Search Results

Search found 4061 results on 163 pages for 'secure government'.

Page 30/163 | < Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >

  • What is the optimum way to secure a company wide wiki?

    - by Mark Robinson
    We have a wiki which is used by over half our company. Generally it has been very positively received. However, there is a concern over security - not letting confidential information fall into the wrong hands (i.e. competitors). The default answer is to create a complicated security matrix defining who can read what document (wiki page) based on who created it. Personally I think this mainly solves the wrong problem because it creates barriers within the company instead of a barrier to the external world. But some are concerned that people at a customer site might share information with a customer which then goes to the competitor. The administration of such a matrix is a nightmare because (1) the matrix is based on department and not projects (this is a matrix organisation), and (2) because in a wiki all pages are by definition dynamic so what is confidential today might not be confidential tomorrow (but the history is always readable!). Apart from the security matrix, we've considered restricting content on the wiki to non super secret stuff, but off course that needs to be monitored. Another solution (the current) is to monitor views and report anything suspicious (e.g. one person at a customer site having 2000 views in two days was reported). Again - this is not ideal because this does not directly imply a wrong motive. Does anyone have a better solution? How can a company wide wiki be made secure and yet keep its low threshold USP? BTW we use MediaWiki with Lockdown to exclude some administrative staff.

    Read the article

  • Is it impossible to secure .net code (intellectual property) ?

    - by JL
    I used to work in JavaScript a lot and one thing that really bothered my employers was that the source code was too easy to steal. Even with obfuscation, nothing really helped, because we all knew that any competent developer would be able to read that code if they wanted to. JS Scripts are one thing, but what about SOA projects that have millions invested in IP (Intellectual Property). I love .net, and especially C#, but I recently again had to answer the question "If we give this compiled program over to our clients, can their developers reverse engineer it?" I had gone out of my way to obfuscate the code, but I knew it wouldn't take that much for another determined C# developer to get at the code. So I earnestly pose the question, is it impossible to secure .net code? The considerations I have as as follows: Even regular native executables can be reversed, but not every developer has the skill to be able to do this. Its a lot harder to disassemble a native executable than a .net assembly. Obfuscation will only get you so far, but it does help a little. Why have I never seen any public acknowledgement by Microsoft that anything written in .net is subject to relatively easy IP theft? Why have I never seen a scrap of counter measure training on any Microsoft site? Why does VS come with a community obfuscater as an optional component? Ok maybe I have just had my head in the sand here, but its not exactly high on most developers priority list. Are there any plans to address my concerns in any future version of .net? I'm not knocking .net, but I would like some realistic answers, thank you, question marked as subjective and community!

    Read the article

  • Are there more secure alternatives to the .Net SQLConnection class?

    - by KeyboardMonkey
    Hi SO people, I'm very surprised this issue hasn't been discussed in-depth: This article tells us how to use windbg to dump a running .Net process strings in memory. I spent much time researching the SecureString class, which uses unmanaged pinned memory blocks, and keeps the data encrypted too. Great stuff. The problem comes in when you use it's value, and assign it to the SQLConnection.ConnectionString property, which is of the System.String type. What does this mean? Well... It's stored in plain text Garbage Collection moves it around, leaving copies in memory It can be read with windbg memory dumps That totally negates the SecureString functionality! On top of that, the SQLConnection class is non-inheritable, I can't even roll my own with a SecureString property instead; Yay for closed-source. Yay. A new DAL layer is in progress, but for a new major version and for so many users it will be at least 2 years before every user is upgraded, others might stay on the old version indefinitely, for whatever reason. Because of the frequency the connection is used, marshalling from a SecureString won't help, since the immutable old copies stick in memory until GC comes around. Integrated Windows security isn't an option, since some clients don't work on domains, and other roam and connect over the net. How can I secure the connection string, in memory, so it can't be viewed with windbg?

    Read the article

  • Is DB logging more secure than file logging for my PHP web app?

    - by iama
    I would like to log errors/informational and warning messages from within my web application to a log. I was initially thinking of logging all of these onto a text file. However, my PHP web app will need write access to the log files and the folder housing this log file may also need write access if log file rotation is desired which my web app currently does not have. The alternative is for me to log the messages to the MySQL database since my web app is already using the MySQL database for all its data storage needs. However, this got me thinking that going with the MySQL option is much better than the file option since I already have a configuration file with the database access information protected using file system permissions. If I now go with the log file option I need to tinker the file and folder access permissions and this will only make my application less secure and defeats the whole purpose of logging. Is this correct? I am using XAMPP for development and am a newbie to LAMP. Please let me know your recommendations for logging. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How should I secure my webapp written using Wicket, Spring, and JPA?

    - by Martin
    So, I have an web-based application that is using the Wicket 1.4 framework, and it uses Spring beans, the Java Persistence API (JPA), and the OpenSessionInView pattern. I'm hoping to find a security model that is declarative, but doesn't require gobs of XML configuration -- I'd prefer annotations. Here are the options so far: Spring Security (guide) - looks complete, but every guide I find that combines it with Wicket still calls it Acegi Security, which makes me think it must be old. Wicket-Auth-Roles (guide 1 and guide 2) - Most guides recommend mixing this with Spring Security, and I love the declarative style of @Authorize("ROLE1","ROLE2",etc). I'm concerned about having to extend AuthenticatedWebApplication, since I'm already extending org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.WebApplication, and Spring is already proxying that behind org.apache.wicket.spring.SpringWebApplicationFactory. SWARM / WASP (guide) - This looks the newest (though the main contributor passed away years ago), but I hate all of the JAAS-styled text files that declare permissions for principals. I also don't like the idea of making an Action class for every single thing a user might want to do. Secure models also aren't immediately obvious to me. Plus, there isn't an Authn example. Additionally, it looks like lots of folks recommend mixing the first and second options. I can't tell what the best practice is at all, though.

    Read the article

  • Am I going the right way to make login system secure with this simple password salting?

    - by LoVeSmItH
    I have two fields in login table password salt And I have this little function to generate salt function random_salt($h_algo="sha512"){ $salt1=uniqid(rand(),TRUE); $salt2=date("YmdHis").microtime(true); if(function_exists('dechex')){ $salt2=dechex($salt2); } $salt3=$_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR']; $salt=$salt1.$salt2.$salt3; if(function_exists('hash')){ $hash=(in_array($h_algo,hash_algos()))?$h_algo:"sha512"; $randomsalt=hash($hash,md5($salt)); //returns 128 character long hash if sha512 algorithm is used. }else{ $randomsalt=sha1(md5($salt)); //returns 40 characters long hash } return $randomsalt; } Now to create user password I have following $userinput=$_POST["password"] //don't bother about escaping, i have done it in my real project. $static_salt="THIS-3434-95456-IS-RANDOM-27883478274-SALT"; //some static hard to predict secret salt. $salt=random_salt(); //generates 128 character long hash. $password =sha1($salt.$userinput.$static_salt); $salt is saved in salt field of database and $password is saved in password field. My problem, In function random_salt(), I m having this FEELING that I'm just making things complicated while this may not generate secure salt as it should. Can someone throw me a light whether I m going in a right direction? P.S. I do have an idea about crypt functions and like such. Just want to know is my code okay? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How do you lock down & secure files stored on server in ASP.NET?

    - by Jon
    How do I go about securing files that are stored on the server? We have an ASP.NET app which generates PDFs. These are not stored in the wwwroot folder but in another folder i.e. C:\inetpub\data. This provides more security but maybe not enough. The ASP.NET/IIS process will need write access to this folder so it generate the PDFs there. Once the pdf is generated, it can be viewed using an ASP.NET form called viewpdf.aspx with the file to be viewed add to the query string like so viewpdf.aspx?FILE=mynewfile.pdf. This is loaded from a gridview. The full path to C:\inetpub\data is resolved and loaded in the Page_load event of the viewer page. Now I'm wondering how to secure this. Anybody could just view the file. Not by entering in the URL, as it won't been seen by IIS (its not in wwwroot), but could change the querystring in the viewpdf page. How do I stop anybody hacking this?

    Read the article

  • PHP - How do you secure a unique variable name?

    - by 102319141763223461745
    This function cropit, which I shamelessly stole off the internet, crops a 90x60 area from an existing image. In this code, when I use the function for more than one item (image) the one will display on top of the other (they come to occupy the same output space). I think this is because the function has the same (static) name ($dest) for the destination of the image when it's created (imagecopy). I tried, as you can see to include a second argument to the cropit function which would serve as the "name" of the $dest variable, but it didn't work. In the interest of full disclosure I have 22 hours of PHP experience (incidentally the same number of hours since the last I slept) and I am not that smart to begin with. Even if there's something else at work here entirely, seems to me that generally it must be useful to have a way to secure that a variable is always given a unique name. function cropit($srcimg, $dest) { $im = imagecreatefromjpeg($srcimg); $img_width = imagesx($im); $img_height = imagesy($im); $width = 90; $height = 60; $tlx = floor($img_width / 2) - floor ($width / 2); $tly = floor($img_height / 2) - floor ($height / 2); if ($tlx < 0) { $tlx = 0; } if ($tly < 0) { $tly = 0; } if (($img_width - $tlx) < $width) { $width = $img_width - $tlx; } if (($img_height - $tly) < $height) { $height = $img_height - $tly; } $dest = imagecreatetruecolor ($width, $height); imagecopy($dest, $im, 0, 0, $tlx, $tly, $width, $height); imagejpeg($dest); imagedestroy($dest); } $img = "imagefolder\imageone.jpg"; $img2 = "imagefolder\imagetwo.jpg"; cropit($img, $i1); cropit($img2, $i2); ?

    Read the article

  • Remove duplicates from a list of nested dictionaries

    - by user2924306
    I'm writing my first python program to manage users in Atlassian On Demand using their RESTful API. I call the users/search?username= API to retrieve lists of users, which returns JSON. The results is a list of complex dictionary types that look something like this: [ { "self": "http://www.example.com/jira/rest/api/2/user?username=fred", "name": "fred", "avatarUrls": { "24x24": "http://www.example.com/jira/secure/useravatar?size=small&ownerId=fred", "16x16": "http://www.example.com/jira/secure/useravatar?size=xsmall&ownerId=fred", "32x32": "http://www.example.com/jira/secure/useravatar?size=medium&ownerId=fred", "48x48": "http://www.example.com/jira/secure/useravatar?size=large&ownerId=fred" }, "displayName": "Fred F. User", "active": false }, { "self": "http://www.example.com/jira/rest/api/2/user?username=andrew", "name": "andrew", "avatarUrls": { "24x24": "http://www.example.com/jira/secure/useravatar?size=small&ownerId=andrew", "16x16": "http://www.example.com/jira/secure/useravatar?size=xsmall&ownerId=andrew", "32x32": "http://www.example.com/jira/secure/useravatar?size=medium&ownerId=andrew", "48x48": "http://www.example.com/jira/secure/useravatar?size=large&ownerId=andrew" }, "displayName": "Andrew Anderson", "active": false } ] I'm calling this multiple times and thus getting duplicate people in my results. I have been searching and reading but cannot figure out how to deduplicate this list. I figured out how to sort this list using a lambda function. I realize I could sort the list, then iterate and delete duplicates. I'm thinking there must be a more elegant solution. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Storing an encrypted cookie with Rails

    - by J. Pablo Fernández
    I need to store a small piece of data (less than 10 characters) in a cookie in Rails and I need it to be secure. I don't want anybody being able to read that piece of data or injecting their own piece of data (as that would open up the app to many kinds of attacks). I think encrypting the contents of the cookie is the way to go (should I also sign it?). What is the best way to do it? Right now I'm doing this, which looks secure, but many things looked secure to people that knew much more than I about security and then it was discovered it wasn't really secure. I'm saving the secret in this way: encryptor = ActiveSupport::MessageEncryptor.new(Example::Application.config.secret_token) cookies[:secret] = { :value => encryptor.encrypt(secret), :domain => "example.com", :secure => !(Rails.env.test? || Rails.env.development?) } and then I'm reading it like this: encryptor = ActiveSupport::MessageEncryptor.new(Example::Application.config.secret_token) secret = encryptor.decrypt(cookies[:secret]) Is that secure? Any better ways of doing it? Update: I know about Rails' session and how it is secure, both by signing the cookie and by optionally storing the contents of the session server side and I do use the session for what it is for. But my question here is about storing a cookie, a piece of information I do not want in the session but I still need it to be secure.

    Read the article

  • SSL setup: UCC or wildcard certificates?

    - by quanza
    I've scoured the web for a clear and concise answer to my SSL question, but to no avail. So here goes: I have a web-service requiring SSL support for authentication pages. The root-level domain does not have the "www" - i.e., secure://domain.com - but localized pages use "language-code.domain.com", i.e. secure://ja.domain.com So I need at least a wildcard SSL certificate that supports secure://*.domain.com However, we also have a public sandbox environment at sandbox.domain.com, which we also need to support under localized domains - so secure://ja.sandbox.domain.com needs to also work. The previous admin managed to purchase a wildcard SSL certificate for .domain.com, but with a Subject Alternative Name for "domain.com". So, I'm thinking of trying to get a wildcard certificate with SANs defined as "domain.com" and ".*.domain.com". But now I'm getting confused because there seem to be separate SAN certificates, also called UCC certificates. Can someone clarify whether it's possible to get a wildcard certificate with additional SAN fields, and ultimately what the best way is to support: secure://domain.com secure://.domain.com secure://.*.domain.com with the fewest (and cheapest!) number of SSL certificates? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Spring 3 simple extentionless url mappings with annotation-based mapping - impossible?

    - by caerphilly
    Hi, I'm using Spring 3, and trying to set up a simple web-app using annotations to define controller mappings. This seems to be incredibly difficult without peppering all the urls with *.form or *.do Because part of the site needs to be password protected, these urls are all under /secure. There is a <security-constraint> in the web.xml protecting everything under that root. I want to map all the Spring controllers to /secure/app/. Example URLs would be: /secure/app/landingpage /secure/app/edit/customer/{id} each of which I would handle with an appropriate jsp/xml/whatever. So, in web.xml I have this: <servlet> <servlet-name>dispatcher</servlet-name> <servlet-class>org.springframework.web.servlet.DispatcherServlet</servlet-class> <load-on-startup>1</load-on-startup> </servlet> <servlet-mapping> <servlet-name>dispatcher</servlet-name> <url-pattern>/secure/app/*</url-pattern> </servlet-mapping> And in despatcher-servlet.xml I have this: <context:component-scan base-package="controller" /> In the Controller package I have a controller class: package controller; import org.springframework.stereotype.Controller; import org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.RequestMapping; import org.springframework.web.bind.annotation.RequestMethod; import org.springframework.web.servlet.ModelAndView; import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest; @Controller @RequestMapping("/secure/app/main") public class HomePageController { public HomePageController() { } @RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.GET) public ModelAndView getPage(HttpServletRequest request) { ModelAndView mav = new ModelAndView(); mav.setViewName("main"); return mav; } } Under /WEB-INF/jsp I have a "main.jsp", and a suitable view resolver set up to point to this. I had things working when mapping the despatcher using *.form, but can't get anything working using the above code. When Spring starts up it appears to map everything correctly: 13:22:36,762 INFO main annotation.DefaultAnnotationHandlerMapping:399 - Mapped URL path [/secure/app/main] onto handler [controller.HomePageController@2a8ab08f] I also noticed this line, which looked suspicious: 13:25:49,578 DEBUG main servlet.DispatcherServlet:443 - No HandlerMappings found in servlet 'dispatcher': using default And at run time any attempt to view /secure/app/main just returns a 404 error in Tomcat, with this log output: 13:25:53,382 DEBUG http-8080-1 servlet.DispatcherServlet:842 - DispatcherServlet with name 'dispatcher' determining Last-Modified value for [/secure/app/main] 13:25:53,383 DEBUG http-8080-1 servlet.DispatcherServlet:850 - No handler found in getLastModified 13:25:53,390 DEBUG http-8080-1 servlet.DispatcherServlet:690 - DispatcherServlet with name 'dispatcher' processing GET request for [/secure/app/main] 13:25:53,393 WARN http-8080-1 servlet.PageNotFound:962 - No mapping found for HTTP request with URI [/secure/app/main] in DispatcherServlet with name 'dispatcher' 13:25:53,393 DEBUG http-8080-1 servlet.DispatcherServlet:677 - Successfully completed request So... Spring maps a URL, and then "forgets" about that mapping a second later? What is going on? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Basic security practices for desktop Ubuntu

    - by Daisetsu
    Most of us know the basic security practices on Windows: use a limited account set a password disable unused services uninstall bloatware Antivirus / Antimalware etc. I haven't ran linux as my main desktop computer before, so I don't know how to properly secure it. I have heard linux is supposed to be more secure than Windows, but I know that the default settings of anything are rarely secure. What are some things I should do as a new Linux user to secure my desktop system from attack?

    Read the article

  • Serving protected files using Nginx's X-Accel-Redirect header

    - by andybak
    I'm trying to serve protected files using this directive in my nginx.conf: location /secure/ { internal; alias /home/ldr/webapps/nginx/app/secure/; } I'm passing in paths in the form: "/myfile.doc" and the file's path would be: /home/ldr/webapps/nginx/app/secure/myfile.doc I just get 404's when I access "http: //myserver/secure/myfile.doc" (space inserted after http to stop ServerFault converting it to a link) I've tried taking the trailing / off the location directive and that makes no difference. Two questions: How do I fix it! How can I debug problems like this myself? How can I get Nginx to report which path it's looking for? error.log shows nothing and access.log just tells me which url is being requested - this is the bit I already know! It's no fun trying things randomly without any feedback. Here's my entire nginx.conf: daemon off; worker_processes 2; events { worker_connections 1024; } http { include mime.types; default_type application/octet-stream; server { listen 21534; server_name my.server.com; client_max_body_size 5m; location /media/ { alias /home/ldr/webapps/nginx/app/media/; } location / { proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; fastcgi_pass unix:/home/ldr/webapps/nginx/app/myproject/django.sock; fastcgi_pass_header Authorization; fastcgi_hide_header X-Accel-Redirect; fastcgi_hide_header X-Sendfile; fastcgi_intercept_errors off; include fastcgi_params; } location /secure { internal; alias /home/ldr/webapps/nginx/app/secure/; } } } EDIT: I'm trying some of the suggestions here So I've tried: location /secure/ { internal; alias /home/ldr/webapps/nginx/app/; } both with and without the trailing slash on location. I've also tried moving this block before the "location /" directive. The page I linked to has ^~ after 'location' giving: location ^~ /secure/ { ...etc... Not sure what that signifies but it didn't work either!

    Read the article

  • .htaccess url rewrite with ssl redirection

    - by Stuart McAlpine
    I'm having trouble combining a url query parameter rewrite (fancy-url) with a .htaccess ssl redirection. My .htaccess file is currently: Options +FollowSymLinks Options -Indexes ServerSignature Off RewriteEngine on RewriteBase / # in https: process secure.html in https RewriteCond %{server_port} =443 RewriteCond $1 ^secure$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.+).html$ index.php?page=$1 [QSA,L] # in https: force all other pages to http RewriteCond %{server_port} =443 RewriteCond $1 !^secure$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.+).html$ http://%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} [QSA,N] # in http: force secure.html to https RewriteCond %{server_port} !=443 RewriteCond $1 ^secure$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.+).html$ https://%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} [QSA,N] # in http: process other pages as http RewriteCond %{server_port} !=443 RewriteCond $1 !^secure$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.+).html$ index.php?page=$1 [QSA,L] The fancy-url rewriting is working fine but the redirection to/from https isn't working at all. If I replace the 2 lines containing RewriteRule ^(.+).html$ https://%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} [QSA,N] with RewriteRule ^(.+).html$ https://%{HTTP_HOST}/index.php?page=$1 [QSA,L] then the https redirection works fine but the fancy-url rewriting doesn't work. Is it possible to combine these two?

    Read the article

  • How to secure Add child record functionality in MVC on Parent's view?

    - by RSolberg
    I'm trying to avoid some potential security issues as I expose some a new set of functionality into the real world. This is basically functionality that will allow for a new comment to be added via a partialview on the "Parent" page. My comment needs to know a couple of things, first what record is the comment for and secondly who is making the comment. I really don't like using a hidden field to store the ID for the Parent record in the add comment form as that can be easily changed with some DOM mods. How should I handle this? PARENT <% Html.RenderPartial("AddComment", Model.Comments); %> CHILD <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<CommentsViewModel>" %> <% using (Html.BeginForm("AddComment", "Requests")) {%> <fieldset> <legend>New Comment</legend> <%= Html.HiddenFor(p => p.RequestID) %> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(p => p.Text) %> &nbsp; <input type="submit" value="Add" /> </fieldset> <% } %> CONTROLLER [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public void AddComment(CommentsViewModel commentsModel) { var user = GetCurrentUser(); commentsModel.CreatedByID = user.UserID; RequestsService.AddComment(commentsModel); }

    Read the article

  • Account verification Yelp style, how is it more "secure" than traditional verification?

    - by Chad
    For business owners to "take control" of their business page on Yelp, they register for it. The Yelp system performs a telephone call-back. From watching to the video here, it sounds like a telephone version of what we all typically do - e-mail check. For e-mail check, it basically goes like this: User registers verify e-mail sent they click link inside verify e-mail site verifies Here's Yelp's: User registers verify screen shown with code Yelp calls user user enters code site verifies It's essentially the same thing, via phone. Is there any reason you can see why this method is better than the e-mail method?

    Read the article

  • How do I read a secure rss feed into a SyndicationFeed without providing credentials?

    - by John Kaster
    For whatever reason, IBM uses https (without requiring credentials) for their RSS feeds. I'm trying to consume https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/roller-ui/rendering/feed/gradybooch/entries/rss?lang=en with a .NET 4 SyndicationFeed. I can open this feed in a browser and it loads just fine. Here's the code: using (XmlReader xml = XmlReader.Create("https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/roller-ui/rendering/feed/gradybooch/entries/rss?lang=en")) { var items = from item in SyndicationFeed.Load(xml).Items select item; } Here's the exception: System.Net.WebException was unhandled by user code Message=The remote server returned an error: (500) Internal Server Error. Source=System StackTrace: at System.Net.HttpWebRequest.GetResponse() at System.Xml.XmlDownloadManager.GetNonFileStream(Uri uri, ICredentials credentials, IWebProxy proxy, RequestCachePolicy cachePolicy) at System.Xml.XmlDownloadManager.GetStream(Uri uri, ICredentials credentials, IWebProxy proxy, RequestCachePolicy cachePolicy) at System.Xml.XmlUrlResolver.GetEntity(Uri absoluteUri, String role, Type ofObjectToReturn) at System.Xml.XmlReaderSettings.CreateReader(String inputUri, XmlParserContext inputContext) at System.Xml.XmlReader.Create(String inputUri, XmlReaderSettings settings, XmlParserContext inputContext) at System.Xml.XmlReader.Create(String inputUri) at EDN.Util.Test.FeedAggTest.LoadFeedInfoTest() in D:\cdn\trunk\CDN\Dev\Shared\net\EDN.Util\EDN.Util.Test\FeedAggTest.cs:line 126 How do I configure the reader to work with an https feed?

    Read the article

  • Pyramid.security: Is getting user info from a database with unauthenticated_userid(request) really secure?

    - by yourfriendzak
    I'm trying to make an accesible cache of user data using Pyramid doc's "Making A “User Object” Available as a Request Attribute" example. They're using this code to return a user object to set_request_property: from pyramid.security import unauthenticated_userid def get_user(request): # the below line is just an example, use your own method of # accessing a database connection here (this could even be another # request property such as request.db, implemented using this same # pattern). dbconn = request.registry.settings['dbconn'] userid = unauthenticated_userid(request) if userid is not None: # this should return None if the user doesn't exist # in the database return dbconn['users'].query({'id':userid}) I don't understand why they're using unauthenticated_userid(request) to lookup user info from the database...isn't that insecure? That means that user might not be logged in, so why are you using that ID to get there private info from the database? Shouldn't userid = authenticated_userid(request) be used instead to make sure the user is logged in? What's the advantage of using unauthenticated_userid(request)? Please help me understand what's going on here.

    Read the article

  • How to secure an AJAX call from a facebook canvas application.

    - by user259349
    Reading this Ajax example, http://wiki.developers.facebook.com/index.php/FBJS/Examples/Ajax#Working_Example I found the following line. I'm not sure what to understand out of it, how do you "check the sig values per Platform spec"? "Note: For brevity's sake we are trusting $_POST['fb_sig_user'] without checking the full signature. This is unsafe as anyone could easily forge a user's action. Always be sure to either use the Facebook object which is supplied with the client libraries, or check the sig values per Platform spec"

    Read the article

  • IP address detection for geo-location or MAC address much secure?

    - by SuperRomia
    Recent study many websites are using geo-location technology on their Websites. I'm planning to implement one website which can be detect the web visitor more accurate. An found that Mozilla is using some kind of detect MAC address technology in their Geo-Location web service. Is it violate some privacy issue? I believe most of Geo-location service providers only offer country to city level. But the Mac address detection enable to locate the web visitors' location more correctly than using IP address detection. If detect the MAC address is not practical, which geo-location service provider is offering more accurate data to detect my Website visitor around the world?

    Read the article

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