Search Results

Search found 55091 results on 2204 pages for 'obiee system security'.

Page 22/2204 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • Security question pertaining web application deployment

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

    Read the article

  • "Account locked out" security event at midnight

    - by Kev
    The last three midnights I've gotten an Event ID 539 in the log...about my own account: Event Type: Failure Audit Event Source: Security Event Category: Logon/Logoff Event ID: 539 Date: 2010-04-26 Time: 12:00:20 AM User: NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM Computer: SERVERNAME Description: Logon Failure: Reason: Account locked out User Name: MyUser Domain: MYDOMAIN Logon Type: 3 Logon Process: NtLmSsp Authentication Package: NTLM Workstation Name: SERVERNAME Caller User Name: - Caller Domain: - Caller Logon ID: - Caller Process ID: - Transited Services: - Source Network Address: - Source Port: - It's always within a half minute of midnight. There are no login attempts before it. Right after it (in the same second) there's a success audit entry: Logon attempt using explicit credentials: Logged on user: User Name: SERVERNAME$ Domain: MYDOMAIN Logon ID: (0x0,0x3E7) Logon GUID: - User whose credentials were used: Target User Name: MyUser Target Domain: MYDOMAIN Target Logon GUID: - Target Server Name: servername.mydomain.lan Target Server Info: servername.mydomain.lan Caller Process ID: 2724 Source Network Address: - Source Port: - The process ID was the same on all three of them, so I looked it up, and right now at least it maps to TCP/IP Services (Microsoft). I don't believe I changed any policies or anything on Friday. How should I interpret this?

    Read the article

  • modsecurity apache mod-security.conf missing

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

    Read the article

  • Why is autologon in Windows 7 a security risk

    - by Phenom
    If I set my Windows 7 account to automatically logon so I don't have to type a password, and I don't have to click my username on the logon screen, I heard it's a security risk. From Windows 7 Auto Login: Although I don’t personally recommend this, there are some people out there who don’t want to bother with using a password to protect their Windows user account. Of course, using a password in Windows isn’t required, only suggested. But even if you don’t fill one in, you still have to click your user icon to start the login process. An easier way - although again much less secure - is to enable auto-logins for your Windows PC. This is possible in Windows 7, as it was in prior versions, but it takes a little finagling to do so. (And for good reason, darn it.) What is risky about it besides people being able to logon locally? Does it make it easier for hackers to logon remoately?

    Read the article

  • Running PHP scripts as the owner of the PHP file: security issues

    - by thomasrutter
    I'm using suexec to ensure that PHP scripts (and other CGI/FastCGI apps) are run as the account holder associated with the relevant virtual host. This allows for securing each users' scripts from reading/writing by other users. However, it occurs to me that this opens up a different security hole. Previously, the web server ran as an unprivileged user, with read-only access to user's files (unless the user changed the file permissions for some reason). Now, the web user can also write to user's files. So while I've prevented different users taking advantage of each other's scripts, I've made it so that in the event that some application has a remote code injection vulnerability, it now has not only read access but also write access to all that user's scripts and website. How can I deal with this? One idea I've had is to create a second user account for each user account in the system, so that each user has their own user account, and all their scripts are run under another user account. But that seems cumbersome.

    Read the article

  • Security issues of running PHP scripts as the owner of the PHP file with suexec

    - by thomasrutter
    I'm using suexec to ensure that PHP scripts (and other CGI/FastCGI apps) are run as the account holder associated with the relevant virtual host. This allows for securing each users' scripts from reading/writing by other users. However, it occurs to me that this opens up a different security hole. Previously, the web server ran as an unprivileged user, with read-only access to user's files (unless the user changed the file permissions for some reason). Now, the web server can also write to user's files. So while I've prevented different users taking advantage of each other's scripts, I've made it so that in the event that some application has a remote code injection vulnerability, it now has not only read access but also write access to all that user's scripts and website. How can I deal with this? One idea I've had is to create a second user account for each user account in the system, so that each user has their own user account, and all their scripts are run under another user account. But that seems cumbersome.

    Read the article

  • Chrome - SSL Security issue on Windows platforms?

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

    Read the article

  • Apache security for multi-user development web server.

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

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Editing the Microsoft Security Essentials context-menu

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

    Read the article

  • Security measures for CentOS

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

    Read the article

  • Linux Security/Sysadmin Courses in London?

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

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 R2 stuck at System Recovery Options

    - by Magnus
    One of my Windows Server 2008 R2 server has started to go into System Recovery Options at reboot. I have tried to let it go through a System Image Recovery, which it says completes successfully. But after reboot it again wants to do a system recovery. Safe mode doesn't work; it still wants to do a system recovery. Putting in the install DVD trying to do a repair actually brings up the very same System Revoery dialog again. Nothing has changed configuration wise. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 R2 stuck at System Recovery Options

    - by Magnus
    My Windows Server 2008 R2 has started to go into System Recovery Options at reboot. I have tried to let it go through a System Image Recovery, which it says completes successfully. But after reboot it again wants to do a system recovery. Safe mode doesn't work; it still wants to do a system recovery. Putting in the install DVD trying to do a repair actually brings up the very same System Revoery dialog again. Nothing has changed configuration wise. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Security considerations for my first eStore.

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

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Identity Claims Encoding for SharePoint

    - by Shawn Cicoria
    Just to remind myself, the list of claim types and their encodings are listed here at the bottom. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg481769.aspx Where for example: i:0#.w|contoso\scicoria ‘i’ = identity, could be ‘c’ for others # == SPClaimTypes.UserLogonName . == Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.String Table for reference: Table 1. Claim types encoding Character Claim Type ! SPClaimTypes.IdentityProvider ” SPClaimTypes.UserIdentifier # SPClaimTypes.UserLogonName $ SPClaimTypes.DistributionListClaimType % SPClaimTypes.FarmId & SPClaimTypes.ProcessIdentitySID ‘ SPClaimTypes.ProcessIdentityLogonName ( SPClaimTypes.IsAuthenticated ) Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.PrimarySid * Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.PrimaryGroupSid + Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.GroupSid - Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Role . System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Anonymous / System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Authentication 0 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.AuthorizationDecision 1 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Country 2 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.DateOfBirth 3 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.DenyOnlySid 4 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Dns 5 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Email 6 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Gender 7 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.GivenName 8 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Hash 9 System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.HomePhone < System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Locality = System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.MobilePhone > System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Name ? System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.NameIdentifier @ System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.OtherPhone [ System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.PostalCode \ System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.PPID ] System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Rsa ^ System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Sid _ System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Spn ` System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.StateOrProvince a System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.StreetAddress b System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Surname c System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.System d System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Thumbprint e System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Upn f System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Uri g System.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimTypes.Webpage Table 2. Claim value types encoding Character Claim Type ! Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.Base64Binary “ Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.Boolean # Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.Date $ Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.Datetime % Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.DaytimeDuration & Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.Double ‘ Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.DsaKeyValue ( Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.HexBinary ) Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.Integer * Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.KeyInfo + Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.Rfc822Name - Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.RsaKeyValue . Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.String / Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.Time 0 Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.X500Name 1 Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims.ClaimValueTypes.YearMonthDuration

    Read the article

  • Whys is System process listening on Port 80?

    - by Seth Spearman
    I am running Windows 7 RC1. I have multiple issues getting IIS to work on my system and today when I installed a new application and I tried to load it using http:\localhost\MyApplication I get absolutely no errors and I get no page load. Just a pretty, white blank page. I did some digging and I found something about some other process listening on port 80 so I did a scan using netstat -aon | findstr 0.0:80 and discovered that PID 4 was listening on that port. PID 4 does not show in task manager so I fired up Process Explorer and it showed me that PID 4 is the System process. (Multiple google searches seems to indicate that System always uses PID 4). Since then I am basically stuck. I have no idea why System needs port 80 and what to do about it. If you google the following strings you will find two helpful Experts-Exchange articles at the top of the search results and you can read them for some helpful information. (If I gave the direct URL to the pages then Experts-Exchange would ask you to pay...but when you click on the results from a google search you can scroll all of the way to the bottom to read the exchanges.) Here are the google searches... "System Process is listening on port 80 (Vista)" "SYSTEM Process is listening on Port 80 and Preventing IIS Default Website from Running" The last entry from the first result showed how to do a trace of http.sys at the following URL: http://blogs.msdn.com/wndp/archive/2007/01/18/event-tracing-in-http-sys-part-1-capturing-a-trace.aspx Trace showed nothing useful. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How to remove NTFS system files from a previous Vista installation

    - by Boldewyn
    I'm trying to shrink my system partition under Win Vista. It's all fine, except that in front of the last 300MB of the volume sits a single file, that cannot be moved by defrag or other means from its position. It's called C:\$Extend\$UsnJrnl:$J, and my assumtion is, that it is left from a previous installation of Vista, when I re-set up the system. Now, googling for this kind of files brings interesting results, but no solution to my problem: Files left on the disk can become ownerless in a new setup of Windows and inaccessible (even for administrators). To be able to access them again, I found the tip to use takeown to re-assign them to the Admin group (or anyone else). Works like a charm for normal files, but not for the C:\$Extend stuff. The C:\$Extend folder is a system folder of the NTFS file system, where the journal is stored (especially in a file called $UsnJrnl:$Data, whose name is surprisingly close to mine). You can delete the journal with fsutil usn /delete C:, however, this doesn't work from within the booted system (as I found out trying). Also, I'm not quite sure of the side effects. You can't move the NTFS own files with standard defrag tools. The same holds, by the way, for not accessible files. Every bit of knowledge out there is targeted to either not accessible files or the $Extend NTFS stuff, but noone addresses my problem involving both, an inaccessible system file. Question: How can I remove this file, or at least how can I move it on the disk?

    Read the article

  • Security and the Mobile Workforce

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

    Read the article

  • Efficiently separating Read/Compute/Write steps for concurrent processing of entities in Entity/Component systems

    - by TravisG
    Setup I have an entity-component architecture where Entities can have a set of attributes (which are pure data with no behavior) and there exist systems that run the entity logic which act on that data. Essentially, in somewhat pseudo-code: Entity { id; map<id_type, Attribute> attributes; } System { update(); vector<Entity> entities; } A system that just moves along all entities at a constant rate might be MovementSystem extends System { update() { for each entity in entities position = entity.attributes["position"]; position += vec3(1,1,1); } } Essentially, I'm trying to parallelise update() as efficiently as possible. This can be done by running entire systems in parallel, or by giving each update() of one system a couple of components so different threads can execute the update of the same system, but for a different subset of entities registered with that system. Problem In reality, these systems sometimes require that entities interact(/read/write data from/to) each other, sometimes within the same system (e.g. an AI system that reads state from other entities surrounding the current processed entity), but sometimes between different systems that depend on each other (i.e. a movement system that requires data from a system that processes user input). Now, when trying to parallelize the update phases of entity/component systems, the phases in which data (components/attributes) from Entities are read and used to compute something, and the phase where the modified data is written back to entities need to be separated in order to avoid data races. Otherwise the only way (not taking into account just "critical section"ing everything) to avoid them is to serialize parts of the update process that depend on other parts. This seems ugly. To me it would seem more elegant to be able to (ideally) have all processing running in parallel, where a system may read data from all entities as it wishes, but doesn't write modifications to that data back until some later point. The fact that this is even possible is based on the assumption that modification write-backs are usually very small in complexity, and don't require much performance, whereas computations are very expensive (relatively). So the overhead added by a delayed-write phase might be evened out by more efficient updating of entities (by having threads work more % of the time instead of waiting). A concrete example of this might be a system that updates physics. The system needs to both read and write a lot of data to and from entities. Optimally, there would be a system in place where all available threads update a subset of all entities registered with the physics system. In the case of the physics system this isn't trivially possible because of race conditions. So without a workaround, we would have to find other systems to run in parallel (which don't modify the same data as the physics system), other wise the remaining threads are waiting and wasting time. However, that has disadvantages Practically, the L3 cache is pretty much always better utilized when updating a large system with multiple threads, as opposed to multiple systems at once, which all act on different sets of data. Finding and assembling other systems to run in parallel can be extremely time consuming to design well enough to optimize performance. Sometimes, it might even not be possible at all because a system just depends on data that is touched by all other systems. Solution? In my thinking, a possible solution would be a system where reading/updating and writing of data is separated, so that in one expensive phase, systems only read data and compute what they need to compute, and then in a separate, performance-wise cheap, write phase, attributes of entities that needed to be modified are finally written back to the entities. The Question How might such a system be implemented to achieve optimal performance, as well as making programmer life easier? What are the implementation details of such a system and what might have to be changed in the existing EC-architecture to accommodate this solution?

    Read the article

  • Mac Management and Security

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

    Read the article

  • Online Storage and security concerns

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

    Read the article

  • Managing Apache to Compensate for WebDAV's Security Masking

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

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Security Essentials & MsMpEng.exe hogging resources

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

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >