Search Results

Search found 55010 results on 2201 pages for 'system security'.

Page 242/2201 | < Previous Page | 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249  | Next Page >

  • How to report a malicious site to Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, etc. so that they will warn users

    - by Jayapal Chandran
    I completed a project a year ago. Now a few modification were needed. While trying to test the site, there was an index.html file with a malicious script which had an iframe to another site's jar file. Kaspersky antivirus blocked it. I browsed via ftp to find the file and I deleted it. I also disabled directory listing. Maybe the ftp details of the site owner would have been hacked. I want to report this site to Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, and other antivirus providers. How do I do that? I hope kaspersky would have updated it in their database, but I still want to explicitly report this. Here is the popup kaspersky showed:

    Read the article

  • Encrypt shared files on AD Domain.

    - by Walter
    Can I encrypt shared files on windows server and allow only authenticated domain users have access to these files? The scenario as follows: I have a software development company, and I would like to protect my source code from being copied by my programmers. One problem is that some programmers use their own laptops to developing the company's software. In this scenario it's impossible to prevent developers from copying the source code for their laptops. In this case I thought about the following solution, but i don't know if it's possible to implement. The idea is to encrypt the source code and they are accessible (decrypted) only when developers are logged into the AD domain, ie if they are not logged into the AD domain, the source code would be encrypted be useless. Can be implemented this ? What technology should be used?

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid

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

    Read the article

  • Steps to make sure network is not blacklisted...Again

    - by msindle
    I have an interesting issue. I have a client that just got blacklisted due to spam being sent out over the last 2 days. I have my firewall configured to only allow mail to go outbound on port 25 from our mail server (Exchange 2010) exclusively and I have verified that there are no open relay's on our transport rules. We are running Vipre Business and after running deep scans with updated definitions all computers come back clean. I ran a message tracking report on our Exchange server that shows all mail sent via the mail server over the last couple of weeks and didn't see anything malicious or out of the ordinary. I have also verified that there are no home devices or rouge computers on the network. For all practical purposes it appears that the network is clean, but we still wound up on 5 or 6 blacklists...Where should I start looking next? Is there a "best practices" guide that can help eradicate this issue? Thanks in advance! msindle

    Read the article

  • In Windows XP, is it possible to disable user credential caching for particular users

    - by kdt
    I understand that when windows caches user credentials, these can sometimes be used by malicious parties to access other machines once a machine containing cached credentials is compromised, a method known as "pass the hash"[1]. For this reason I would like to get control over what's cached to reduce the risk of cached credentials being used maliciously. It is possible to prevent all caching by zeroing HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\CachedLogonsCount, but this is too indiscriminate: laptops users need to be able to login when away from the network. What I would like to do is prevent the caching of credentials of certain users, such as administrators -- is there any way to do that in Windows XP? http://www.lbl.gov/cyber/systems/pass-the-hash.html

    Read the article

  • Encrypt shared files on AD Domain.

    - by Walter
    Can I encrypt shared files on windows server and allow only authenticated domain users have access to these files? The scenario as follows: I have a software development company, and I would like to protect my source code from being copied by my programmers. One problem is that some programmers use their own laptops to developing the company's software. In this scenario it's impossible to prevent developers from copying the source code for their laptops. In this case I thought about the following solution, but i don't know if it's possible to implement. The idea is to encrypt the source code and they are accessible (decrypted) only when developers are logged into the AD domain, ie if they are not logged into the AD domain, the source code would be encrypted be useless. How can be implemented this using EFS?

    Read the article

  • how to detect device type from connected device to router?

    - by molly
    i have a att router and there is an unknown device connected to my network. i cant seem to kick it off because of how att's router settings are created which is kind of dumb. i am able to see its local ip and mac address. i am on a mac with snow leopard. how can i get more information on the device with the information that i have? i want to see what kind of device it is, i have checked all deviced that are connected to the router and non seem to match the local ip that is connected. i have wpa encryption setup with a strong password.

    Read the article

  • The Story of secure user-authentication in squid

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

    Read the article

  • Firewall Deep Inspection Updates and Antivirus Subscription, worth it?

    - by msemack
    I realize that this is a subjective question, but I'm trying to get some experiences We have Juniper firewalls in our organization (SSG-320M, SSG-5, and some old NS-5GT). We have the option of a yearly subscription for: Deep Inspection Signature Updates Juniper-Kaspersky Antivirus I seem similar services available from other Firewall vendors. We have Symantec Endpoint Protection deployed to all workstations and servers, plus a dedicated appliance for e-mail spam/virus filtering. So, I'm not sure what these firewall-base services will bring to the table that I don't already have. I would appreciate some feedback from people using these firewall services (Juniper or otherwise). Are these services generally worth it? Do they really catch anything? Do they interfere with normal traffic (false positives)?

    Read the article

  • How do I properly check if a program is a virus/trojan in VMware?

    - by acidzombie24
    How I should check if a program is a virus in VMware? Some programs I do need admin ability to install and it makes sense. But how do I know if it's doing more than I want? Some thoughts are: How many processes open when I launch the application What is added to the startup tab in msconfig If any services are added. That's pretty much all my ideas. Even if it does something I recognize I wouldn't know if it's necessary or not. What are some rule of thumb? -Edit- What about registries, can I use that information to help? Maybe have a scanner tell me if the application I just used has messed with sections (like bootup) it shouldn't have?

    Read the article

  • Does anyone know how to "tcpdump" traffic decrypted by Mallory MITM? [migrated]

    - by chriv
    I'm looking for some help in capturing network traffic that I can analyze in Wireshare (or other tools). The tool I'm using is mallory. If anyone is familiar with mallory, I could use some help. I've got it configured and running correctly, but I don't know how to get the output that I want. The setup is on my private network. I have a VM (running Ubuntu 12.04 - precise) with two NICs: eth0 is on my "real" network eth1 is only on my "fake" network, and is using dnsmasq (for DNS and DHCP for other devices on the "fake" network) Effectively eth0 is the "WAN" on my VM, and eth1 is the "LAN" on my VM. I've setup mallory and iptables to intercept, decrypt, encrypt and rewrite all traffic coming in on destination port 443 on eth1. On the device I want intercepted, I have imported the ca.cer that mallory generated as a trusted root certificate. I need to analyze some strange behavior in the HTTPS stream between the client and server, so that's why mallory is setup in between for this MITM. I would like to take the decrypted HTTPS traffic and dump it to either a logfile or a socket in a format compatible with tcpdump/wireshark (so I can collect it later and analyze it). Running tcpdump on eth1 is too soon (it's encrypted), and running tcpdump on eth2 is too late (it's been re-encrypted). Is there a way to make mallory "tcpdump" the decrypted traffic (in both directions)?

    Read the article

  • Making Puppet manifests/modules available to a wide audience

    - by Kyle Smith
    Our team rolled puppet out to our systems over the last six months. We're managing all sorts of resources, and some of them have sensitive data (database passwords for automated backups, license keys for proprietary software, etc.). Other teams want to get involved in the development of (or at least be able to see) our modules and manifests. What have other people done to continue to have secure data moving through Puppet, while sharing the modules and manifests with a larger audience?

    Read the article

  • Can remote LogMeIn Hamachi users access our local LAN?

    - by Kev
    Unknown to me, one of the kids has installed LogMeIn Hamachi on his PC so that he can access and play on his pal's Minecraft server, and vice versa. One of the things I did was disable the Client for Microsoft Networks and File and Printer Sharing for Microsoft Networks on the Hamachi NIC in Windows 7's Network Connections. However, my lack of fu when it comes to these types of services is leaving me feeling a little uncomfortable about him using this. Is there anything I should be worried about here? For example, can his friends access our local LAN (which has a number of NAS boxes with unsecured shares) and get up to no good?

    Read the article

  • Permissions required to look up a domain user's group memberships

    - by adrianbanks
    I am writing some code to look up the members of particular domain groups. Does the user that this application runs as need any particular permissions on the domain to get this information? Background: I have already determined that the application needs to be run as a domain user to be able to query information from the domain. I have a list of group names and for each group, I need to look up the members of that group on the domain and get their names/usernames.

    Read the article

  • Is SSL to the proxy good enough?

    - by Josh Smeaton
    We are currently trying to decide on how best to do SSL traffic in our environment. We have an externally facing Apache proxy server that is responsible for directing all traffic into our environment. It is also doing the SSL work for the majority of our servers. There are one or two IIS servers in particular that are doing their own SSL, but they are also behind the proxy. I'm wondering, is SSL to the proxy good enough? It would mean that traffic within our network is identifiable, but is that such a big deal?

    Read the article

  • Execute build task in Hudson with root privilages

    - by jensendarren
    I have a build script which executes apt-get and therefore requires root privileges. What is the best way to run this script in Hudson? Currently the only solution I have found that works is to add an entry to the sudoers file for the user hudson like so: hudson ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD:ALL However, although my build script now runs without error in Hudson, I am not entirely comfortable with this solution. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid: The Story

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

    Read the article

  • Router reporting failed admin login attempts from home server

    - by jeffora
    I recently noticed in the logs of my home router that it relatively regularly lists the following entry: [admin login failure] from source 192.168.0.160, Monday, June 20,2011 18:13:25 192.168.0.160 is the internal address of my home server, running Windows Home Server 2011. Is there anyway I can find out what specifically is trying to login to the router? Or is there some explanation for this behaviour? (not sure if this belongs here or on superuser...) [Update] I've run both Wireshark and netmon for a while on my home server. Wireshark captured the traffic, but didn't really show anything useful (or nothing I could make use of). A simple HTTP GET request is sent from the server (192.168.0.160) to the router (192.168.0.1), from a seemingly random port (I've seen examples from 50068, 52883), and it appears to do it twice in quick succession (incrementing port by 1), about every hour. Running netstat around the time of the failure didn't show anything (probably too long after anyway). I tried using netmon as it categorises by process, so I thought it might show a corresponding process for the port. Unfortunately, this comes in under the 'unknown' category, meaning it's basically just a slower, less useful Wireshark. I know there's not much to go on here, but does this help in anyway?

    Read the article

  • How can I audit a Linux filesystem for files which have been changed or added within a specific time

    - by Bcos
    We are a website design/hosting company running several sites on a Linux server using Joomla 1.5.14 and recently someone was able exploit a vulnerability in the RW Cards component to write arbitrary files/modify existing files on our filesystem enabling them to do some nasty things to our customers sites. We have removed vulnerable modules from all sites but are still seeing some problems. We suspect that they still have some scripts installed and need a way to audit anything that has been changed or added in the last 10 days. Is there a command or script we can run to do this?

    Read the article

  • Hardening Word and Reader against exploits

    - by satuon
    I have recently heard a lot about exploits for PDF and DOC files on Windows, which when opened in Reader or Word would infect the computer. I'm assuming most of those exploits rely on some kind of active content, I've heard that Reader allows JavaScript for example. I already have antivirus, but I've heard they often don't catch those types of exploits, so I want to try a little proactive defense. Is there a way to harden Reader and Word by disabling plugins or options that are often used by exploits?

    Read the article

  • What is a good solution for an adaptive iptables daemon?

    - by Matt
    I am running a series of web servers and already have a pretty good set of firewall rules set up, however I'm looking for something to monitor the traffic and add rules as needed. I have denyhosts monitoring for bad SSH logins, and that's great - but I'd love something I could apply to the whole machine that would help prevent bute force attacks against my web applications as well, and add rules to block IPs that display evidence of common attacks. I've seen APF, but it looks as though it hasn't been updated in several years. Is it still in use and would it be good for this? Also, what other solutions are out there that would manipulate iptables to behave in some adaptive fashion? I'm running Ubuntu Linux, if that helps.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249  | Next Page >