Search Results

Search found 12324 results on 493 pages for 'password encryption'.

Page 30/493 | < Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >

  • How can I make my password fields always empty?

    - by ggfan
    I have a form field where users can change their passwords, but if they set their settings to remember passwords, their password shows up. Is there a way to make the field always empty? So that they always have to type their password. <label for="oldpassword" class="styled">Old password:</label> <input type="password" id="oldpassword" name="oldpassword"/><br />

    Read the article

  • How do I encrypt but share a number of folders?

    - by d3vid
    I want to achieve the following functionality. Is it possible? Boot up computer (possibly via WakeOnLan or WakeOnPlan). Either be automatically logged in, or log in via login screen, or log in remotely. I change this behavior occasionally, so full disk encryption wouldn't work for me because it requires a password on bootup (which would it would prevent the remote bootup options, and the automatic login option). I am only interested in encrypting data, not the entire harddrive. Once logged in either: a launcher/tray icon is available to launch encryption app (preferred) run encryption app from the dash Prompted to unlock encrypted folder(s) individually. Unlocked folders are available to: me, apps I am running (e.g. editors, SpiderOak) Ideally, folders that I share with bindfs can be locked/unlocked by other users too. A key point is that once I have unlocked an encrypted folder, I don't want to have to think about it again. I currently achieve this via TrueCrypt (except for the last part). Unfortunately TrueCrypt isn't well integrated with Ubuntu (licensing issues prevent Debian from including it in their repo, the interface isn't quite integrated with Unity, setting it as a startup app doesn't quite work, sharing encrypted folders isn't really part of its design). Is there an alternative to TrueCrypt that is better integrated with the Ubuntu GUI and would suit this workflow?

    Read the article

  • Deleted info in Boot folder

    - by user207984
    First off, I'm using Zorin 7 OS. So my Boot folder was too full to install any new updates, I used a tutorial I found somewhere on here to remove the unneeded linux-image files, and must of also deleted the latest one as well. Now when I attempt to boot I get error: no such partition. grub rescue> I used my MultiSystem USB to install (on a separate partition) a different Linux OS (Kali) and no longer get that error, however, it will ONLY give me the option to boot Kali Linux. Here's the biggest new problem though, I used the built in option of hard drive encryption for Zorin 7 when I initially installed it, so now when I attempt to explore it (to get all my saved data which is REALLY important to me), it asks me for password for encryption. However, the password says it in not recognized, and I know it's right, I had to type it in every single day. So I either need a way to restore my Zorin 7 boot files or GRUB or whatever, so I can boot it up... or I need to know how to fix my encryption problem to save all my info.

    Read the article

  • change password code error.....

    - by shimaTun
    I've created a code to change a password. Now it seem contain an error.before i fill the form. the page display the error message: Parse error: parse error, unexpected $end in C:\Program Files\xampp\htdocs\e-Complaint(FYP)\userChangePass.php on line 222 this the code: <?php # userChangePass.php //this page allows logged in user to change their password. $page_title='Change Your Password'; //if no first_name variable exists, redirect the user if(!isset($_SESSION['nameuser'])){ header("Location: http://" .$_SERVER['HTTP_HOST']. dirname($_SERVER['PHP_SELF'])."/index.php"); ob_end_clean(); exit(); }else{ if(isset($_POST['submit'])) {//handle form. require_once('connectioncomplaint.php'); //connec to the database //check for a new password and match againts the confirmed password. if(eregi ("^[[:alnum:]]{4,20}$", stripslashes(trim($_POST['password1'])))){ if($_POST['password1'] == $_POST['password2']){ $p =escape_data($_POST['password1']); }else{ $p=FALSE; echo'<p><font color="red" size="+1"> Your password did not match the confirmed password!</font></p>'; } }else{ $p=FALSE; echo'<p><font color="red" size="+1"> Please Enter a valid password!</font></p>'; } if($p){ //if everything OK. //make the query $query="UPDATE access SET password=PASSWORD('$p') WHERE userid={$_SESSION['userid']}"; $result=@mysql_query($query);//run the query. if(mysql_affected_rows() == 1) {//if it run ok. //send an email,if desired. echo '<p><b>your password has been changed.</b></p>'; //include('templates/footer.inc');//include the HTML footer. exit(); }else{//if it did not run ok $message= '<p>Your password could not be change due to a system error.We apolpgize for any inconvenience.</p><p>' .mysql_error() .'</p>'; } mysql_close();//close the database connection. }else{//failed the validation test. echo '<p><font color="red" size="+1"> Please try again.</font></p>'; } }//end of the main Submit conditional. ?> And code for form: <h1>Change Your Password</h1> <form action="<?php echo $_SERVER['PHP_SELF']; ?>" method="post"> <fieldset> <p><b>New Password:</b><input type="password" name="password1" size="20" maxlength="20" /> <small>Use only letters and numbers.Must be between 4 and 20 characters long.</small></p> <p><b>Confirm New Password:</b><input type="password" name="password2" size="20" maxlength="20" /></p> </fieldset> <div align="center"> <input type="submit" name="submit" value="Change My Password" /></div> </form><!--End Form-->

    Read the article

  • Improving VPN performance - stronger encryption = more performance?

    - by Seth
    I have a site-to-site VPN set up with two SonicWall's (a TZ170 and a Pro1260). It was suggested to me that turning off encryption (so the VPN is tunneling only) would improve performance. (I'm not concerned with security, because the VPN is running over a trusted line.) Using FTP and HTTP transfers, I measured my baseline performance at about 130±10 kB/s. The Ipsec (Phase 2) Encryption was set to 3DES, so I set it to "none". However, the effect was opposite -- the performance dropped to 60±30 kB/s, and the transfers stall for about 25 seconds before any data comes down the line. I tried AES-128 and the throughput went UP to 160±5 kB/s. The rated speed of my line is 193 kB/s (it's a T1). Contrary to what I would think, stronger Ipsec encryption seems to improve throughput. Can anyone explain what might be going on here? Why would no encryption cause poor and highly variable performance, and cause transfers to stall? Why does AES-128 improve performance?

    Read the article

  • Copying files between linux machines with strong authentication but without encryption

    - by Zizzencs
    I'm looking for a suitable program to copy files from one linux machine to another one. The program should be able to do authentication but it should not do encryption. The reason behind the latter is the lack of CPU power to do the encryption. I copy backups from ~70 machines to a single backup server simultaneously. The single server is an HP Proliant DL360 G7, with 10 Gbps ethernet connection and an FC storage backend that can do 4 Gbps. Through FTP I can write ~400MB/sec to the storage (that's about what I want) but through ssh with arcfour I can only do ~100MB/sec while having 100% CPU usage. That's why I want file transfers not to be encrypted. The alternatives that I found not really suitable: rcp: no authentication, forget it FTP: making the authentication "secure" (at least preventing plain-text password exchange) is possible but not really easy and I haven't found a method to force any FTP daemon to encrypt the control channel (for the authentication) and not to encrypt the data channel (for data transfers) SCP/SFTP: in farely recent ssh(d) implementations you can't turn off encryption. The best you can do is to use the arcfour cypher for the encryption but it sill uses too much CPU power for my needs. rsync over ssh: same problems as with SCP/SFTP. plain rsync: from the documentation of rsyncd: "The authentication protocol used in rsync is a 128 bit MD4 based challenge response system. This is fairly weak protection, though (with at least one brute-force hash-finding algorithm publicly available), so if you want really top-quality security, then I recommend that you run rsync over ssh." It's a no-go. Is there a protocol/program that can do exactly what I want? (A big plus would be if it could work on windows as well and/or if it would support rsync-stlye copying/synchronization (e.g. copy only the differences).)

    Read the article

  • How to manually start and re-start Apache with mod_wsgi powering a password protected Python WSGI app?

    - by Mahmoud Abdelkader
    I'm working on a project where I have to meet some regulatory requirements that require at least 3 out of 5 authorized users to start a backend web service that handles very sensitive information using pre-assigned passwords. Right now, the prototype has been approved and is running using Python's wsgiref.simple_server(), which I have programmed to manually prompt for the passwords. Now that the prototype has been approved, I have to migrate the web application to a production environment where I will need to run it behind Apache and mod_wsgi. I have two questions: Right now, I use a thin Python wrapper around expect to programmatically allow for remote password entry. How do I get Apache to prompt me for a password before starting? Will this have to be in the app.wsgi script that's executed by mod_wsgi? How would that work since Apache daemonizes, and thus, has no stdin! Will I have to worry about some type of code reload? Apache probably has some maximum number of requests before it kills and restarts another worker process, but, would this require a password prompt as well?

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to get a stored POP3 password out of Outlook 2007?

    - by Tom Morris
    If you have a password for a POP3 account in Outlook 2007 (Windows 7 Home Premium) and you then forget the password, how do you retrieve it? I tried copy-and-paste. No go. I downloaded Mail PassView, but upon installing it, AVG said it was malware, so I removed it. I eventually found the account details by opening up RegEdit, and found it in HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Windows Messaging Subsystem\Profiles\Outlook\ (...) but it was encoded in REG_BINARY. I Googled around and found various Visual Basic routines for decoding it but being a Unix dork I had absolutely no idea what to do with said scripts. By this point, I gave up and managed to get hold of the password by another means (it was written down on a piece of paper in the briefcase of the owner of the account - I know, it makes the inner sysadmin rage). I also attempted to write a simple POP3 server in Python and then get Outlook to log on to it, but that didn't really work out (it was about 4am at that point). For future reference, is there an easy and sensible way of doing this? Is Mail PassView actually evil spyware or was AVG just giving me a false positive? (Any chance of Windows 8 having something like OS X's Keychain?)

    Read the article

  • How can I estimate the entropy of a password?

    - by Wug
    Having read various resources about password strength I'm trying to create an algorithm that will provide a rough estimation of how much entropy a password has. I'm trying to create an algorithm that's as comprehensive as possible. At this point I only have pseudocode, but the algorithm covers the following: password length repeated characters patterns (logical) different character spaces (LC, UC, Numeric, Special, Extended) dictionary attacks It does NOT cover the following, and SHOULD cover it WELL (though not perfectly): ordering (passwords can be strictly ordered by output of this algorithm) patterns (spatial) Can anyone provide some insight on what this algorithm might be weak to? Specifically, can anyone think of situations where feeding a password to the algorithm would OVERESTIMATE its strength? Underestimations are less of an issue. The algorithm: // the password to test password = ? length = length(password) // unique character counts from password (duplicates discarded) uqlca = number of unique lowercase alphabetic characters in password uquca = number of uppercase alphabetic characters uqd = number of unique digits uqsp = number of unique special characters (anything with a key on the keyboard) uqxc = number of unique special special characters (alt codes, extended-ascii stuff) // algorithm parameters, total sizes of alphabet spaces Nlca = total possible number of lowercase letters (26) Nuca = total uppercase letters (26) Nd = total digits (10) Nsp = total special characters (32 or something) Nxc = total extended ascii characters that dont fit into other categorys (idk, 50?) // algorithm parameters, pw strength growth rates as percentages (per character) flca = entropy growth factor for lowercase letters (.25 is probably a good value) fuca = EGF for uppercase letters (.4 is probably good) fd = EGF for digits (.4 is probably good) fsp = EGF for special chars (.5 is probably good) fxc = EGF for extended ascii chars (.75 is probably good) // repetition factors. few unique letters == low factor, many unique == high rflca = (1 - (1 - flca) ^ uqlca) rfuca = (1 - (1 - fuca) ^ uquca) rfd = (1 - (1 - fd ) ^ uqd ) rfsp = (1 - (1 - fsp ) ^ uqsp ) rfxc = (1 - (1 - fxc ) ^ uqxc ) // digit strengths strength = ( rflca * Nlca + rfuca * Nuca + rfd * Nd + rfsp * Nsp + rfxc * Nxc ) ^ length entropybits = log_base_2(strength) A few inputs and their desired and actual entropy_bits outputs: INPUT DESIRED ACTUAL aaa very pathetic 8.1 aaaaaaaaa pathetic 24.7 abcdefghi weak 31.2 H0ley$Mol3y_ strong 72.2 s^fU¬5ü;y34G< wtf 88.9 [a^36]* pathetic 97.2 [a^20]A[a^15]* strong 146.8 xkcd1** medium 79.3 xkcd2** wtf 160.5 * these 2 passwords use shortened notation, where [a^N] expands to N a's. ** xkcd1 = "Tr0ub4dor&3", xkcd2 = "correct horse battery staple" The algorithm does realize (correctly) that increasing the alphabet size (even by one digit) vastly strengthens long passwords, as shown by the difference in entropy_bits for the 6th and 7th passwords, which both consist of 36 a's, but the second's 21st a is capitalized. However, they do not account for the fact that having a password of 36 a's is not a good idea, it's easily broken with a weak password cracker (and anyone who watches you type it will see it) and the algorithm doesn't reflect that. It does, however, reflect the fact that xkcd1 is a weak password compared to xkcd2, despite having greater complexity density (is this even a thing?). How can I improve this algorithm? Addendum 1 Dictionary attacks and pattern based attacks seem to be the big thing, so I'll take a stab at addressing those. I could perform a comprehensive search through the password for words from a word list and replace words with tokens unique to the words they represent. Word-tokens would then be treated as characters and have their own weight system, and would add their own weights to the password. I'd need a few new algorithm parameters (I'll call them lw, Nw ~= 2^11, fw ~= .5, and rfw) and I'd factor the weight into the password as I would any of the other weights. This word search could be specially modified to match both lowercase and uppercase letters as well as common character substitutions, like that of E with 3. If I didn't add extra weight to such matched words, the algorithm would underestimate their strength by a bit or two per word, which is OK. Otherwise, a general rule would be, for each non-perfect character match, give the word a bonus bit. I could then perform simple pattern checks, such as searches for runs of repeated characters and derivative tests (take the difference between each character), which would identify patterns such as 'aaaaa' and '12345', and replace each detected pattern with a pattern token, unique to the pattern and length. The algorithmic parameters (specifically, entropy per pattern) could be generated on the fly based on the pattern. At this point, I'd take the length of the password. Each word token and pattern token would count as one character; each token would replace the characters they symbolically represented. I made up some sort of pattern notation, but it includes the pattern length l, the pattern order o, and the base element b. This information could be used to compute some arbitrary weight for each pattern. I'd do something better in actual code. Modified Example: Password: 1234kitty$$$$$herpderp Tokenized: 1 2 3 4 k i t t y $ $ $ $ $ h e r p d e r p Words Filtered: 1 2 3 4 @W5783 $ $ $ $ $ @W9001 @W9002 Patterns Filtered: @P[l=4,o=1,b='1'] @W5783 @P[l=5,o=0,b='$'] @W9001 @W9002 Breakdown: 3 small, unique words and 2 patterns Entropy: about 45 bits, as per modified algorithm Password: correcthorsebatterystaple Tokenized: c o r r e c t h o r s e b a t t e r y s t a p l e Words Filtered: @W6783 @W7923 @W1535 @W2285 Breakdown: 4 small, unique words and no patterns Entropy: 43 bits, as per modified algorithm The exact semantics of how entropy is calculated from patterns is up for discussion. I was thinking something like: entropy(b) * l * (o + 1) // o will be either zero or one The modified algorithm would find flaws with and reduce the strength of each password in the original table, with the exception of s^fU¬5ü;y34G<, which contains no words or patterns.

    Read the article

  • Why is mkfs overwriting the LUKS encryption header on LVM on RAID partitions on Ubuntu 12.04?

    - by Starchy
    I'm trying to setup a couple of LUKS-encrypted partitions to be mounted after boot-time on a new Ubuntu server which was installed with LVM on top of software RAID. After running cryptsetup luksFormat, the LUKS header is clearly visible on the volume. After running any flavor of mkfs, the header is overwritten (which does not happen on other systems that were setup without LVM), and cryptsetup will no longer recognize the device as a LUKS device. # cryptsetup -y --cipher aes-cbc-essiv:sha256 --key-size 256 luksFormat /dev/dm-1 WARNING! ======== This will overwrite data on /dev/dm-1 irrevocably. Are you sure? (Type uppercase yes): YES Enter LUKS passphrase: Verify passphrase: # hexdump -C /dev/dm-1|head -n5 00000000 4c 55 4b 53 ba be 00 01 61 65 73 00 00 00 00 00 |LUKS....aes.....| 00000010 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................| 00000020 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 63 62 63 2d 65 73 73 69 |........cbc-essi| 00000030 76 3a 73 68 61 32 35 36 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |v:sha256........| 00000040 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 73 68 61 31 00 00 00 00 |........sha1....| # cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/dm-1 web2-var # mkfs.ext4 /dev/mapper/web2-var [..snip..] Creating journal (32768 blocks): done Writing superblocks and filesystem accounting information: done # hexdump -C /dev/dm-1|head -n5 # cryptsetup luksClose /dev/mapper/web2-var 00000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................| * 00000400 00 40 5d 00 00 88 74 01 66 a0 12 00 17 f2 6d 01 |.@]...t.f.....m.| 00000410 f5 3f 5d 00 00 00 00 00 02 00 00 00 02 00 00 00 |.?].............| 00000420 00 80 00 00 00 80 00 00 00 20 00 00 00 00 00 00 |......... ......| # cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/dm-1 web2-var Device /dev/dm-1 is not a valid LUKS device. I have also tried mkfs.ext2 with the same result. Based on setups I've done successfully on Debian and Ubuntu (but not LVM or Ubuntu 12.04), it's hard to see why this is failing.

    Read the article

  • is this aes encryption wrapper safe ? - yet another take...

    - by user393087
    After taking into accound answers for my questions here and here I created (well may-be) improved version of my wrapper. The key issue was what if an attacker is knowing what is encoded - he might then find the key and encode another messages. So I added XOR before encryption. I also in this version prepend IV to the data as was suggested. sha256 on key is only for making sure the key is as long as needed for the aes alg, but I know that key should not be plain text but calculated with many iterations to prevent dictionary attack function aes192ctr_en($data,$key) { $iv = mcrypt_create_iv(24,MCRYPT_DEV_URANDOM); $xor = mcrypt_create_iv(24,MCRYPT_DEV_URANDOM); $key = hash_hmac('sha256',$key,$iv,true); $data = $xor.((string)$data ^ (string)str_repeat($xor,(strlen($data)/24)+1)); $data = hash('md5',$data,true).$data; return $iv.mcrypt_encrypt('rijndael-192',$key,$data,'ctr',$iv); } function aes192ctr_de($data,$key) { $iv = substr($data,0,24); $data = substr($data,24); $key = hash_hmac('sha256',$key,$iv,true); $data = mcrypt_decrypt('rijndael-192',$key,$data,'ctr',$iv); $md5 = substr($data,0,16); $data = substr($data,16); if (hash('md5',$data,true)!==$md5) return false; $xor = substr($data,0,24); $data = substr($data,24); $data = ((string)$data ^ (string)str_repeat($xor,(strlen($data)/24)+1)); return $data; } $encrypted = aes192ctr_en('secret text','password'); echo $encrypted; echo aes192ctr_de($encrypted,'password'); another question is if ctr mode is ok in this context, would it be better if I use cbc mode ? Again, by safe I mean if an attacter could guess password if he knows exact text that was encrypted and knows above method. I assume random and long password here. Maybe instead of XOR will be safer to random initial data with another run of aes or other simpler alg like TEA or trivium ?

    Read the article

  • PAM Winbind Expired Password

    - by kernelpanic
    We've got Winbind/Kerberos setup on RHEL for AD authentication. Working fine however I noticed that when a password has expired, we get a warning but shell access is still granted. What's the proper way of handling this? Can we tell PAM to close the session once it sees the password has expired? Example: login as: ad-user [email protected]'s password: Warning: password has expired. [ad-user@server ~]$ Contents of /etc/pam.d/system-auth: auth required pam_env.so auth sufficient pam_unix.so nullok try_first_pass auth requisite pam_succeed_if.so uid >= 500 quiet auth sufficient pam_krb5.so use_first_pass auth sufficient pam_winbind.so use_first_pass auth required pam_deny.so account [default=2 success=ignore] pam_succeed_if.so quiet uid >= 10000000 account sufficient pam_succeed_if.so user ingroup AD_Admins debug account requisite pam_succeed_if.so user ingroup AD_Developers debug account required pam_access.so account required pam_unix.so broken_shadow account sufficient pam_localuser.so account sufficient pam_succeed_if.so uid < 500 quiet account [default=bad success=ok user_unknown=ignore] pam_krb5.so account [default=bad success=ok user_unknown=ignore] pam_winbind.so account required pam_permit.so password requisite pam_cracklib.so try_first_pass retry=3 password sufficient pam_unix.so md5 shadow nullok try_first_pass use_authtok password sufficient pam_krb5.so use_authtok password sufficient pam_winbind.so use_authtok password required pam_deny.so session [default=2 success=ignore] pam_succeed_if.so quiet uid >= 10000000 session sufficient pam_succeed_if.so user ingroup AD_Admins debug session requisite pam_succeed_if.so user ingroup AD_Developers debug session optional pam_mkhomedir.so umask=0077 skel=/etc/skel session optional pam_keyinit.so revoke session required pam_limits.so session optional pam_mkhomedir.so session [success=1 default=ignore] pam_succeed_if.so service in crond quiet use_uid session required pam_unix.so session optional pam_krb5.so

    Read the article

  • duplicity fail: not promping for password: "Running 'sftp user@host' failed"

    - by Thr4wn
    I have two linode VPS accounts and I want to back up one onto the other (the reasons are mainly for fun and to practice server administration.) the short version Duplicity isn't even asking for my password, but immediately says "invalid SSH password" (but I can ssh into the other server). why? the long version When I run duplicity /home/me scp://[email protected]//root/backup I get Invalid SSH password Running 'sftp [email protected]' failed (attempt #1) Invalid SSH password Running 'sftp [email protected]' failed (attempt #2) Invalid SSH password Running 'sftp [email protected]' failed (attempt #3) And it says Invalid SSH password immediately with no opportunity for me to actually type the password. When I type duplicity full -v9 --num-retries 4 /home/me scp://[email protected]//root/backup I get Main action: full Running 'sftp [email protected]' (attempt #1) State = sftp, Before = 'Connecting to 97.107.129.67... [email protected]'s' State = sftp, Before = '' Invalid SSH password Running 'sftp [email protected]' failed (attempt #1) I can ssh into [email protected] fine, and in fact have the ip in known_hosts before I tried any of this. serer 1 (from which I'm running the duplicity command) is Linode's default Ubuntu 8 setup with only a handful of programs installed via apt-get. server 2 (represented by x.x.x.x) is literally only Linode's default Ubuntu 8 setup I previously tried using SystemImager -- would that have changed settings in a destructive way? (I have removed and rebooted since then) Isn't Duplicity supposed to prompt for password? Am I using it wrong? are there common mistakes/dependencies I need to know about? Is there any way that x.x.x.x could be setup that could make this not work (I used Linode's default Ubuntu 8 setup and barely )?

    Read the article

  • SSL Proxy: Forwarding without the encryption

    - by John
    I have a python application listening on port 9001 for HTTP traffic. I'm trying to configure Apache (or anything, really) to listen on port 443 for HTTPS connections, and then forward the connection, sans encryption, to port 9001 on the same machine. My application would then reply via the proxy, where the encryption would be reapplied, and returned to the client transparently. I'm not doing anything crazy with the site names and SSL certs, I have one public IP, one hostname, and one SSL cert. Stripping the encryption at the proxy doesn't seem to be a common requirement. Is what I'm asking for a normal requirement? Are there other concerns with this sort of configuration?

    Read the article

  • How is the "change password at next logon" requirement supposed to work with RDP using Network Level Authentication?

    - by NReilingh
    We have a Windows server (2008 R2) with the "Remote Desktop Services" feature installed and no Active Directory domain. Remote desktop is set up to "Allow connections only from computers running Remote Desktop with Network Level Authentication (more secure)". This means that before the remote screen is displayed, the connection is authenticated in a "Windows Security: Enter your credentials" window. The only two role services installed on this server is the RD Session Host and Licensing. When the "User must change password at next logon" checkbox is selected in the properties for a local user on this server, the following displays on a client computer after attempting to connect using the credentials that were last valid: On some other servers using RDP for admin access (but without the Remote Desktop Services role installed), the behavior is different -- the session begins and the user is given a change password prompt on the remote screen. What do I need to do to replicate this behavior on the Remote Desktop Services server?

    Read the article

  • How secure is a bluetooth keyboard against password sniffing?

    - by jhs
    In a situation where an admin will enter sensitive information into a keyboard (the root password), what is the risk that a bluetooth keyboard (ship by default with Mac systems these days) would put those passwords at risk? Another way of asking would be: what security and encryption protocols are used, if any, to establish a bluetooth connection between a keyboard and host system?

    Read the article

  • How to reset Administrator password Windows Server 2003 installed on Vmware?

    - by Cucumber
    I want to reset administrator password on Windows Server 2003. OS installed on VMware server VMware Server version 2.0.1. And problem is this: when i try to boot from live cd, after boot disk with Windows not detected. I tried to use Windows Admin Hack - Linux Boot; Hirens.BootCD.10.4; ophcrack-xp-livecd-2.3.1.iso None of these programs did not see the hard drive! Any ideas? Thank! ADD: I want to reset LOCAL admin password, not domain. And this computer are not domain controller.

    Read the article

  • OpenLDAP Password Expiration with pwdReset=TRUE?

    - by jsight
    I have configured the ppolicy overlay for OpenLDAP to enable password policies. These things work: Password lockouts on too many failed attempts Password Change required once pwdReset=TRUE added to user entry Password Expirations If the account is locked out due to intrusion attempts (too many bad passwords) or time (expiration time hit), the account must be reset by an administrator. However, when the administrator sets pwdReset=TRUE in the profile, this seems to also override the expiration policy. So, the password that the administrator sent out (which should be a temporary password) ends up being valid permanently. Is there a way in OpenLDAP to have a password that must be changed, but also MUST expire?

    Read the article

  • OpenLDAP Password Expiration with pwdReset=TRUE?

    - by jsight
    I have configured the ppolicy overlay for OpenLDAP to enable password policies. These things work: Password lockouts on too many failed attempts Password Change required once pwdReset=TRUE added to user entry Password Expirations If the account is locked out due to intrusion attempts (too many bad passwords) or time (expiration time hit), the account must be reset by an administrator. However, when the administrator sets pwdReset=TRUE in the profile, this seems to also override the expiration policy. So, the password that the administrator sent out (which should be a temporary password) ends up being valid permanently. Is there a way in OpenLDAP to have a password that must be changed, but also MUST expire?

    Read the article

  • Blackberry Gmail password change

    - by Highstead
    I've updated my gmail password and so i must update my blackberry password. I tried updating the email password to which i got the following message. Invalid email address or password. Please verify your email address and password. The information you provided is incorrect. If the error persists contact gmail.com (Your email provider). Please try again. I tried again, with what i know the password to be, with password show on. I've also deleted the account and tried to create it. I've tried going to the "Last account activity: XXXX details" menu and signing out all devices. I'm continually getting the above error, but the account activities don't seem to show any sign of a mobile attempt to access my mail account. Has anyone had this issue before and how did you sign it. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Update saved password for basic authentication using a script

    - by Kalamane
    I have a website that uses basic authentication as described on this webpage. Each of the computers I manage have the password saved in their browser. There is only one username and password for this. After someone logs in to the site this way, they are presented with their individual username and password prompt as part of the web page. The purpose of the initial username/password is to discourage non-technical employees that aren't supposed to be using the page from even viewing it. So far, when we've had to change this password, I've manually gone to each computer and updated the saved password. I'm writing a startup script to configure other aspects of these systems so that I can maintain them easier. I'd like to be able to update the saved password via this script. The operating system running on these machines is Windows XP SP3 and the browsers they're using to access this site are IE8 and IE9. How can I update the saved basic authentication information for a website via a script?

    Read the article

  • How to encrypt dual boot windows 7 and xp (bitlocker, truecrypt combo?) on sdd (recommended?)

    - by therobyouknow
    I would like to setup a dual boot Windows 7 and Windows XP laptop/notebook computer where each operation system's partition is fully encrypted. I would like to do this on a SSD - a 128Gb Crucial M4. My research Dual boot of truecrypt encrypted OSs on one drive (not possible - in Truecript 7.x at time of writing) This cannot be done on a standard Truecrypt setup - it will only support encrypting one of the operating systems. I have tried this and also read about it here on superuser.com However, I did see a solution here that uses grub4dos as the initial bootloader to chain to separate truecrypt encrypted OSs, in my case Windows 7 and Windows XP: http://yyzyyz.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/truecrypt-how-to-encrypt-multiple.html I am not going to consider this solution as it relies upon some custom code for use in the bootloader that is provided by the author. I would prefer a solution that can be fully understood so that I can be sure that there is nothing undesirable occuring (i.e. malware or just simply bugs in the code). I would like to believe such a solution doesn't have those risks but I can't be sure. BitLocker and Truecrypt combination - possible solution? So I am now considering a combination of encryption programs: I now aim to encrypt Windows XP with Truecrypt and Windows 7 with BitLocker. Assuming Truecrypt bootloader can boot into non-Truecrypt OSs (e.g. via hitting Escape to go to another menu), then this solution may be viable. SSDs and Encryption (use fastest possible spinning hard disk instead (?)) I read on various superuser.com posts and elsewhere that current SSDs are not suited to whole drive encryption for various reasons: impact of performance algorithms that give SSDs advantage over spinning harddisks. Algorithms used in compression of data for example. Wear on the SSD, shortening its life Security issues whereby data is repeated, as indicated in some Truecrypt documentation So I am now considering not using SSD. But with the aim to have the fastest drive possible, I am considering using the Western Digital Scorpion black 2.5" 7200rpm harddisk as this appears to be top rated among spinning platter-based harddrives (don't work for Western Digital). Summary So to achieve whole drive encrypted dual boot Windows 7 and Windows XP with minimal performance impact I intend to use a combination of Truecrypt and Bitlocker on a top-rated conventional spinning platter-based harddisk. Questions Will my summary: achieve whole disk encryption of the dual-boot Windows XP, Windows 7? OR an you suggest a simpler solution, including one that only requires only Truecrypt (BitLocker not available on XP). Or another encryption tool, including paid-for? provide the highest performance. Am I correct to avoid using SDD with encryption for the reasons I discovered? Are the concerns about SSDs and encryption still very real (some articles I read go back to 2010) Thanks for your input!

    Read the article

  • SSH only works after intentionally failed password

    - by pyraz
    So, I'm having a rather weird problem. I have a server, that when I try to SSH into, immediately closes the connection if I type in the correct password on the first attempt. However, if I purposefully enter a wrong password on the first attempt, and then enter a correct password at the second or third prompt, it successfully logs me into the computer. Similarly, when I try to use public key authentication, I get an immediate closed connection. If, however, I enter a wrong password for my key file, followed by another wrong password once it reverts to password authentication, I can successfully log in as long as I provide the correct password at the second or third prompt. The machine is running Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.2 (Santiago), and is using LDAP and PAM for authentication. Any ideas on where to start debugging this one? Let me know what config files I need to provide and I'll be happy to do so.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >