Search Results

Search found 1138 results on 46 pages for 'formal verification'.

Page 3/46 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Mozilla rend son outil de vérification des plug-ins compatible avec les autres navigateurs, pour plu

    Mise à jour du 24.03.2010 par Katleen Mozilla rend son outil de vérification des plug-ins compatible avec les autres navigateurs Après s'être occupé de patcher en urgence son navigateur Firefox suite à la détection d'une faille de sécurité critique, Mozilla travaille sur un outil permettant de sécuriser les navigateurs concurrents. La fondation devrait en effet ce jour rendre disponible une version cross-browser de cette fonctionnalité (qui est embarquée par défaut dans Firefox 3.6), compatible avec Internet Explorer 7 et 8, Chrome 4, Safari 4 et Opera 10.5. Son utilité ? Vérifier si les add-ons importants sont à jour. les hackers profitent souvent de plug-ins périmés pour s'int...

    Read the article

  • Getting "server certificate verification failed" during apt-get update

    - by mydoghasworms
    I am trying to update a system using an HTTPS package mirror located here: https://mirror.ufs.ac.za/os/linux/distros/ubuntu/ubuntu/ However, during apt-get update, I get the following message: Packages server certificate verification failed. CAfile: /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt CRLfile: none If you visit the site in your browser, you are warned about the site's certificate, but I trust the site, so it's not an issue for me. I assume I must be able to add this exception somewhere for apt to proceed. Can you tell me where and how?

    Read the article

  • Are there any formalized/mathematical theories of software testing?

    - by Erik Allik
    Googling "software testing theory" only seems to give theories in the soft sense of the word; I have not been able to find anything that would classify as a theory in the mathematical, information theoretical or some other scientific field's sense. What I'm looking for is something that formalizes what testing is, the notions used, what a test case is, the feasibility of testing something, the practicality of testing something, the extent to which something should be tested, formal definition/explanation of code coverage, etc. UPDATE: Also, I'm not sure, intuitively, about the connection between formal verification and what I asked, but there's clearly some sort of connection.

    Read the article

  • Google authorship verification issue

    - by Fraser
    I'm trying to get my blog content author verified so my face gets into the Google search results. I managed to achieve this a few weeks back - When testing my content in the Google authorship testing tool it reported that I had been verified and I could see my mug in the results. All I had to do was wait a couple of weeks before I started popping up in the search results (I think(?)). However, I seem to have thrown a spanner in the works. I set up Google apps for my domain and merged my old Google+ profile into my google apps account. This seemed to reset my Google+ profile (no biggy, since it was a new profile and only had 1 connection). I re-set up my G+ account and tied it all in to my blog and it's content. I am now seeing some very strange behaviour. If you take a look at one of my blog posts through the snippet testing tool: http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.fraser-hart.co.uk%2Fjquery-fullscreen-background-slideshow%2F&html= You will see that it is not recognising me as an author. However, when you enter my profile URL (https://plus.google.com/108765138229426105004) into the "Authorship verification by email" input, you will see that it does in fact recognise it as verified. Now, if you try and verify the same page again, it reverts back to unverified. I thought I may have to just wait it out but this has been over a week now and previously (before I merged my profile) it happened instantaneously. Has anyone experienced this bizarre behaviour before? What is happening here? More importantly, is there anything I can do to resolve it? (Apologies for the long and boring question). Cheers!

    Read the article

  • Where to find clients who are willing to pay top dollar for highly reliable code?

    - by Robin Green
    I'm looking to find clients who are willing to pay a premium above usual contractor rates, for software that is developed with advanced tools and techniques to eliminate certain classes of bugs. However, I have little experience of contracting, and relatively few contacts. It's important to state that the kind of tools and techniques I'm thinking of (e.g. formal verification) are used commercially extremely rarely, as far as I'm aware. There is kind of a continuum of approaches to higher reliability, with basic testing and basic static typing at one end and full-blown formal verification at the other, but the methods I'm thinking of are towards the latter end of the spectrum.

    Read the article

  • Inspection, code review - is it really testing?

    - by user970696
    ISTQB, Wikipedia or other sources classify verification acitivities (reviews etc.) as a static testing, yet other do not. If we can say that peer reviews and inspections are actually a kind of a testing, then a lot of standards do not make sense (consider e.g. ISO which say that validation is done by testing, while verification by checking of work products) - it should at least say dynamic testing for validation, shouldn't it? I am completing master thesis dealing with QA and I must admit that I have never seen worse and more ambiguous and contradicting literature than in this field :/ Do you think (and if so, why) that static testing is a good and justifiable term or should we stick to testing and static checks/analysis?

    Read the article

  • C++ : Avoid lot of boolean variable for multiple verification conditions in trading app

    - by Naveen
    Hi i am a junior dev in trading app... we have a order refresh verification unit. It has to verify order confirmation from exchange. We send a bunch of different request in bulk ( NEW, MODIFY, CANCEL ) to exchange... Verification has to happen for max N times with each T intervals for all orders. if verification successful for all the order before N retry then fine.. otherwise we need to indicate as verification unsuccessfull. i hv done a basic coding done in very urgent like below for( N times ) { for_each ( sent_request_order ) // SENT { 1) get all the refreshed order from DB or shared mem i.e REFRESHED 2) find current sent order in REFRESHED if( not_found ) not refreshed from exchange, continue to next order if( found ) case NEW : //check for new status, mark verification done case MODIFY : //check for modified status.. //if not mark pending, go to next order, //revisit the same after T time case CANCEL : //check for cancelled status.. //if not mark pending, go to next order, //revisit the same after T time } if( all_verified ) exit from verification. wait ( T sec ) } order_verification_pending, order_verification_done, order_visited, order_not_visited, all_verified, all_not_verified ... lot of boolean flags used for indication.. is there any better approach for doing this.... splitting responsibilities across the classes......???? i know this is not a general question.... but still flags are making me tidious to handle...

    Read the article

  • Steam app and age verification issue

    - by TronicZomB
    I have OSX 10.9.4 with the Steam App (API v016 and package versions 1407966480) installed. When I would visit game pages that required age verification, my birthday would be filled in due to being logged in and I would just click OK to move past. Now the age verification shows up with January 1st, 2014 each time and it will not let me change the date. The drop down menus just show up blank. I have tried to log out of my computer, log out of Steam, restart Steam, restart my computer, and reinstall Steam. Nothing has worked and it continues to have this issue. When I visit the Steam website, the age verification drop downs work just fine. What is causing this issue? And/or how can I fix this issue?

    Read the article

  • WPF Login Verification Using Active Directory

    - by psheriff
    Back in October of 2009 I created a WPF login screen (Figure 1) that just showed how to create the layout for a login screen. That one sample is probably the most downloaded sample we have. So in this blog post, I thought I would update that screen and also hook it up to show how to authenticate your user against Active Directory. Figure 1: Original WPF Login Screen I have updated not only the code behind for this login screen, but also the look and feel as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2: An Updated WPF Login Screen The UI To create the UI for this login screen you can refer to my October of 2009 blog post to see how to create the borderless window. You can then look at the sample code to see how I created the linear gradient brush for the background. There are just a few differences in this screen compared to the old version. First, I changed the key image and instead of using words for the Cancel and Login buttons, I used some icons. Secondly I added a text box to hold the Domain name that you wish to authenticate against. This text box is automatically filled in if you are connected to a network. In the Window_Loaded event procedure of the winLogin window you can retrieve the user’s domain name from the Environment.UserDomainName property. For example: txtDomain.Text = Environment.UserDomainName The ADHelper Class Instead of coding the call to authenticate the user directly in the login screen I created an ADHelper class. This will make it easier if you want to add additional AD calls in the future. The ADHelper class contains just one method at this time called AuthenticateUser. This method authenticates a user name and password against the specified domain. The login screen will gather the credentials from the user such as their user name and password, and also the domain name to authenticate against. To use this ADHelper class you will need to add a reference to the System.DirectoryServices.dll in .NET. The AuthenticateUser Method In order to authenticate a user against your Active Directory you will need to supply a valid LDAP path string to the constructor of the DirectoryEntry class. The LDAP path string will be in the format LDAP://DomainName. You will also pass in the user name and password to the constructor of the DirectoryEntry class as well. With a DirectoryEntry object populated with this LDAP path string, the user name and password you will now pass this object to the constructor of a DirectorySearcher object. You then perform the FindOne method on the DirectorySearcher object. If the DirectorySearcher object returns a SearchResult then the credentials supplied are valid. If the credentials are not valid on the Active Directory then an exception is thrown. C#public bool AuthenticateUser(string domainName, string userName,  string password){  bool ret = false;   try  {    DirectoryEntry de = new DirectoryEntry("LDAP://" + domainName,                                           userName, password);    DirectorySearcher dsearch = new DirectorySearcher(de);    SearchResult results = null;     results = dsearch.FindOne();     ret = true;  }  catch  {    ret = false;  }   return ret;} Visual Basic Public Function AuthenticateUser(ByVal domainName As String, _ ByVal userName As String, ByVal password As String) As Boolean  Dim ret As Boolean = False   Try    Dim de As New DirectoryEntry("LDAP://" & domainName, _                                 userName, password)    Dim dsearch As New DirectorySearcher(de)    Dim results As SearchResult = Nothing     results = dsearch.FindOne()     ret = True  Catch    ret = False  End Try   Return retEnd Function In the Click event procedure under the Login button you will find the following code that will validate the credentials that the user types into the login window. C#private void btnLogin_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e){  ADHelper ad = new ADHelper();   if(ad.AuthenticateUser(txtDomain.Text,         txtUserName.Text, txtPassword.Password))    DialogResult = true;  else    MessageBox.Show("Unable to Authenticate Using the                      Supplied Credentials");} Visual BasicPrivate Sub btnLogin_Click(ByVal sender As Object, _ ByVal e As RoutedEventArgs)  Dim ad As New ADHelper()   If ad.AuthenticateUser(txtDomain.Text, txtUserName.Text, _                         txtPassword.Password) Then    DialogResult = True  Else    MessageBox.Show("Unable to Authenticate Using the                      Supplied Credentials")  End IfEnd Sub Displaying the Login Screen At some point when your application launches, you will need to display your login screen modally. Below is the code that you would call to display the login form (named winLogin in my sample application). This code is called from the main application form, and thus the owner of the login screen is set to “this”. You then call the ShowDialog method on the login screen to have this form displayed modally. After the user clicks on one of the two buttons you need to check to see what the DialogResult property was set to. The DialogResult property is a nullable type and thus you first need to check to see if the value has been set. C# private void DisplayLoginScreen(){  winLogin win = new winLogin();   win.Owner = this;  win.ShowDialog();  if (win.DialogResult.HasValue && win.DialogResult.Value)    MessageBox.Show("User Logged In");  else    this.Close();} Visual Basic Private Sub DisplayLoginScreen()  Dim win As New winLogin()   win.Owner = Me  win.ShowDialog()  If win.DialogResult.HasValue And win.DialogResult.Value Then    MessageBox.Show("User Logged In")  Else    Me.Close()  End IfEnd Sub Summary Creating a nice looking login screen is fairly simple to do in WPF. Using the Active Directory services from a WPF application should make your desktop programming task easier as you do not need to create your own user authentication system. I hope this article gave you some ideas on how to create a login screen in WPF. NOTE: You can download the complete sample code for this blog entry at my website: http://www.pdsa.com/downloads. Click on Tips & Tricks, then select 'WPF Login Verification Using Active Directory' from the drop down list. Good Luck with your Coding,Paul Sheriff ** SPECIAL OFFER FOR MY BLOG READERS **We frequently offer a FREE gift for readers of my blog. Visit http://www.pdsa.com/Event/Blog for your FREE gift!

    Read the article

  • How to verify the code that could take a substantial time to compile? [on hold]

    - by user18404
    As a follow up to my prev question: What is the best aproach for coding in a slow compilation environment To recap: I am stuck with a large software system with which a TDD ideology of "test often" does not work. And to make it even worse the features like pre-compiled headers/multi-threaded compilation/incremental linking, etc is not available to me - hence I think that the best way out would be to add the extensive logging into the system and to start "coding in large chunks", which I understand as code for a two-three hours first (as opposed to 15-20 mins in TDD) - thoroughly eyeball the code for a 15 minutes and only after all that do the compilation and run the tests. As I have been doing TDD for a quite a while, my code eyeballing / code verification skills got rusty (you don't really need this that much if you can quickly verify what you've done in 5 seconds by running a test or two) - so I am after a recommendations on how to learn these source code verification/error spotting skills again. I know I was able to do that easily some 5-10 years ago when I din't have much support from the compiler/unit testing tools I had until recently, thus there should be a way to get back to the basics.

    Read the article

  • Grant’s video warning – backup verification

    Grant takes a humorous (but completely serious) look at why you should be regularly verifying your backups. Get top tips for backup and recovery, and protect yourself when disaster strikes. Watch the video Schedule Azure backupsRed Gate’s Cloud Services makes it simple to create and schedule backups of your SQL Azure databases to Azure blob storage or Amazon S3. Try it for free today.

    Read the article

  • Chrome Web Store verification

    - by Vince V.
    A couple of days ago I created an extension for Chrome and added it to the store. Now I want it to get verified. I payed the 5 dollar and added my website to Webmaster Tools. The website is also verified on those Webmaster Tools. Today I wanted to add my URL to my extension (ultimately to do online installations) but it doesn't recognize the URL I put in those Webmaster Tools. I tried refreshing and clicking add site, but it just doesn't work. Is there some step that I am missing or is this a bug in the Chrome Web Store, because I don't see any option left.

    Read the article

  • Remove Google+ company page after verification?

    - by JohnJ
    My personal Google+ page has a lot of comments and posts that I'd like to keep. However, I've only just finished validating the business page as well (Google+ company page) in the hopes of improving traffic. Now that it's been validated, can I remove the Google+ Company link and switch it back to my original personal Google+ page? Scenario: My client is an accountant (one man shop) and so both personal and company Google+ pages would work.

    Read the article

  • Use Outlook password for website verification

    - by Jack Lockyer
    I am currently building an internal employee dashboard for our global company (it is hosted on an external website for logistical reasons) I'd like (need) to password protect the page as we will be displaying sensitive information, my question is, is it possible to integrate with Outlook passwords? We have over 350 staff all of whom use outlook on a daily basis, I'd love for the website to check whether the visitor is logged into Outlook and if they're not, prompt them to log in. Is it possible?? If it is I'll get is developed straight away.

    Read the article

  • forward sudo verification

    - by Timo Kluck
    I often use the following construct for building and installing a tarball: sudo -v && make && sudo make install which will allow me to enter my password immediately and have everything done unattended. This works well except in the rare case that building takes longer than the sudo timeout, which may happen on my rather slow machine with large projects (even when using make -j4). But when the build takes a long time, that's exactly when doing things unattended has a great advantage. Can anyone think of a shell construct that allows me to input my password immediately, and which has make executing under normal permissions and make install under elevated permissions? For security reasons, I don't want to configure my user to use sudo without password. A viable option is to set the timeout to very long, but I'm hoping for something more elegant.

    Read the article

  • tdd is about design not verification what does it concretely mean?

    - by sigo
    I've been wondering about this. What do we exactly mean by design and verification. Should I just apply tdd to make sure my code is SOLID and not check is correct external behaviour ? Should I use Bdd for the correct behaviour part ? Where I get confused also is regarding TDD code katas, to me they looked like more about verification than design... shouldn't they be called bdd katas instead of tdd katas? I reckon that for example uncle bob bowling kata leads in the end to a simple and nice internal design but I felt that most of the process was more around vérification than design. Design seemed to be a side effect of testing incrementally the external behaviour. I didnt feel so much that we were focusing most of our efforts on design but more on vérification. While normally we are told the contrary, that in TDD, verification is a side effect, design is the main purpose. So my question is what should i focus exactly on when i do tdd: SOLID, external Api usability, what else...? And how can I do that without being focused on verification ? What do you guys focus your energy on when you are practicing TDD ?

    Read the article

  • "TDD is about design, not verification"; concretely, what does that mean?

    - by sigo
    I've been wondering about this. What do we exactly mean by design and verification. Should I just apply TDD to make sure my code is SOLID and not check if it's external behaviour is correct? Should I use BDD for verifying the behaviour is correct? Where I get confused also is regarding TDD code Katas, to me they looked like more about verification than design; shouldn't they be called BDD Katas instead of TDD Katas? I reckon that for example the Uncle Bob bowling Kata leads in the end to a simple and nice internal design but I felt that most of the process was centred more around verification than design. Design seemed to be a side effect of testing the external behaviour incrementally. I didn't feel so much that we were focusing most of our efforts on design but more on verification. While normally we are told the contrary, that in TDD, verification is a side effect, design is the main purpose. So my question is what should I focus on exactly, when I do TDD: SOLID, external API usability, or something else? And how can I do that without being focused on verification? What do you guys focus your energy on when you are practising TDD?

    Read the article

  • Access Token Verification

    - by DecafCoder
    I have spent quite a few days reading up on Oauth and token based security measures for REST API's and I am currently looking at implementing an Oauth based authentication approach almost exactly like the one described in this post (OAuth alternative for a 2 party system). From what I understand, the token is to be verified upon each request to the resource server. This means the resource server would need to retrieve the token from a datastore to verify the clients token. Given this would have to happen upon every request I am concerned about the speed implications of hitting a datastore like MySQL or NoSQL upon every request just to verify the token. Is this the standard way to verify tokens by having them stored in a RDBMS or NoSQL database and retrieved upon each request? Or is it a suitable solution to have them cached (baring in mind that we are talking millions of users)?

    Read the article

  • How to add DNS txt record in cpanel and what to name it?

    - by Lars Holdgaard
    I have a domain, where I have to add a DNS text change. More specifically, I have to do the following: "You should now create a DNS text record with the meta tag value shown below for the domain you're securing." The value I should insert is this one: globalsign-domain-verification=list_of_random_chars How do I add this in cPanel? I thought about doing it this way, but I have to add a name: I also thought about adding it like this: So my question really is: how do I add this txt file in a correct way?

    Read the article

  • ISO 12207: SQA as a supporting process?

    - by user970696
    I have been following ISO12207 for the sake of my thesis dealing with software quality. Now I should explain quality assurance and here comes the problem: according to this norm, QA is a supporting process, separated but on the same level with verification, validation and auditing processes. According to other sources, Quality Assurance is basically high level activity making sure that standards, norms etc. are being followed. Usually the part of Quality Assurance is the Quality Control (testing, reviewing, inspections also V&V) which measures the quality and provides QA with this information so it can be acted upon. I somehow do not understand how QA is thought to be according to this ISO and what activities should it perform. Also it does not mention QC except for a footnote.

    Read the article

  • What is the aim of software testing?

    - by user970696
    Having read many books, there is a basic contradiction: Some say, "the goal of testing is to find bugs" while other say "the goal of the testing is to equalize the quality of the product", meaning that bugs are its by-products. I would also agree that if testing would be aimed primarily on a bug hunt, who would do the actual verification and actually provided the information, that the software is ready? Even e.g. Kaner changed his original definiton of testing goal from bug hunting to quality assesement provision but I still cannot see the clear difference. I percieve both as equally important. I can verify software by its specification to make sure it works and in that case, bugs found are just by products. But also I perform tests just to brake things. Also what definition is more accurate?

    Read the article

  • Very original V&V explanation (Bohm) - I cannot understand its point

    - by user970696
    Hopefully my last thread about V&V as I found the B.Boehm is text which I just do not understand well (likely my technical English is not that good). http://csse.usc.edu/csse/TECHRPTS/1979/usccse79-501/usccse79-501.pdf Basically he says that verification is about checking that products derived from requirments baseline must correspond to it and that deviation leads only to changes in these derived products (design, code). But he says it begins with design and ends with acceptance tests (you can check the V model inside). The thing is, I have accepted ISO12207 in terms of all testing is validation, yet it does not make any sense here. In order to be sure the product complies with requirements (acceptance test) I need to test it. Also it says that validation problems means that requirements are bad and needs to be changed - which does not happen with testing that testers do, who just checks correspondence with requirements.

    Read the article

  • Big Oh Notation - formal definition.

    - by aloh
    I'm reading a textbook right now for my Java III class. We're reading about Big-Oh and I'm a little confused by its formal definition. Formal Definition: "A function f(n) is of order at most g(n) - that is, f(n) = O(g(n)) - if a positive real number c and positive integer N exist such that f(n) <= c g(n) for all n = N. That is, c g(n) is an upper bound on f(n) when n is sufficiently large." Ok, that makes sense. But hold on, keep reading...the book gave me this example: "In segment 9.14, we said that an algorithm that uses 5n + 3 operations is O(n). We now can show that 5n + 3 = O(n) by using the formal definition of Big Oh. When n = 3, 5n + 3 <= 5n + n = 6n. Thus, if we let f(n) = 5n + 3, g(n) = n, c = 6, N = 3, we have shown that f(n) <= 6 g(n) for n = 3, or 5n + 3 = O(n). That is, if an algorithm requires time directly proportional to 5n + 3, it is O(n)." Ok, this kind of makes sense to me. They're saying that if n = 3 or greater, 5n + 3 takes less time than if n was less than 3 - thus 5n + n = 6n - right? Makes sense, since if n was 2, 5n + 3 = 13 while 6n = 12 but when n is 3 or greater 5n + 3 will always be less than or equal to 6n. Here's where I get confused. They give me another example: Example 2: "Let's show that 4n^2 + 50n - 10 = O(n^2). It is easy to see that: 4n^2 + 50n - 10 <= 4n^2 + 50n for any n. Since 50n <= 50n^2 for n = 50, 4n^2 + 50n - 10 <= 4n^2 + 50n^2 = 54n^2 for n = 50. Thus, with c = 54 and N = 50, we have shown that 4n^2 + 50n - 10 = O(n^2)." This statement doesn't make sense: 50n <= 50n^2 for n = 50. Isn't any n going to make the 50n less than 50n^2? Not just greater than or equal to 50? Why did they even mention that 50n <= 50n^2? What does that have to do with the problem? Also, 4n^2 + 50n - 10 <= 4n^2 + 50n^2 = 54n^2 for n = 50 is going to be true no matter what n is. And how in the world does picking numbers show that f(n) = O(g(n))? Please help me understand! :(

    Read the article

  • How to verify that all files are intact prior to install?

    - by Kalle H. Väravas
    I'm working on my CMS (in PHP platform) for a long time now. The main program is done and I'm currently developing the Installer part. Installation itself will be fairly simple: Upload all files Verify that the "content/" dir has correct permissions Check if ALL files are intact and not modified [This is the subject of this question] Insert the config data and first settings Run install (Generate all DB tables and insert sample data etc.) Now the question-mark is at step 3. How do I verify ALL files? Verification itself should compare all CMS root-directories files against a list from remote location. List should contain filename, filesize and filetype. This way the user can check, that there are no unnecessary or corrupted files, that could indicated a breach in the software. I have seen some software installers do that, but I cannot find any right now and there for I'm clueless on the most optimal method for this. Of course there always is a simple array trick, but there surely must be a better and faster method?!

    Read the article

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