different behaviour with windows authentication on IIS7 websites

    - by amaters
    I need to run a website with just windows authentication. Given the following situation: The location of the default website is: c:\inetpub\wwwroot The location of my code is: c:\Sites\WebApp my hostfile is edited so any .local i use points to 127.0.0.1 I have created a new application called 'AppX' underneath the default website and point it to c:\Sites\WebApp. It will use the DefaultappPool. When I switch off anonymous and switch on windows authentication all works well when I go to localhost/AppX/. What i really want is a new website (No need to question why I want this). So I created Website2 and did exact the same creation of the application. Everything is the same; destination, app pool and authentication. Now when I browse to this website web2.local/AppX/ I get the 401.2 - Unauthorized error. What am I missing here?

    Read the article

  • Approach for replacing forms authentication in .NET application

    - by Ash Machine
    My question is about an approach, and I am looking for tips or links to help me develop a solution. I have an .NET 4.0 web forms application that works with Forms authentication using the aspnetdb SQL database of users and passwords. A new feature for the application is a new authentication mechanism using single sign on to allow access for thousands of new users. Essentially, when the user logs in through the new single-sign-on method, I will be able to identify them as legitimate users with a role. So I will have something like HttpContext.Current.Session["email_of_authenticated_user"] (their identity) and HttpContext.Current.Session["role_of_authenticated_user"] (their role). Importantly, I don't necessarily want to maintain these users and roles redundantly in the aspnetdb database which will be retired, but I do want to use the session objects above to allow the user to pass through the application as if they were in passing through with forms authentication. I don't think CustomRoleProviders or CustomMemberProviders are helpful since they do not allow for creating session-level users. So my question is how to use the session level user and role that I do have to "mimic" all the forms authentication goodness like enforcing: [System.Security.Permissions.PrincipalPermission(System.Security.Permissions.SecurityAction.Demand, Role = "Student")] or <authorization> <allow users="wilma, barney" /> </authorization> Thanks for any pointers.

    Read the article

  • Joining Samba to Active Directory with local user authentication

    - by Ansel Pol
    I apologise that this is somewhat incoherent, but hopefully someone will be able to make enough sense of this to understand what I'm trying to achieve and provide pointers. I have a machine with two network interfaces connected to two different networks (one of which it's providing several other services for, such as DNS), running two separate instances of Samba, one bound to each interface. One of the instances is just a workgroup-style setup using share-level authentication, which is all working fine. The problem is that I'm looking to join the other instance to an MS Active Directory domain (provided by MS Windows Small Business Server 2003) to enable a subset of the domain users to access the shares from Windows machines on the other network. The users who need access from the domain environment have accounts (whose names are all-lowercase versions of their domain usernames) on the machine running Samba, but I'm not sure about how to map the UIDs and everything I've read concerns authenticating accounts on that machine against either AD or another LDAP server. To clarify: I only want the credentials for AD users accessing the non-workgroup Samba instance to be authenticated against AD, not the accounts on the machine running Samba. I hope this is sufficiently clear. EDIT: In addition to being able to access the Samba shares from AD, I do also need to be able to access a share on the domain from the machine running Samba but would still like everything non-Samba-related to authenticate locally.

    Read the article

  • Joining Samba to Active Directory with local user authentication

    - by Ansel Pol
    I apologise that this is somewhat incoherent, but hopefully someone will be able to make enough sense of this to understand what I'm trying to achieve and provide pointers. I have a machine with two network interfaces connected to two different networks (one of which it's providing several other services for, such as DNS), running two separate instances of Samba, one bound to each interface. One of the instances is just a workgroup-style setup using share-level authentication, which is all working fine. The problem is that I'm looking to join the other instance to an MS Active Directory domain (provided by MS Windows Small Business Server 2003) to enable a subset of the domain users to access the shares from Windows machines on the other network. The users who need access from the domain environment have accounts (whose names are all-lowercase versions of their domain usernames) on the machine running Samba, but I'm not sure about how to map the UIDs and everything I've read concerns authenticating accounts on that machine against either AD or another LDAP server. To clarify: I only want the credentials for AD users accessing the non-workgroup Samba instance to be authenticated against AD, not the accounts on the machine running Samba. I hope this is sufficiently clear. EDIT: In addition to being able to access the Samba shares from AD, I do also need to be able to access a share on the domain from the machine running Samba but would still like everything non-Samba-related to authenticate locally.

    Read the article

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