Search Results

Search found 1746 results on 70 pages for 'bom signature'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 3/70 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Added key, but still getting "gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found"

    - by gertvdijk
    Trying to download Django source package using dget and the .dsc file from here. Then dget fails to verify the source, because it is missing a public key. $ dget https://launchpad.net/ubuntu... [...] dscverify: python-django_1.4.1-2.dsc failed signature check: gpg: Signature made Tue 21 Aug 2012 09:12:04 CEST using RSA key ID F2AC729A gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found Validation FAILED!! Fine, I added this key to my keyring, because I think I can trust this one: $ gpg --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com --recv-key 0xF2AC729A gpg: requesting key F2AC729A from hkp server keyserver.ubuntu.com gpg: key F2AC729A: "Raphaël Hertzog <[email protected]>" not changed gpg: Total number processed: 1 gpg: unchanged: 1 (well, this output is run afterwards, when it was already in my keyring) And it is really there: $ gpg --fingerprint F2AC729A pub 4096R/F2AC729A 2009-05-07 Key fingerprint = 3E4F B711 7877 F589 DBCF 06D6 E619 045D F2AC 729A uid Raphaël Hertzog <[email protected]> uid Raphaël Hertzog (Debian) <[email protected]> uid Raphaël Hertzog (Freexian SARL) <[email protected]> sub 2048R/71F23DEE 2009-05-07 But still fails for the same reason: gpg: Signature made Tue 21 Aug 2012 09:12:04 CEST using RSA key ID F2AC729A gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found I'm running all these commands as my regular user. I also tried adding this key to APT's keyring and root's keyring. Both to no avail. What am I missing here?

    Read the article

  • Digital Signature Device Recommendations (Mini Tablet)

    - by blu
    I'd like to capture signatures of application users with a mini-tablet/little pos signature device. I welcome any first hand experiences of which ones were good and which ones to stay away from. Off the top of my head I can think of a few features I'd like to see: USB interface Not too expensive (I don't know 100-200 dollars?) Be easy to integrate with a managed .NET application Also I realize most people, myself included, think of digitally signing assemblies with code instead of a mini-tablet device, if there is a more accurate phrase for this pleas let me know. Thanks for any input.

    Read the article

  • Windows XP Rejecting Digital Signature

    - by ajs410
    I don't want to see unsigned driver warnings while installing a driver, so I'm trying to digitally sign a driver using signtool, inf2cat, and a Software Publishing Certificate. Vista x64 requires the drivers to be digitally signed or it flat out rejects them, but I have managed to get Vista x64 to accept the driver, so I know I'm doing the process correctly. However, I repeat the process for the Windows XP x86 driver. inf2cat and signtool both return successful results, signtool verifies the digital signatures, right-click - properties on the file verifies the digital signature too. However, when I go to load the driver in Windows XP, it still prompts me with an unsigned driver warning. Why does XP consider the file unsigned, but Vista does not?

    Read the article

  • Method params match signature, but still getting error

    - by Jason
    I am in the midst of converting a VB library to C#. One of my methods has the following signature in VB: Private Shared Sub FillOrder(ByVal row As DataRowView, ByRef o As Order) In C# I converted it to: private static void FillOrder(DataRowView row, ref Order o) From my constructor inside my Order class, I am calling the FillOrder() method like so: DataView dv = //[get the data] if (dv.Count > 0) { FillOrder(dv[0], this); } In VB, this works: Dim dv As DataView = '[get data]' If dv.Count > 0 Then FillOrder(dv.Item(0), Me) End If However, in VS10 in the C# file I am getting a red squiggle under this call with the following error: The best overloaded method match for [the method] has some invalid arguments This was working code in VB. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • java: can I convert strings with String.getBytes() without the BOM?

    - by Cheeso
    Suppose I have this code: String encoding = "UTF-16"; String text = "[Hello StackOverflow]"; byte[] message= text.getBytes(encoding); If I display the byte array in message, the result is: 0000 FE FF 00 5B 00 48 00 65 00 6C 00 6C 00 6F 00 20 ...[.H.e.l.l.o. 0010 00 53 00 74 00 61 00 63 00 6B 00 4F 00 76 00 65 .S.t.a.c.k.O.v.e 0020 00 72 00 66 00 6C 00 6F 00 77 00 5D .r.f.l.o.w.] As you can see, there's a BOM in the beginning. How can I: generate a UTF-16 byte array that lacks a BOM ? convert from a byte array that contains UTF=16 chars but lacks a BOM, back to a string?

    Read the article

  • java: can I convert strings to byte arrays, without a BOM?

    - by Cheeso
    Suppose I have this code: String encoding = "UTF-16"; String text = "[Hello StackOverflow]"; byte[] message= text.getBytes(encoding); If I display the byte array in message, the result is: 0000 FE FF 00 5B 00 48 00 65 00 6C 00 6C 00 6F 00 20 ...[.H.e.l.l.o. 0010 00 53 00 74 00 61 00 63 00 6B 00 4F 00 76 00 65 .S.t.a.c.k.O.v.e 0020 00 72 00 66 00 6C 00 6F 00 77 00 5D .r.f.l.o.w.] As you can see, there's a BOM in the beginning. How can I: generate a UTF-16 byte array that lacks a BOM, from a string? convert from a byte array that contains UTF-16 chars but lacks a BOM, back to a string?

    Read the article

  • Automate the signature of the update.rdf manifest for my firefox extension

    - by streetpc
    Hello, I'm developing a firefox extension and I'd like to provide automatic update to my beta-testers (who are not tech-savvy). Unfortunately, the update server doesn't provide HTTPS. According to the Extension Developer Guide on signing updates, I have to sign my update.rdf and provide an encoded public key in the install.rdf. There is the McCoy tool to do all of this, but it is an interactive GUI tool and I'd like to automate the extension packaging using an Ant script (as this is part of a much bigger process). I can't find a more precise description of what's happening to sign the update.rdf manifest than below, and McCoy source is an awful lot of javascript. The doc says: The add-on author creates a public/private RSA cryptographic key pair. The public part of the key is DER encoded and then base 64 encoded and added to the add-on's install.rdf as an updateKey entry. (...) Roughly speaking the update information is converted to a string, then hashed using a sha512 hashing algorithm and this hash is signed using the private key. The resultant data is DER encoded then base 64 encoded for inclusion in the update.rdf as an signature entry. I don't know well about DER encoding, but it seems like it needs some parameters. So would anyone know either the full algortihm to sign the update.rdf and install.rdf using a predefined keypair, or a scriptable alternative to McCoy whether a command-line tool like asn1coding will suffise a good/simple developer tutorial on DER encoding

    Read the article

  • Installing Visual Studio Team Foundation Server Service Pack 1

    - by Martin Hinshelwood
    As has become customary when the product team releases a new patch, SP or version I like to document the install. Although I had no errors on my main computer, my netbook did have problems. Although I am not ready to call it a Service Pack problem just yet! Update 2011-03-10 – Running the Team Foundation Server 2010 Service Pack 1 install a second time worked As per Brian's post I am installing the Team Foundation Server Service Pack first and indeed as this is a single server local deployment I need to install both. If I only install one it will leave the other product broken. This however does not affect you if you are running Visual Studio and Team Foundation Server on separate computers as is normal in a production deployment. Main workhorse I will be installing the service pack first on my main computer as I want to actually use it here. Figure: My main workhorse I will also be installing this on my netbook which is obviously of significantly lower spec, but I will do that one after. Although, as always I had my fingers crossed, I was not really worried. Figure: KB2182621 Compared to Visual Studio there are not really a lot of components to update. Figure: TFS 2010 and SQL 2008 are the main things to update There is no “web” installer for the Team Foundation Server 2010 Service Pack, but that is ok as most people will be installing it on a production server and will want to have everything local. I would have liked a Web installer, but the added complexity for the product team is not work the capability for a 500mb patch. Figure: There is currently no way to roll SP1 and RTM together Figure: No problems with the file verification, phew Figure: Although the install took a while, it progressed smoothly   Figure: I always like a success screen Well, as far as the install is concerned everything is OK, but what about TFS? Can I still connect and can I still administer it. Figure: Service Pack 1 is reflected correctly in the Administration Console I am confident that there are no major problems with TFS on my system and that it has been updated to SP1. I can do all of the things that I used before with ease, and with the new features detailed by Brian I think I will be happy. Netbook The great god Murphy has stuck, and my poor wee laptop spat the Team Foundation Server 2010 Service Pack 1 out so fast it hit me on the back of the head. That will teach me for not looking… Figure: “Installation did not succeed” I am pretty sure should not be all caps! On examining the file I found that everything worked, except the actual Team Foundation Server 2010 serving step. Action: System Requirement Checks... Action complete Action: Downloading and/or Verifying Items c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\VS10-KB2182621.msp: Verifying signature for VS10-KB2182621.msp c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\VS10-KB2182621.msp Signature verified successfully for VS10-KB2182621.msp c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\DACFramework_enu.msi: Verifying signature for DACFramework_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\DACFramework_enu.msi Signature verified successfully for DACFramework_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\DACProjectSystemSetup_enu.msi: Verifying signature for DACProjectSystemSetup_enu.msi Exists: evaluating Exists evaluated to false c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\DACProjectSystemSetup_enu.msi Signature verified successfully for DACProjectSystemSetup_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\TSqlLanguageService_enu.msi: Verifying signature for TSqlLanguageService_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\TSqlLanguageService_enu.msi Signature verified successfully for TSqlLanguageService_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SharedManagementObjects_x86_enu.msi: Verifying signature for SharedManagementObjects_x86_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SharedManagementObjects_x86_enu.msi Signature verified successfully for SharedManagementObjects_x86_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SharedManagementObjects_amd64_enu.msi: Verifying signature for SharedManagementObjects_amd64_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SharedManagementObjects_amd64_enu.msi Signature verified successfully for SharedManagementObjects_amd64_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SQLSysClrTypes_x86_enu.msi: Verifying signature for SQLSysClrTypes_x86_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SQLSysClrTypes_x86_enu.msi Signature verified successfully for SQLSysClrTypes_x86_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SQLSysClrTypes_amd64_enu.msi: Verifying signature for SQLSysClrTypes_amd64_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SQLSysClrTypes_amd64_enu.msi Signature verified successfully for SQLSysClrTypes_amd64_enu.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x86.cab: Verifying signature for vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x86.cab c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x86.cab Signature verified successfully for vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x86.cab c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x86.msi: Verifying signature for vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x86.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x86.msi Signature verified successfully for vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x86.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SetupUtility.exe: Verifying signature for SetupUtility.exe c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\SetupUtility.exe Signature verified successfully for SetupUtility.exe c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x64.cab: Verifying signature for vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x64.cab c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x64.cab Signature verified successfully for vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x64.cab c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x64.msi: Verifying signature for vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x64.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x64.msi Signature verified successfully for vcruntime\Vc_runtime_x64.msi c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\NDP40-KB2468871.exe: Verifying signature for NDP40-KB2468871.exe c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\NDP40-KB2468871.exe Signature verified successfully for NDP40-KB2468871.exe Action complete Action: Performing actions on all Items Entering Function: BaseMspInstallerT >::PerformAction Action: Performing Install on MSP: c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\VS10-KB2182621.msp targetting Product: Microsoft Team Foundation Server 2010 - ENU Returning IDOK. INSTALLMESSAGE_ERROR [Error 1935.An error occurred during the installation of assembly 'Microsoft.TeamFoundation.WebAccess.WorkItemTracking,version="10.0.0.0",publicKeyToken="b03f5f7f11d50a3a",processorArchitecture="MSIL",fileVersion="10.0.40219.1",culture="neutral"'. Please refer to Help and Support for more information. HRESULT: 0x80070005. ] Returning IDOK. INSTALLMESSAGE_ERROR [Error 1712.One or more of the files required to restore your computer to its previous state could not be found. Restoration will not be possible.] Patch (c:\757fe6efe9f065130d4838081911\VS10-KB2182621.msp) Install failed on product (Microsoft Team Foundation Server 2010 - ENU). Msi Log: MSI returned 0x643 Entering Function: MspInstallerT >::Rollback Action Rollback changes PerformMsiOperation returned 0x643 PerformMsiOperation returned 0x643 OnFailureBehavior for this item is to Rollback. Action complete Final Result: Installation failed with error code: (0x80070643), "Fatal error during installation. " (Elapsed time: 0 00:14:09). Figure: Error log for Team Foundation Server 2010 install shows a failure As there is really no information in this log as to why the installation failed so I checked the event log on that box. Figure: There are hundreds of errors and it actually looks like there are more problems than a failed Service Pack I am going to just run it again and see if it was because the netbook was slow to catch on to the update. Hears hoping, but even if it fails, I would question the installation of Windows (PDC laptop original install) before I question the Service Pack Figure: Second run through was successful I don’t know if the laptop was just slow, or what… Did you get this error? If you did I will push this to the product team as a problem, but unless more people have this sort of error, I will just look to write this off as a corrupted install of Windows and reinstall.

    Read the article

  • Adeus ano bom – bem vindo, melhor ainda.

    - by anobre
    Olá pessoal! Este ano de 2010 foi realmente muito bom. A NBR cresceu consideravelmente, eu tive algumas mudanças no meu trabalho, me casei, comprei um apartamento e tudo mais. Definitivamente, este ano ficará marcado para sempre. Fiz diversos amigos, dentro da comunidade Microsoft também. O melhor ainda é que as perspectivas para 2011 são ainda mais positivas. E pelo que estou vendo, este sentimento é comum a muitos amigos por aí, o que me deixa mais feliz ainda. Sem mais, desejo a todos um feliz ano de 2011, que muitos objetivos e conquistas sejam alcançados. Indepentende de tecnologias, linguagens ou religiões, que cada um faça o seu melhor, para garantir o melhor a sua volta. Espero que todos sigam duas palavras: MUDANÇAS e EMPREENDEDORISMO. Um forte abraço a todos e até ano que vem!

    Read the article

  • Bonnie.NET Web Edition - Digital Signature form ASP.NET Web Pages

    Cassandra relseases on the we-coffee.com site a new version of Bonnie.NET. The Bonnie.NET Web Edition (http://www.we-coffee.com/bonnie/bonnieWeb.aspx). This new version permits to digitally sign texts, files and from data from an ASP.NET web-pages. It integrates the PKCS#7 standard to permits signature and co-signature of data both form client-side that from server side. To permits digital signature from ASP.NET web pages, Bonnie.NET Web Edition contains three asp.net server controls,...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Validating signature trust with gpg?

    - by larsks
    We would like to use gpg signatures to verify some aspects of our system configuration management tools. Additionally, we would like to use a "trust" model where individual sysadmin keys are signed with a master signing key, and then our systems trust that master key (and use the "web of trust" to validate signatures by our sysadmins). This gives us a lot of flexibility, such as the ability to easily revoke the trust on a key when someone leaves, but we've run into a problem. While the gpg command will tell you if a key is untrusted, it doesn't appear to return an exit code indicating this fact. For example: # gpg -v < foo.asc Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) gpg: armor header: gpg: original file name='' this is a test gpg: Signature made Fri 22 Jul 2011 11:34:02 AM EDT using RSA key ID ABCD00B0 gpg: using PGP trust model gpg: Good signature from "Testing Key <[email protected]>" gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. Primary key fingerprint: ABCD 1234 0527 9D0C 3C4A CAFE BABE DEAD BEEF 00B0 gpg: binary signature, digest algorithm SHA1 The part we care about is this: gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature! gpg: There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner. The exit code returned by gpg in this case is 0, despite the trust failure: # echo $? 0 How do we get gpg to fail in the event that something is signed with an untrusted signature? I've seen some suggestions that the gpgv command will return a proper exit code, but unfortunately gpgv doesn't know how to fetch keys from keyservers. I guess we can parse the status output (using --status-fd) from gpg, but is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • XML Signature in a Web application

    - by OpenDevSoft
    Hi, We are developing an e-Banking web application for a small bank (up to 20000 clients/users). We have to implement digital signatures with X509 certificates (issued by CA on USB tokens) for signing payment information. We tried using CAPICOM but it seems that it is not working well with Windows Vista (have not tried it with Win 7). The other problem is that core banking system can process only Xml digital signatures, so we have to sign XML documents (not just a bulk-formatted text data like with CAPICOM and Win32 Crypto API). So my questions here are: Does anyone of you have similar problem and how did they solved it? Is there a plug-in, library, component or external tool (for Internet Explorer and/or Fire Fox) that supports XML Digital Signatures in a web application? Can you please recommend some of these products and write something about your experience with them? Thank you very much.

    Read the article

  • How to create digital signature that can not be used to reproduce the message twice

    - by freediver
    I am creating a client-server application and I'd like to send data from server to client securely. Using public/private key algorithms makes sense and in PHP we can use openssl_sign and openssl_verify functions to check that the data came by someone who has the private key. Now imagine that one of the actions sent by server to client is destructive in nature. If somebody uses an HTTP sniffer to catch this command (which will be signed properly) how can I further protect the communication to ensure that only commands coming from our server get processed by the client? I was thinking about using current UTC time as part of the encrypted data but client time might be off. Is there a simple solution to the problem?

    Read the article

  • Haskell type signature with multiple type somethings (predicates?, for example Eq a =>)

    - by Andrew
    I'm not sure if type predicates is the right term, in fact I've never learned the word for this, so an edit to correct would be helpful - I'm referring to when you give the tipe of function f :: a -> b and you want to say a is a Eq and you say f :: Eq a => a -> b, the name for Eq a => - this is the thing i called a type predicate. My question, though, is how to have multiple of these, so if A is an Eq and B is a Num, I could say either f :: Eq a => a -> b or f :: Num b => a -> b. So, how can I have Eq a => and Num b => at the same time? f :: Eq a => Num b => a -> b, f :: Eq a -> Num b => a -> b, and f :: Eq a, Num b => a -> b all didn't do what I wanted.

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu One error: Invaild signature

    - by ItsThatMatt
    I have never connected to Ubuntu One, I can log in through http://one.ubuntu.com and everything on that site works. The client throws this error though; 2011-02-28 18:05:33,680 - ubuntuone.controlpanel.dbus_service - ERROR - VolumesInfoError: args (, {'error_type': 'WebClientError', 'error_msg': u"(400L, 'Invalid signature. Expected signature base string: GET&https%3A%2F%2Fone.ubuntu.com%2Fapi%2Faccount%2F&oauth_consumer_key%3DtB3tTPd%26oauth_nonce%3D01736942%26oauth_signature_method%3DHMAC-SHA1%26oauth_timestamp%3D1298876730%26oauth_token%3DhkUuGUCHedzbTCxQdvtQMBNOxoNTrWsUBWXQaTykCGAmxzECmg%26oauth_version%3D1.0')"}), kwargs {}.

    Read the article

  • Let your Signature Experience drive IT-decision making

    - by Tania Le Voi
    Today’s CIO job description:  ‘’Align IT infrastructure and solutions with business goals and objectives ; AND while doing so reduce costs; BUT ALSO, be innovative, ensure the architectures are adaptable and agile as we need to act today on the changes that we may request tomorrow.”   Sound like an unachievable request? The fact is, reality dictates that CIO’s are put under this type of pressure to deliver more with less. In a past career phase I spent a few years as an IT Relationship Manager for a large Insurance company. This is a role that we see all too infrequently in many of our customers, and it’s a shame.  The purpose of this role was to build a bridge, a relationship between IT and the business. Key to achieving that goal was to ensure the same language was being spoken and more importantly that objectives were commonly understood - hence service and projects were delivered to time, to budget and actually solved the business problems. In reality IT and the business are already married, but the relationship is most often defined as ‘supplier’ of IT rather than a ‘trusted partner’. To deliver business value they need to understand how to work together effectively to attain this next level of partnership. The Business cannot compete if they do not get a new product to market ahead of the competition, or for example act in a timely manner to address a new industry problem such as a legislative change. An even better example is when the Application or Service fails and the Business takes a hit by bad publicity, being trending topics on social media and losing direct revenue from online channels. For this reason alone Business and IT need the alignment of their priorities and deliverables now more than ever! Take a look at Forrester’s recent study that found ‘many IT respondents considering themselves to be trusted partners of the business but their efforts are impaired by the inadequacy of tools and organizations’.  IT Meet the Business; Business Meet IT So what is going on? We talk about aligning the business with IT but the reality is it’s difficult to do. Like any relationship each side has different goals and needs and language can be a barrier; business vs. technology jargon! What if we could translate the needs of both sides into actionable information, backed by data both sides understand, presented in a meaningful way?  Well now we can with the Business-Driven Application Management capabilities in Oracle Enterprise Manager 12cR2! Enterprise Manager’s Business-Driven Application Management capabilities provide the information that IT needs to understand the impact of its decisions on business criteria.  No longer does IT need to be focused solely on speeds and feeds, performance and throughput – now IT can understand IT’s impact on business KPIs like inventory turns, order-to-cash cycle, pipeline-to-forecast, and similar.  Similarly, now the line of business can understand which IT services are most critical for the KPIs they care about. There are a good deal of resources on Oracle Technology Network that describe the functionality of these products, so I won’t’ rehash them here.  What I want to talk about is what you do with these products. What’s next after we meet? Where do you start? Step 1:  Identify the Signature Experience. This is THE business process (or set of processes) that is core to the business, the one that drives the economic engine, the process that a customer recognises the company brand for, reputation, the customer experience, the process that a CEO would state as his number one priority. The crème de la crème of your business! Once you have nailed this it gets easy as Enterprise Manager 12c makes it easy. Step 2:  Map the Signature Experience to underlying IT.  Taking the signature experience, map out the touch points of the components that play a part in ensuring this business transaction is successful end to end, think of it like mapping out a critical path; the applications, middleware, databases and hardware. Use the wealth of Enterprise Manager features such as Systems, Services, Business Application Targets and Business Transaction Management (BTM) to assist you. Adding Real User Experience Insight (RUEI) into the mix will make the end to end customer satisfaction story transparent. Work with the business and define meaningful key performance indicators (KPI’s) and thresholds to enable you to report and action upon. Step 3:  Observe the data over time.  You now have meaningful insight into every step enabling your signature experience and you understand the implication of that experience on your underlying IT.  Watch if for a few months, see what happens and reconvene with your business stakeholders and set clear and measurable targets which can re-define service levels.  Step 4:  Change the information about which you and the business communicate.  It’s amazing what happens when you and the business speak the same language.  You’ll be able to make more informed business and IT decisions. From here IT can identify where/how budget is spent whether on the level of support, performance, capacity, HA, DR, certification etc. IT SLA’s no longer need be focused on metrics such as %availability but structured around business process requirements. The power of this way of thinking doesn’t end here. IT staff get to see and understand how their own role contributes to the business making them accountable for the business service. Take a step further and appraise your staff on the business competencies that are linked to the service availability. For the business, the language barrier is removed by producing targeted reports on the signature experience core to the business and therefore key to the CEO. Chargeback or show back becomes easier to justify as the ‘cost of day per outage’ can be more easily calculated; the business will be able to translate the cost to the business to the cost/value of the underlying IT that supports it. Used this way, Oracle Enterprise Manager 12c is a key enabler to a harmonious relationship between the end customer the business and IT to deliver ultimate service and satisfaction. Just engage with the business upfront, make the signature experience visible and let Enterprise Manager 12c do the rest. In the next blog entry we will cover some of the Enterprise Manager features mentioned to enable you to implement this new way of working.  

    Read the article

  • PHP: json_decode dumping NULL, BOM not found

    - by SerEnder
    I've been trying to find out why this 'json_encode'd string isn't parsing out correctly, and came across previously answered questions that had the UTF BOM sequence that was throwing the error, but didn't help me here. Here's the code that isn't currently working: //Decode the notes attached to the sig $aNotes = json_decode($rule->getNotes(),true); $bom = pack("CCC",0xef,0xbb,0xbf); if(0 == strncmp($rule->getNotes(),$bom,3)) { print('BOM detected - json encoding in UTF-8<br/>'); } else { print('BOM NOT detected - json encoding correctly<br/>'); } print('rule->getNotes:<br/>' . $rule->getNotes() .'<br/>'); var_dump($aNotes); Which generates this result: BOM NOT detected - json encoding correctly rule->getNotes: [{"lDate":"Unknown","sAuthor":"Unknown","sNote":"This is a general purpose Russian spam rule that matches anything starting with 2, 3 or 4 hex digits followed by a domain name ending with .ru -RSK 2010-05-10"},{"lDate":"1295031463082","sAuthor":"Drew Thorstenson","sNote":"this is Ryan's ru rule"}] NULL I've run it through JSON Lint, which said it was valid, and An Online JSON Parser which parsed it correctly too. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Handling UTF-8 with BOM in HTTP

    - by Alois Mahdal
    Say I have a script which at some point serves a plain text file as a content (right after "\n\n"). These files are provided by users, but I can expect they will be UTF-8. So I hard-wire Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8. But while I can teach users to save everything in UTF-8, I can't be very sure that the files will be without BOM ("\xEE\xBB\xBF"), as at least on Windows, this is not very clearly distinguished in common plain text editors and not every one of them uses the same default. So what about these files created on Windows, where they may/may not start with BOM? Should/will server or UA get rid of this debris for me? Or is it my task to prepare clean UTF-8, i.e. open each file and check whether BOM needs to be removed?

    Read the article

  • How to Verify Signature, Loading PUBLIC KEY From PEM file?

    - by bbirtle
    I'm posting this in the hope it saves somebody else the hours I lost on this really stupid problem involving converting formats of public keys. If anybody sees a simpler solution or a problem, please let me know! The eCommerce system I'm using sends me some data along with a signature. They also give me their public key in .pem format. The .pem file looks like this: -----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY----- MIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDe+hkicNP7ROHUssGNtHwiT2Ew HFrSk/qwrcq8v5metRtTTFPE/nmzSkRnTs3GMpi57rBdxBBJW5W9cpNyGUh0jNXc VrOSClpD5Ri2hER/GcNrxVRP7RlWOqB1C03q4QYmwjHZ+zlM4OUhCCAtSWflB4wC Ka1g88CjFwRw/PB9kwIDAQAB -----END PUBLIC KEY----- Here's the magic code to turn the above into an "RSACryptoServiceProvider" which is capable of verifying the signature. Uses the BouncyCastle library, since .NET apparently (and appallingly cannot do it without some major headaches involving certificate files): RSACryptoServiceProvider thingee; using (var reader = File.OpenText(@"c:\pemfile.pem")) { var x = new PemReader(reader); var y = (RsaKeyParameters)x.ReadObject(); thingee = (RSACryptoServiceProvider)RSACryptoServiceProvider.Create(); var pa = new RSAParameters(); pa.Modulus = y.Modulus.ToByteArray(); pa.Exponent = y.Exponent.ToByteArray(); thingee.ImportParameters(pa); } And then the code to actually verify the signature: var signature = ... //reads from the packet sent by the eCommerce system var data = ... //reads from the packet sent by the eCommerce system var sha = new SHA1CryptoServiceProvider(); byte[] hash = sha.ComputeHash(Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(data)); byte[] bSignature = Convert.FromBase64String(signature); ///Verify signature, FINALLY: var hasValidSig = thingee.VerifyHash(hash, CryptoConfig.MapNameToOID("SHA1"), bSignature);

    Read the article

  • Auto-responder rule in Outlook 2010 produces double signature (but only to certain emails)

    - by Austin ''Danger'' Powers
    I have set up an auto-responder in Outlook 2010 using a custom template, as a staff member will be on vacation for 6 weeks. It works perfectly, apart from the fact certain people receive two signatures at the bottom of the message instead of one. When reviewing the "sent" folder, there is no sign of double signatures. In the custom template, there is only 1 copy of the signature. Signatures are set to be applied automatically to new messages or replies- however, if I remove the signature from the template, then it seems no one receives a response with the signature. People sending from Hotmail accounts do not receive a duplicate signature. Gmail users do see a duplicate signature. Does anyone have any idea what could be causing this?

    Read the article

  • Saving a file in a CSV type in Excel always removes the BOM

    - by rickp
    I've been trying to find a reasonable solution/explanation (unsuccessfully) to find out why Excel defaults to removing the BOM when saving a file to the CSV type. Please forgive me if you find this a duplicate of this question. This handles reading CSV files with non-ASCII encoding, but it doesn't cover saving the file back out (which is where the biggest issue lies). Here is my current situation (which I'm going to gather is common among localized software dealing with Unicode characters and a CSV format): We export data to a CSV format using UTF-16LE, ensuring the BOM is set (0xFFFE). We validate after the file is generated with a Hex editor to ensure it was set correctly. Open the file in Excel (for this example we're exporting Japanese characters) and witness that Excel handles loading the file with the correct encoding. Attempts to save this file will prompt you with a warning message indicating that the file may contain features that may not be compatible with Unicode encoding, but asks if you'd like to save anyway. If you select the Save As dialog, it will immediately ask you to save the file as "Unicode Text" rather than CSV. If you select the "CSV" extension and save the file it removes the BOM (obviously along with all the Japanese characters). Why would this happen? Is there a solution to this problem, or is this a known 'bug'/limitation of Excel? Additionally (as a side issue) it appears that Excel, when loading UTF-16LE encoded CSV files, only uses TAB delimiters. Again, is this another known 'bug'/limitation of Excel?

    Read the article

  • Saving a file in a CSV type in Excel always removes the BOM

    - by rickp
    I've been trying to find a reasonable solution/explanation (unsuccessfully) to find out why Excel defaults to removing the BOM when saving a file to the CSV type. Please forgive me if you find this a duplicate of this question. This handles reading CSV files with non-ASCII encoding, but it doesn't cover saving the file back out (which is where the biggest issue lies). Here is my current situation (which I'm going to gather is common among localized software dealing with Unicode characters and a CSV format): We export data to a CSV format using UTF-16LE, ensuring the BOM is set (0xFFFE). We validate after the file is generated with a Hex editor to ensure it was set correctly. Open the file in Excel (for this example we're exporting Japanese characters) and witness that Excel handles loading the file with the correct encoding. Attempts to save this file will prompt you with a warning message indicating that the file may contain features that may not be compatible with Unicode encoding, but asks if you'd like to save anyway. If you select the Save As dialog, it will immediately ask you to save the file as "Unicode Text" rather than CSV. If you select the "CSV" extension and save the file it removes the BOM (obviously along with all the Japanese characters). Why would this happen? Is there a solution to this problem, or is this a known 'bug'/limitation of Excel? Additionally (as a side issue) it appears that Excel, when loading UTF-16LE encoded CSV files, only uses TAB delimiters. Again, is this another known 'bug'/limitation of Excel?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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