Search Results

Search found 29467 results on 1179 pages for 'public'.

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 3/1179 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Sonicwall TZ210 - Set up public wifi on separate subnet & interface

    - by thomasjbarrett
    I want to set up a public wifi by connecting another router to the X6 interface, and put it on a separate subnet (192.168.10.0/24) & in the DMZ Zone to keep it away from the regular LAN. I believe I have the network settings correct: the router has acquired the IP and DNS information from the TZ210, and the TZ210 shows it as an active DHCP lease. X6 is in the DMZ. I now have a routing/NAT/firewall problem, since I can't get any traffic to travel from the subnet to the internet. I can't get to any external websites and can't ping the TZ210 from the subnet. X0 is the regular LAN, and X1 is the WAN. Looking for any tips or tutorials on this. Here's my current relevant rules: Routing Source: X6 Subnet Destination: Any Service: Any Gateway: Default Gateway Interface: X6 Source: Any Destination: X6 Subnet Service: Any Gateway: 0.0.0.0 Interface: X6 NAT Policies Source Original: Any Translated: WAN IP Destination Original: Any Translated: Original Inbound: X6 Outbound: X1 Source Original: Any Translated: U0 IP Destination Original: Any Translated: Original Inbound: X6 Outbound: U0 Firewall DMZ LAN : Deny All DMZ WAN : Allow All LAN DMZ : Allow All WAN DMZ : Allow All

    Read the article

  • Cannot ping Google Public DNS on 8.8.8.8

    - by Tibor
    I have a weird problem on my Windows 7 (x64) computer. I seem to cannot ping the Google Public DNS on one of its addresses (while the other works fine). The peculiar thing is that it fails with the General failure. error message which usually means that there is a problem with a network adapter/base connectivity and not a timeout as one would expect. I checked my routing tables for any anomalies and I even flushed them but the problem seems unrelated. All the other hosts I tried ping fine (either respond or timeout). If I try to tracert or connect to the address via browser (yes, I know that it doesn't listen on port 80), it also fails instantaneously. The reason I need to ping 8.8.8.8 is that I commonly use it as a test of Internet conectivity due to it being rememberable. The problem occurs no matter where I connect to the Internet (it is a laptop computer). What could be the cause of this anomaly? Note: I use native IPv6 connectivity.

    Read the article

  • Redirect public traffic to a different subfolder, while local traffic remains unchanged

    - by ecnepsnai
    I would like to have local (intranet) HTTP traffic go to the /var/www/html folder while any public traffic goes to the subfolder, /var/www/html/public I've tried this configuration, with some variation, in httpd.conf <VirtualHost PRIVATE-IP> DocumentRoot /var/www/html ServerName ecn ErrorLog /var/www/logs/error/private CustomLog /var/www/logs/access/private common </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost PUBLIC-IP> DocumentRoot /var/www/html/public ServerName PUBLIC-DOMAIN-NAME ErrorLog /var/www/logs/error/public CustomLog /var/www/logs/access/public common </VirtualHost> PUBLIC-IP, PRIVATE-IP, and PUBLIC-DOMAIN name are all replaced with the correct values in the actual document. The problem is, local traffic can browse fine but remote traffic is directed to the root folder and getting 403d (because I have that folder blocked off through my .htaccess file). If I append /public to the URL it works fine.

    Read the article

  • Closest Ruby representation of a 'private static final' and 'public static final' class variable in

    - by Hosh
    Given the Java code below, what's the closest you could represent these two static final variables in a Ruby class? And, is it possible in Ruby to distinguish between private static and public static variables as there is in Java? public class DeviceController { ... private static final Device myPrivateDevice = Device.getDevice("mydevice"); public static final Device myPublicDevice = Device.getDevice("mydevice"); ... public static void main(String args[]) { ... } }

    Read the article

  • Public Private Key Encryption Tutorials

    - by Jake M
    Do you know of a tutorial that demonstrates Public Private Key encryption(PPKE) in C++ or C? I am trying to learn how it works and eventually use Crypto++ to create my own encryptions using public private keys. Maybe theres a Crypto++ PPKE tutorial? Maybe someone can explain the relationship(if any) between the public and private keys? Could anyone suggest some very simple public and private key values I could use(like 'char*32','char/32') to create my simple PPKE program to understand the concept?

    Read the article

  • Using nested public classes to organize constants

    - by FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
    I'm working on an application with many constants. At the last code review it came up that the constants are too scattered and should all be organized into a single "master" constants file. The disagreement is about how to organize them. The majority feel that using the constant name should be good enough, but this will lead to code that looks like this: public static final String CREDITCARD_ACTION_SUBMITDATA = "6767"; public static final String CREDITCARD_UIFIELDID_CARDHOLDER_NAME = "3959854"; public static final String CREDITCARD_UIFIELDID_EXPIRY_MONTH = "3524"; public static final String CREDITCARD_UIFIELDID_ACCOUNT_ID = "3524"; ... public static final String BANKPAYMENT_UIFIELDID_ACCOUNT_ID = "9987"; I find this type of naming convention to be cumbersome. I thought it might be easier to use public nested class, and have something like this: public class IntegrationSystemConstants { public class CreditCard { public static final String UI_EXPIRY_MONTH = "3524"; public static final String UI_ACCOUNT_ID = "3524"; ... } public class BankAccount { public static final String UI_ACCOUNT_ID = "9987"; ... } } This idea wasn't well received because it was "too complicated" (I didn't get much detail as to why this might be too complicated). I think this creates a better division between groups of related constants and the auto-complete makes it easier to find these as well. I've never seen this done though, so I'm wondering if this is an accepted practice or if there's better reasons that it shouldn't be done.

    Read the article

  • Compilation Error: "The modifier 'public' is not valid for this item" while creating public method o

    - by Lalit
    I am getting this error while creating public method on a class for explicitly implementing the interface. I have the workaround: by removing the explicit implementation of PrintName Method, But surprised why i am getting this error. Can anyone explain the error. Code for Library: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace Test.Lib1 { public class Customer : i1 { public string i1.PrintName() //Error Here... { return this.GetType().Name + " called from interface i1"; } } public interface i1 { string PrintName(); } interface i2 { string PrintName(); } } Code for Console Test Application: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using Test.Lib1; namespace ca1.Test { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Customer customer = new Customer(); Console.WriteLine(customer.PrintName()); //i1 i1o = new Customer(); //Console.WriteLine(i1o.printname()); //i2 i2o = new Customer(); //Console.WriteLine(i2o.printname()); } } }

    Read the article

  • Public and Internal members in an Internal class?

    - by Noldorin
    Ok, so this may be a bit of a silly question, and there's certainly the obvious answer, but I was curious if I've missed any subtleties here. Is there any difference in terms of visibility/usability between a public member declared in an internal class and an internal member declared in an internal class? i.e. between internal class Foo { public void Bar() { } } and internal class Foo { internal void Bar() { } } If you declared the method as public and also virtual, and then overrode it in a derived class that is public, the reason for using this modifier is clear. However, is this the only situation... am I missing something else?

    Read the article

  • Retrieve contents of a public Dropbox folder?

    - by Sam
    Is there a way to retrieve a list of the contents of a public Dropbox folder (preferably in PHP)? This is what a URL to a public file in Dropbox looks like: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1234567/publikPholder/textytext.txt One would think that jumping up one level to the directory in the URL... http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1234567/publikPholder/ ...would show all the public files. Nope. Nothing but a 404.

    Read the article

  • loading css or javascript from non-public directory

    - by twmulloy
    is there a way to load css and/or javascript files from outside of the public web directory? for example on my hosting service i have /public_html but don't want these files to exist in the public directory and want them in a directory outside of the public directory in a sibling directory /system (i am using codeigniter) within the /system/application/view/

    Read the article

  • Exporting non-public type through public API

    - by feelgood
    What if I have few factory methods returning non-public type and pairing set of methods which gives variables of this non-public type? This results with titled warning message in NetBeans. In result public API will contain only two pairing sets of methods. The reason is to make my type hierarchy sealed (like seald classes in Scala) and allow users only instantiate these types through factory methods. So we get DSL in some sense. For example, Schedule class represented by calendar fields' contraints. There are some types of contraints - Range, Singleton, List, FullSet - with NumberSet interface as a root. We don't want to expose these types and how Schedule interact with them. We just want the specification from the user. So we make NumberSet package-private. In class Schedule we create few factory-methods for constraints: NumberSet singleton(int value); NumberSet range(int form, int to); NumberSet list(NumberSet ... components); and some methods for creating Schedule object: Schedule everyHour(NumberSet minutes); Schedule everyDay(NumberSet minutes, NumberSet hours); User can only use them in the manner: Schedule s = Schedule.everyDay( singleton(0), list(range(10-15), singleton(8)) ); Is it bad idea?

    Read the article

  • Hide public method used to help test a .NET assembly

    - by ChrisW
    I have a .NET assembly, to be released. Its release build includes: A public, documented API of methods which people are supposed to use A public but undocumented API of other methods, which exist only in order to help test the assembly, and which people are not supposed to use The assembly to be released is a custom control, not an application. To regression-test it, I run it in a testing framework/application, which uses (in addition to the public/documented API) some advanced/undocumented methods which are exported from the control. For the public methods which I don't want people to use, I excluded them from the documentation using the <exclude> tag (supported by the Sandcastle Help File Builder), and the [EditorBrowsable] attribute, for example like this: /// <summary> /// Gets a <see cref="IEditorTransaction"/> instance, which helps /// to combine several DOM edits into a single transaction, which /// can be undone and redone as if they were a single, atomic operation. /// </summary> /// <returns>A <see cref="IEditorTransaction"/> instance.</returns> IEditorTransaction createEditorTransaction(); /// <exclude/> [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] void debugDumpBlocks(TextWriter output); This successfully removes the method from the API documentation, and from Intellisense. However, if in a sample application program I right-click on an instance of the interface to see its definition in the metadata, I can still see the method, and the [EditorBrowsable] attribute as well, for example: // Summary: // Gets a ModelText.ModelDom.Nodes.IEditorTransaction instance, which helps // to combine several DOM edits into a single transaction, which can be undone // and redone as if they were a single, atomic operation. // // Returns: // A ModelText.ModelDom.Nodes.IEditorTransaction instance. IEditorTransaction createEditorTransaction(); // [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] void debugDumpBlocks(TextWriter output); Questions: Is there a way to hide a public method, even from the meta data? If not then instead, for this scenario, would you recommend making the methods internal and using the InternalsVisibleTo attribute? Or would you recommend some other way, and if so what and why? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Confused about encryption with public and private keys (which to use for encryption)

    - by jax
    I am making a licensing system when clients ask my server for a license and I send them a license if they are permitted to have one. On my current system I encrypt the license using a single private key and have the public key embedded into the client application that they use to decrypt the license. It works! Others have told me that I should be encrypting with the public key on the server and distributing the private key to clients. I have searched the web and can see that sometimes they use the private key to encrypt and other times they use the public key to encrypt. In this case what am I supposed to do?

    Read the article

  • Can't DER encode and BER decode RSA public key

    - by Mildred
    I have problems using Crypto++ to save a RSA public key (that I obtained loading a private key file in PKCS#8 format). When decoding the key, I always get a BERDecodeErr exception. Here is the code I am using: CryptoPP::RSASSA_PKCS1v15_SHA_Signer _signer; CryptoPP::RSASSA_PKCS1v15_SHA_Verifier _verifier; CryptoPP::ByteQueue bytes; //_signer.AccessPublicKey().Save(bytes); // seem to save private key instead _signer.AccessKey().DEREncodePublicKey(bytes); //_verifier.AccessKey().Load(bytes); //_verifier.AccessKey().BERDecodePublicKey(bytes, 0, 0); _verifier.AccessPublicKey().Load(bytes); I also tried with the instructions commented above, without success. How do you do to save or open the public key? The public key looks like this in hex format, is there a tool to check its format / validity (regarding what crypto++ supports) ? 3081890281810097e24f2e95504a397e90fbc56d1b330ab2ab97a0d326007b890e40013f9e1d9bd9 f54b0c0840782ddae19b5b4595d8f8b9ffe0d2120174fcbc39585c5867cd2dfba69f8e540caa2c52 de8f08278a34e9249120500117f0ba756c5bb2be660013160db9f82f75deb7ccf63742a9e945da6c cf30c2b109b73342daaabd02b872e50203010001

    Read the article

  • Using Public/Private keys in reverse

    - by Wizzarding
    Hi, I have a situation where I need to make some data available for reading by anyone from a specific device, where the data is pre-loaded on the device, but I cannot allow anyone to create their own device and populate it with their own data in the same format. I know this sounds a little crazy, but there is a good reason! I was planning to use Public Key cryptography, encrypting the data with a public key, but then publishing the private key to anyone who wants to read the data. However, after looking at the RSACryptoServiceProvider and how it works it looks like I cannot just publish the private key as the private key can be used to create the public key. Could someone confirm that suspicion, or give me some hints on how I might be able to make this work! Many Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Public code repository

    - by Andy White
    Can anyone recommend a public code repository? A few friends and I are thinking of starting a few projects for iPhone, web, Android, etc., and it would be nice to have a public (internet) code repository to use that would work well on any platform (Mac, PC, Linux). Any type of repository is fine (SVN, CVS, Git, etc.). A few ideas are Sourceforge or Google Code. Any recommendations? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to hide helper functions from public API in c

    - by emge
    I'm working on a project and I need to create an API. I am using sockets to communicate between the server (my application) and the clients (the other applications using my API). This project is in c not C++ I come from a linux background and this is my first project using Windows, Visual Studio 2008, and dll libraries. I have communication working between the client and server, but I have some that is duplicated on both projects. I would like to create a library (probably a dll file), that both projects can link to so I don't have to maintain extra code. I also have to create the library that has the API that I need to make available for my clients. Within the API functions that I want public are the calls to these helper functions that are "duplicated code", I don't want to expose these functions to my client, but I do want my server to be able to use those functions. How can I do this? I will try to clarify with an example. This is what I started with. Server Project: int Server_GetPacket(SOCKET sd); int ReceiveAll(SOCKET sd, char *buf, int len); int VerifyLen(char *buf); Client Project: int Client_SendCommand(int command); int Client_GetData(int command, char *buf, int len); int ReceiveAll(SOCKET sd, char *buf, int len); int VerifyLen(char *buf); This is kind of what I would like to end up with: //Server Project: int Server_GetPacket(SOCKET sd); // library with public and private types // private API (not exposed to my client) int ReceiveAll(SOCKET sd, char *buf, int len); int VerifyLen(char *buf); // public API (header file available for client) int Client_SendCommand(int command); int Client_GetData(int command, char *buf, int len); Thanks any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Why shouldn't I be using public variables in my Java class?

    - by Omega
    In school, I've been told many times to stop using public for my variables. I haven't asked why yet. This question: Are Java's public fields just a tragic historical design flaw at this point? seems kinda related to this. However, they don't seem to discuss why is it "wrong", but instead focus on how can they use them instead. Look at this (unfinished) class: public class Reporte { public String rutaOriginal; public String rutaNueva; public int bytesOriginales; public int bytesFinales; public float ganancia; /** * Constructor para objetos de la clase Reporte */ public Reporte() { } } No need to understand Spanish. All this class does is hold some statistics (those public fields) and then do some operations with them (later). I will also need to be modifying those variables often. But well, since I've been told not to use public, this is what I ended up doing: public class Reporte { private String rutaOriginal; private String rutaNueva; private int bytesOriginales; private int bytesFinales; private float ganancia; /** * Constructor para objetos de la clase Reporte */ public Reporte() { } public String getRutaOriginal() { return rutaOriginal; } public String getRutaNueva() { return rutaNueva; } public int getBytesOriginales() { return bytesOriginales; } public int getBytesFinales() { return bytesFinales; } public float getGanancia() { return ganancia; } public void setRutaOriginal(String rutaOriginal) { this.rutaOriginal = rutaOriginal; } public void setRutaNueva(String rutaNueva) { this.rutaNueva = rutaNueva; } public void setBytesOriginales(int bytesOriginales) { this.bytesOriginales = bytesOriginales; } public void setBytesFinales(int bytesFinales) { this.bytesFinales = bytesFinales; } public void setGanancia(float ganancia) { this.ganancia = ganancia; } } Looks kinda pretty. But seems like a waste of time. Google searches about "When to use public in Java" and "Why shouldn't I use public in Java" seem to discuss about a concept of mutability, although I'm not really sure how to interpret such discussions. I do want my class to be mutable - all the time.

    Read the article

  • Encryption Product Keys : Public and Private key encryption

    - by Aran Mulholland
    I need to generate and validate product keys and have been thinking about using a public/private key system. I generate our product keys based on a client name (which could be a variable length string) a 6 digit serial number. It would be good if the product key would be of a manageable length (16 characters or so) I need to encrypt them at the base and then distrubute the decryption/validation system. As our system is written in managed code (.NET) we dont want to distribute the encryption system, only the decryption. I need a public private key seems a good way to do this, encrypt with the one key that i keep and distribute the other key needed for decrpytion/verification. What is an appropriate mechanism to do this with the above requirements?

    Read the article

  • How to read public key from PFX file in java

    - by articlestack
    I am able to read private key from PFX file but not public key. I am using following code to read public key. InputStream inStream = new FileInputStream(certFile); CertificateFactory cf = CertificateFactory.getInstance("X.509"); BufferedInputStream bis = new BufferedInputStream(inStream); // if (bis.available() > 0) { java.security.cert.Certificate cert = cf.generateCertificate(bis); System.out.println("This part is not getting printed in case of PFX file"); // } puk = (PublicKey) cert.getPublicKey(); This code is working properly when i read from .cer file. Please help

    Read the article

  • A pragmatic view on private vs public

    - by Denis Gorbachev
    Hello everybody! I've always wondered on the topic of public, protected and private properties. My memory can easily recall times when I had to hack somebody's code, and having the hacked-upon class variables declared as private was always upsetting. Also, there were (more) times I've written a class myself, and had never recognized any potential gain of privatizing the property. I should note here that using public vars is not in my habit: I adhere to the principles of OOP by utilizing getters and setters. So, what's the whole point in these restrictions?

    Read the article

  • Drupal : how to emulate the public/private attribute available in WordPress

    - by Parneix
    Hi, Basically, I'm looking for an easy way (module) to add a private/public option to any kind of content I may published in Drupal (blog entry, image, etc.). So that when I'm logged in, I can see everything. But when an anonymous user visit the site, he will only see the public stuff. It's way to manage a kind of front window/back-store architecture. I can use the same Drupal installation to all my needs and choose to filter the stuff I may want to make publicly available. * Important : 1) Private items must not be accessible even if anonymous users guess its URL; 2) Private item must not show up if anonymous user perform a search; 3) Private content must not be indexed by search engines; 4) Private items should show up if I perform a search while being logged in. Any idea? Thanks a lot, P.

    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 >