Search Results

Search found 41147 results on 1646 pages for 'database security'.

Page 290/1646 | < Previous Page | 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297  | Next Page >

  • save to sql server database fromclient side

    - by user281693
    I have a gridview with dropdownlist in it. When the user changes the item in the dropdownlist I want to save the new item in the database. I want this to happen using javascript and ajax like effect. I know how to access the dropdownlist inside gridview using javascript and I can get the new selectd item. But how can I save it to database without server side code? I know one way of doing this is using web services. I just want to know if there is/are any other ways to do it.

    Read the article

  • Best solution to import records from MySQL database to MS SQL (Hourly)

    - by xkingpin
    I need to import records stored in a MySQL Database that I do not maintain into my Sql Server 2005 database (x64) We should import the records at an interval basis (probably 1 hour). What would be the best solution to perform the regular import? Windows Service (using reference MySql.data dll) Windows Client (could make it automated) SQL Extended Stored Procedure (is it possible to reference the MySQL.data dll?) SSIS package - Install MySQL ODBC driver The problem with #4 is that I do not really want to support the ODBC driver on the sql server. I'm not sure if you can even reference the x86 MySql.data dll into a x64 sql server process for #3. (Or if you can even reference that dll within a sql server project)

    Read the article

  • PHP: reusing database class

    - by citricsquid
    Hi, I built a class that allows me to do: $db->query($query); and it works perfectly, although if I want to do: $db->query($query); while($row = $db->fetch_assoc()){ $db->query($anotherquery); echo $db->result(); } it "breaks" the class. I don't want to constantly have to redeclare my class (eg: $seconddb = new database()), is there a way to get around this? I want to be able to reuse $db within $db, without overwriting the "outside" db. currently I'm create an array of data (from db-fetch_assoc() then doing a foreach and then doing the db call inside that: $db->query('SELECT * FROM table'); while($row = $db->fetch_assoc()){ $arr[] = $row; } foreach($arr as $a){ $db->query(); // query and processing here } Is this the best method or am I missing the obvious? Should I consider passing a connection link ID with the database connection?

    Read the article

  • How do I change a MySQL table to UTF-8?

    - by alex
    I know there are many settings for a language for a table and a database. I already created the database. I believe when I created it, it was default/LATIN. I want to change everything-I mean...both the table and the database, to UTF-8. How can I do that? thanks.

    Read the article

  • how to guarantee atomicity across two databases (the filesystem and your RDBMS)?

    - by Lock up
    i am working on a online file management project.In which we are storing references on the database(sql server) and files data on the on file system;.In which we are facing a problem of coordination between file system and database while we are uploading a file and also in case of deleting a file that first we create a reference in the data base or store files on file system;;the problem is that if create a reference in the database first and then storing a file on file system.bur while storing files on the file system any type of error occur.then reference for that file is created in the database but no file data on the file system;; please give me some solution how to deal with such situation;;i am badly in need of it;; and reason for that?

    Read the article

  • RSpec leaves record in test database

    - by DMiller
    Whenever I run a user test, RSpec leaves the Fabricated user in the test database after the test has completed, which is messing up my other tests. I will do a rake db:test:prepare, but when I run my tests again, the record is recreated in my database. I have no idea why this is happening. It only happens with user objects. In my spec_helper file I even have: config.use_transactional_fixtures = true Here is an example test that creates a record: it "creates a password reset token for the user" do alice = Fabricate(:user) post :create, email: alice.email expect(assigns(alice.password_reset_token)).to_not eq(nil) end Fabricator: Fabricator(:user) do email { Faker::Internet.email } password 'password' name { Faker::Name.name } end Could this have anything to do with my users model?

    Read the article

  • MySql database design for a quiz

    - by Mark
    I'm making an online quiz with php and mysql and need a bit of help deciding how to design the database for optimal insert of questions/answers and to select questions for the quiz. The table will hold 80 questions each with 4 possible options plus the correct answer. When retrieving the questions and options from the database I will randomly select 25 questions and their options. Is it better to make a single column for all questions, options, and correct answers? For example: ID | Q | OPT1 | OPT2 | OPT3 | OPT4 | ANS Or would it be better to make a column for each individual question, option, and correct answer? For example: Q1 | Q1_OPT1 | Q1_OPT2 | Q1_OPT3 | Q1_OPT5 | Q1_ANS | Q2 | Q2_OPT1 | Q2_OPT2...

    Read the article

  • How to "redefine search" or correct "misspelling" from the database

    - by From.ME.to.YOU
    Hello i want to add new feature to the search in my website. i'm using PHP and MYSQL. mysql database containing a table to the items that the user will search for, for each item there is a "keyword" column that's comma separated keywords "EXAMPLE: cat,dog,horse". after the user search in my website i want to get the words that are let me say "85%" similar to his search keyword, this is for redefine search. and for misspelling i want a service or something that provide if the keyword is correct or misspelled so i get some corrections and check if those exists in the database and then give those corrections to user to change his search keyword. i'm not asking for a solution here ... but if you can direct me in a one way or another that will be great Thanks guys Cheers

    Read the article

  • Move database from SQL 7 to 2005 / 2008

    - by etechpartner
    I have several pretty large databases located in a SQL Server 7 box. Whats the best way to get them into SQL Server 2008? As far as I know, there were changes to the underlying file structures so I am not sure that a simple detach/attach would work. When I tried attaching from 2008 it complained strongly. "Version no longer supported" etc etc. What options do I have? Are there any tools on the market that can connect to both 7 and 2008 and then move the schema and data?

    Read the article

  • Common vulnerabilities for WinForms applications

    - by David Stratton
    I'm not sure if this is on-topic or not here, but it's so specific to .NET WinForms that I believe it makes more sense here than at the Security stackexchange site. (Also, it's related strictly to secure coding, and I think it's as on-topic as any question asking about common website vulnerabiitles that I see all over the site.) For years, our team has been doing threat modeling on Website projects. Part of our template includes the OWASP Top 10 plus other well-known vulnerabilities, so that when we're doing threat modeling, we always make sure that we have a documented process to addressing each of those common vulnerabilities. Example: SQL Injection (Owasp A-1) Standard Practice Use Stored Parameterized Procedures where feasible for access to data where possible Use Parameterized Queries if Stored Procedures are not feasible. (Using a 3rd party DB that we can't modify) Escape single quotes only when the above options are not feasible Database permissions must be designed with least-privilege principle By default, users/groups have no access While developing, document the access needed to each object (Table/View/Stored Procedure) and the business need for access. [snip] At any rate, we used the OWASP Top 10 as the starting point for commonly known vulnerabilities specific to websites. (Finally to the question) On rare occasions, we develop WinForms or Windows Service applications when a web app doesn't meet the needs. I'm wondering if there is an equivalent list of commonly known security vulnerabilities for WinForms apps. Off the top of my head, I can think of a few.... SQL Injection is still a concern Buffer Overflow is normally prevented by the CLR, but is more possible if using non-managed code mixed in with managed code .NET code can be decompiled, so storing sensitive info in code, as opposed to encrypted in the app.config... Is there such a list, or even several versions of such a list, from which we can borrow to create our own? If so, where can I find it? I haven't been able to find it, but if there is one, it would be a great help to us, and also other WinForms developers.

    Read the article

  • Integrating Dynamics CMS with Sharepoint ASCX SecurityException Issue

    - by Gavin
    Hi, I've an ASCX control (WebParts aren't used in this solution) which interrogates CMS 4's data via the API provided by Microsoft.Crm.Sdk and Microsoft.Crm.SdkTypeProxy. The solution works until it's deployed to Sharepoint. Initially I received the following error: [SecurityException: That assembly does not allow partially trusted callers.] MyApp.SharePoint.Web.Applications.MyAppUtilities.RefreshUserFromCrm(String login) +0 MyApp.SharePoint.Web.Applications.MyApp_LoginForm.btnLogin_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) +30 System.Web.UI.WebControls.Button.OnClick(EventArgs e) +111 Then I tried wrapping the calling code in the ASCX with SPSecurity.RunWithElevatedPrivileges: SPSecurity.RunWithElevatedPrivileges(delegate() { // FBA user may not exist yet or require refreshing MyAppUtilities.RefreshUserFromCrm(txtUser.Text); }); But this resulted in the following error: [SecurityException: Request for the permission of type 'Microsoft.SharePoint.Security.SharePointPermission, Microsoft.SharePoint.Security, Version=12.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=71e9bce111e9429c' failed.] MyApp.SharePoint.Web.Applications.MyApp_LoginForm.btnLogin_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) +0 System.Web.UI.WebControls.Button.OnClick(EventArgs e) +111 When I elevate the trust level in the Sharepoint site to full everything works fine, however I need to come up with a solution that uses minimal trust (or a customised minimal trust). I'm also trying to stay clear of adding anything to the GAC. Any ideas? I assume the issue is occuring when trying to call functionality from Microsoft.Crm.* Thanks in advance for any help anyone can provide. Cheers, Gavin

    Read the article

  • Password Cracking Windows Accounts

    - by Kevin
    At work we have laptops with encrypted harddrives. Most developers here (on occasion I have been guilty of it too) leave their laptops in hibernate mode when they take them home at night. Obviously, Windows (i.e. there is a program running in the background which does it for windows) must have a method to unencrypt the data on the drive, or it wouldn't be able to access it. That being said, I always thought that leaving a windows machine on in hibernate mode in a non-secure place (not at work on a lock) is a security threat, because someone could take the machine, leave it running, hack the windows accounts and use it to encrypt the data and steal the information. When I got to thinking about how I would go about breaking into the windows system without restarting it, I couldn't figure out if it was possible. I know it is possible to write a program to crack windows passwords once you have access to the appropriate file(s). But is it possible to execute a program from a locked Windows system that would do this? I don't know of a way to do it, but I am not a Windows expert. If so, is there a way to prevent it? I don't want to expose security vulnerabilities about how to do it, so I would ask that someone wouldn't post the necessary steps in details, but if someone could say something like "Yes, it's possible the USB drive allows arbitrary execution," that would be great! EDIT: The idea being with the encryption is that you can't reboot the system, because once you do, the disk encryption on the system requires a login before being able to start windows. With the machine being in hibernate, the system owner has already bypassed the encryption for the attacker, leaving windows as the only line of defense to protect the data.

    Read the article

  • How do I securely authenticate the calling assembly of a WCF service method?

    - by Tim
    The current situation is as follows: We have an production .net 3.5 WCF service, used by several applications throughout the organization, over wsHttpBinding or netTcpBinding. User authentication is being done on the Transport level, using Windows integrated security. This service has a method Foo(string parameter), which can only be called by members of given AD groups. The string parameter is obligatory. A new client application has come into play (.net 3.5, C# console app), which eliminates the necessity of the string parameter. However, only calls from this particular application should be allowed to omit the string parameter. The identity of the caller of the client application should still be known by the server because the AD group limitation still applies (ruling out impersonation on the client side). I found a way to pass on the "evidence" of the calling (strong-named) assembly in the message headers, but this method is clearly not secure because the "evidence" can easily be spoofed. Also, CAS (code access security) seems like a possible solution, but I can't seem to figure out how to make use of CAS in this particular scenario. Does anyone have a suggestion on how to solve this issue? Edit: I found another thread on this subject; apparently the conclusion there is that it is simply impossible to implement in a secure fashion.

    Read the article

  • Relay WCF Service

    - by Matt Ruwe
    This is more of an architectural and security question than anything else. I'm trying to determine if a suggested architecture is necessary. Let me explain my configuration. We have a standard DMZ established that essentially has two firewalls. One that's external facing and the other that connects to the internal LAN. The following describes where each application tier is currently running. Outside the firewall: Silverlight Application In the DMZ: WCF Service (Business Logic & Data Access Layer) Inside the LAN: Database I'm receiving input that the architecture is not correct. Specifically, it has been suggested that because "a web server is easily hacked" that we should place a relay server inside the DMZ that communicates with another WCF service inside the LAN which will then communicate with the database. The external firewall is currently configured to only allow port 443 (https) to the WCF service. The internal firewall is configured to allow SQL connections from the WCF service in the DMZ. Ignoring the obvious performance implications, I don't see the security benefit either. I'm going to reserve my judgement of this suggestion to avoid polluting the answers with my bias. Any input is appreciated. Thanks, Matt

    Read the article

  • WCF Custom Delegation/Authentication without Kerberos

    - by MichaelGG
    I'm building a simple WCF service, probably exposed via HTTPS, using NTLM security. Since not all users are going to be capable of using the service directly, we're writing a simple web front-end for the service. Users will auth with HTML to the web front-end. What we want is a way to delegate the user of the web site all the way to the WCF service. I understand Kerberos delegation can do this, but that's not available to us. What I want to do is make the web front-end account a specially trusted account, so that if a request hits the WCF service authenticated as "DOMAIN\WebApp", we read a WCF message header containing the real identity, then switch the principal to that and continue as normal. Is there any "simple" way of achieving this? Should I give up entirely on this idea, and instead make users "sign-in" to the WCF app and then do complete custom auth? The WCF extensibility and security options seem so vast, I'd like to get a heads up on which path to start heading down.

    Read the article

  • How to detect hidden field tampering?

    - by Myron
    On a form of my web app, I've got a hidden field that I need to protect from tampering for security reasons. I'm trying to come up with a solution whereby I can detect if the value of the hidden field has been changed, and react appropriately (i.e. with a generic "Something went wrong, please try again" error message). The solution should be secure enough that brute force attacks are infeasible. I've got a basic solution that I think will work, but I'm not security expert and I may be totally missing something here. My idea is to render two hidden inputs: one named "important_value", containing the value I need to protect, and one named "important_value_hash" containing the SHA hash of the important value concatenated with a constant long random string (i.e. the same string will be used every time). When the form is submitted, the server will re-compute the SHA hash, and compare against the submitted value of important_value_hash. If they are not the same, the important_value has been tampered with. I could also concatenate additional values with the SHA's input string (maybe the user's IP address?), but I don't know if that really gains me anything. Will this be secure? Anyone have any insight into how it might be broken, and what could/should be done to improve it? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Isolated storage misunderstand

    - by Costa
    Hi this is a discussion between me and me to understand isolated storage issue. can you help me to convince me about isolated storage!! This is a code written in windows form app (reader) that read the isolated storage of another win form app (writer) which is signed. where is the security if the reader can read the writer's file, I thought only signed code can access the file! If all .Net applications born equal and have all permissions to access Isolated storage, where is the security then? If I can install and run Exe from isolated storage, why I don't install a virus and run it, I am trusted to access this area. but the virus or what ever will not be trusted to access the rest of file system, it only can access the memory, and this is dangerous enough. I cannot see any difference between using app data folder to save the state and using isolated storage except a long nasty path!! I want to try give low trust to Reader code and retest, but they said "Isolated storage is actually created for giving low trusted application the right to save its state". Reader code: private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { String path = @"C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\IsolatedStorage\efv5cmbz.ewt\2ehuny0c.qvv\StrongName.5v3airc2lkv0onfrhsm2h3uiio35oarw\AssemFiles\toto12\ABC.txt"; StreamReader reader = new StreamReader(path); var test = reader.ReadLine(); reader.Close(); } Writer: private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { IsolatedStorageFile isolatedFile = IsolatedStorageFile.GetMachineStoreForAssembly(); isolatedFile.CreateDirectory("toto12"); IsolatedStorageFileStream isolatedStorage = new IsolatedStorageFileStream(@"toto12\ABC.txt", System.IO.FileMode.Create, isolatedFile); StreamWriter writer = new StreamWriter(isolatedStorage); writer.WriteLine("Ana 2akol we ashrab kai a3eesh wa akbora"); writer.Close(); writer.Dispose(); }

    Read the article

  • AspNetMembership provider with WCF service

    - by Sly
    I'm trying to configure AspNetMembershipProvider to be used for authenticating in my WCF service that is using basicHttpBinding. I have following configuration: <system.serviceModel> <serviceHostingEnvironment aspNetCompatibilityEnabled="true" /> <bindings> <basicHttpBinding> <binding name="basicSecureBinding"> <security mode="Message"></security> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> </bindings> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="MyApp.Services.ComputersServiceBehavior"> <serviceAuthorization roleProviderName="AspNetSqlRoleProvider" principalPermissionMode="UseAspNetRoles" /> <serviceCredentials> <userNameAuthentication userNamePasswordValidationMode="MembershipProvider" membershipProviderName="AspNetSqlMembershipProvider"/> </serviceCredentials> <serviceMetadata httpGetEnabled="true" /> <serviceDebug includeExceptionDetailInFaults="true" /> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> <services> <service behaviorConfiguration="MyApp.Services.ComputersServiceBehavior" name="MyApp.Services.ComputersService"> <endpoint binding="basicHttpBinding" contract="MyApp.Services.IComputersService" /> <endpoint address="mex" binding="mexHttpBinding" contract="IMetadataExchange" /> </service> </services> </system.serviceModel> Roles are enabled and membership provider is configured (its working for web site). But authentication process is not fired at all. There is no calles to data base during request, and when I try to set following attribute on method: [PrincipalPermission(SecurityAction.Demand, Authenticated = true)] public bool Test() { return true; } I'm getting access denied exception. Any thoughts how to fix it?

    Read the article

  • OAuth secrets in mobile apps

    - by Felixyz
    When using the OAuth protocol, you need a secret string obtained from the service you want to delegate to. If you are doing this in a web app, you can simply store the secret in your data base or on the file system, but what is the best way to handle it in a mobile app (or a desktop app for that matter)? Storing the string in the app is obviously not good, as someone could easily find it and abuse it. Another approach would be to store it on you server, and have the app fetch it on every run, never storing it on the phone. This is almost as bad, because you have to include the URL in the app. I don't believe using https is any help. The only workable solution I can come up with is to first obtain the Access Token as normal (preferably using a web view inside the app), and then route all further communication through our server, where a script would append the secret to the request data and communicates with the provider. Then again, I'm a security noob, so I'd really like to hear some knowledgeable peoples' opinions on this. It doesn't seem to me that most apps are going to these lengths to guarantee security (for example, Facebook Connect seems to assume that you put the secret into a string right in your app). Another thing: I don't believe the secret is involved in initially requesting the Access Token, so that could be done without involving our own server. Am I correct?

    Read the article

  • Using Active Directory to authenticate users in a WWW facing website

    - by Basiclife
    Hi, I'm looking at starting a new web app which needs to be secure (if for no other reason than that we'll need PCI accreditation at some point). From previous experience working with PCI (on a domain), the preferred method is to use integrated windows authentication which is then passed all the way through the app to the database. This allows for better auditing as well as object-level permissions (ie an end user can't read the credit card table). There are advantages in that even if someone compromises the webserver, they won't be able to glean any additional information from the database. Also, the webserver isn't storing any database credentials (beyond perhaps a simple anonymous user with very few permissions) So, now I'm looking at the new web app which will be on the public internet. One suggestion is to have a Active Directory server and create windows accounts on the AD for each user of the site. These users will then be placed into the appropriate NT groups to decide which DB permissions they should have (and which pages they can access). ASP already provides the AD membership provider and role provider so this should be fairly simple to implement. There are a number of questions around this - Scalability, reliability, etc... and I was wondering if there is anyone out there with experience of this approach or, even better, some good reasons why to do it / not to do it. Any input appreciated Regards Basiclife

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297  | Next Page >