Search Results

Search found 1456 results on 59 pages for 'authority'.

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 34/59 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • SQLAuthority News – Blog Subscription and Comments RSS

    - by pinaldave
    Quite often I get email where many readers ask me how to get email from SQLAuthority.com blog. Today very quickly I will go over few standard practices of this blog using you can stay connected with SQLAuthority.com First the most important is search: I received hundreds of emails and hundreds of comments every day. I try [...]

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2000 + ASP.NET: Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'

    - by Rick
    I just migrated a development workstation FROM: Windows XP Pro SP3 with IIS 6 TO: Vista Enterprise 64bit with IIS 7 Since the move, one of my pages that accesses an SQL Server 2000 database is receiving the following error from my ASP.NET 2.0 web page: "Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'." I have: enabled Windows Authentication in IIS and web.config disabled Anonymous Authentication in IIS set up Impersonation to run as the authenticated user verified that the logged in user (in this case, me) has access to the appropriate database on the SQL Server verified that my login and impersonation information is correct in the ASP.NET page by checking User.Identity.Name and System.Security.Principal.WindowsIdentity.GetCurrent().Name (both display my username) My connection string using SqlConnection is "Server={SERVER_NAME};Database={DB_NAME};Integrated Security=SSPI;Trusted_Connection=True;" Why is it trying to login with NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGIN? I have to assume it's some setting or web.config entry specific to IIS7 since it worked fine before the migration. NOTE: The SQL Server is Windows authentication only - no mixed mode or SQL only.

    Read the article

  • Migrate an intermediate CA to a new root

    - by Tim Brigham
    Using the Microsoft CA is there any way to cut over to a new certificate authority from an intermediate authority? Both my systems are Microsoft CAs - I have a 2008 R2 Enterprise CA (intermediate) and an old 2003 CA (root). The 2003 box bit the dust and I don't have good backups. I still have a few months before the CRL expires; instead of having to cut over to a new intermediate authority is there a ready way to simply point this intermediate authority to a new offline CA?

    Read the article

  • Error message: do not have authority to access this function

    - by Ross
    Hi. I just reinstalled Windows on my computer after getting a virus. I worked with it for a while and everything worked as it should. I then used a backup of the computer that I had made a week or so earlier and copied the backup over my user folder. (That is, I took the folder named "Joe" from the backup drive and copied-replaced the whole thing over the folder named "Joe" on the new Windows install.) To do this I had to work from an Ubuntu live CD because some of the files were in use. Now the problem: After I did this copying my computer says that I have no authority. Anytime I try to access anything that is part of the operating system (Explorer, Personalize, Control Panel, etc) I get an error message that says I don't have the authority to do this. I am able to access things that aren't part of the OS: Chrome, Firefox, my accounting software, Rockbox, but nothing that is part of the OS. I only copied over the User file, so I didn't mess with the registry or anything, so I have no idea why this should be. Does anyone out in cyberspace have any idea? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • SharePoint Business Connectivity Services (BCS) Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'

    - by g18c
    I am running SharePoint 2010 with SQL 2012, I am trying to get Business Connectivity Services (BCS) running but I am facing a double-hope authentication issue. Everytime I try to connect to the external BCS list created in SharePoint designer, I get the error Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. In the event viewer on the SQL server I see a login failure for an anonymous user from the SP server IP address. Background information below: I have enabled Kerberos under SharePoint Central admin. I have the following AD domain accounts: SP_Farm - main website pool SP_Services - for SharePoint services (including BCS) SQL_Engine - SQL database engine I then created the following with SetSPN: SetSPN -S http/intranet mydomain\SP_Farm SetSPN -S http/intranet.mydomain.local mydomain\SP_Farm SetSPN -S SPSvc/SPS mydomain\SP_Farm SetSPN -S MSSQLSvc/SQL1 mydomain\SQL_DatabaseEngine SetSPN -S MSSQLSvc/SQL1.mydomain.local mydomain\SQL_DatabaseEngine SetSPN -S MSSQLSvc/SQL1:1433 mydomain\SQL_DatabaseEngine SetSPN -S MSSQLSvc/SQL1.mydomain.local:1433 mydomain\SQL_DatabaseEngine I then delegated the AD accounts for any authentication protocol to the following: SP_Farm - SP_Farm (http service type, intranet) SP_Farm - SQL_DatabaseEngine (MSSQLSvc, sql1) SP_Service - SP_Service (SPSvc) SP_Service - SQL_DatabaseEngine (MSSQLSvc, sql1) I have also checked the WFE is being logged on to with Kerberos, with the WFE server event log showing event ID 4624 with Kerberos authentication, this is OK. The SQL is also showing connections authenticated as Kerberos from the WFE with the following query: Select s.session_id, s.login_name, s.host_name, c.auth_scheme from sys.dm_exec_connections c inner join sys.dm_exec_sessions s on c.session_id = s.session_id Despite the above, credentials are not passed from the client through the SharePoint server to the SQL server, only the anonymous account is used. I get the following error in the WFE server for 'BusinessData' ID 8080: Could not open connection using 'data source=sql1.mydomain.local;initial catalog=MSCRM;integrated security=SSPI;pooling=true;persist security info=false' in App Domain '/LM/W3SVC/1848937658/ROOT-1-129922939694071446'. The full exception text is: Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. If I set a username and password with the Secure Store Service and set the external list to use the impersonated credentials, the list works. Any ideas what I have missed and what can be tried next?

    Read the article

  • Authority Information Access local path being ignored

    - by Kevin
    I have a CA set up in Server 2008 R2, and generally it is working, but I can't control the local path/filename it writes its own certificate to for the Authority Information Access publishing. Here's a screen shot of the dialog I'm trying to set this on: From these settings I would expect to get the file: C:\Windows\system32\CertSrv\CertEnroll\DAMNIT.crt But instead I get: C:\Windows\system32\CertSrv\CertEnroll\SERVER.domain.com_My Issuing Authority(1).crt Of course, the actual change shown wouldn't be very useful, but it's illustrative; no matter what path/filename I use, it always lands up in the same place and with the same name. I actually wanted to change the name from <ServerDNSName>_<CaName><CertificateName>.crt to <CaName><CertificateName>.crt, since the latter corresponds to the HTTP URL whereas the former does not. Admittedly, I haven't set up many CAs so perhaps I'm just deluded as to what this dialog is supposed to be setting, but if so this is notoriously bad UI design. (Incidentally, I have a couple other complaints with the same dialog.) What's going on here and is there some way to get the filename pattern I want?

    Read the article

  • Reoccurring error "The current identity (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE) does not have write access to

    - by tuseau
    Hi, I keep receiving this error in my ASP.NET web app (below). I give the Network Service account rights to the specified folder, it runs fine for a while, but then within a day or two the error reoccurs, as the Network Service account has been removed from the rights for the folder. Adding it again fixes it, but why does it keep reocurring? Could it be anything to do with using Interop components (such as WMI)? Here's the full error: Server Error in '/DriveMonitor' Application. The current identity (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE) does not have write access to 'C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\Temporary ASP.NET Files'. Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.Web.HttpException: The current identity (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE) does not have write access to 'C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\Temporary ASP.NET Files'. Source Error: An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below. Stack Trace: [HttpException (0x80004005): The current identity (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE) does not have write access to 'C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\Temporary ASP.NET Files'.] System.Web.HttpRuntime.SetUpCodegenDirectory(CompilationSection compilationSection) +8918190 System.Web.HttpRuntime.HostingInit(HostingEnvironmentFlags hostingFlags) +152 [HttpException (0x80004005): The current identity (NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE) does not have write access to 'C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\Temporary ASP.NET Files'.] System.Web.HttpRuntime.FirstRequestInit(HttpContext context) +8890735 System.Web.HttpRuntime.EnsureFirstRequestInit(HttpContext context) +85 System.Web.HttpRuntime.ProcessRequestInternal(HttpWorkerRequest wr) +259

    Read the article

  • Install new root certificate authority (CA) in windows

    - by er4z0r
    I am trying to use ninite to get my new laptop set up quickly. However when I try to install, windows complains about the CA. The website ninite.com also shows certificate problems. They use a root CA (COMODO Certification Authority) that is not included into windows 7 by default. However I am not able to install that CA. I can view the certrification path for the ninite.com cert. I can view the cert for COMODO. However I cannot see any option to install it. Any clues?

    Read the article

  • Validating SSL clients using a list of authorised certificates instead of a Certificate Authority

    - by Gavin Brown
    Is it possible to configure Apache (or any other SSL-aware server) to only accept connections from clients presenting a certificate from a pre-defined list? These certificates may be signed by any CA (and may be self-signed). A while back I tried to get client certificate validation working in the EPP system of the domain registry I work for. The EPP protocol spec mandates use of "mutual strong client-server authentication". In practice, this means that both the client and the server must validate the certificate of the other peer in the session. We created a private certificate authority and asked registrars to submit CSRs, which we then signed. This seemed to us to be the simplest solution, but many of our registrars objected: they were used to obtaining a client certificate from a CA, and submitting that certificate to the registry. So we had to scrap the system. I have been trying to find a way of implementing this system in our server, which is based on the mod_epp module for Apache.

    Read the article

  • SQLServer 2008 Fails to start under NT AUTHORITY/NETWORK SERVICE account

    - by braincells2pixels
    Not sure what changed but looks like my security credentials have been monkeyed with. Since yesterday evening after I disconnected from our corporate network and rebooted my laptop at home, I am unable to start the instance of SQL2K8. The service is set to run under NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE account. The event log records an Access Denied error on the Master.mdf. Switching the account to Local System starts the service but our application runs into security errors. Any clues? TIA

    Read the article

  • Understanding Security Certificates (and thier pricing)

    - by John Robertson
    I work at a very small company so certificate costs need to be absolutely minimal. However for some applications we do Need to have our customers get that warm fuzzy not-using-a-self-signed certificate feeling. Since creating a "certificate authority" with makecert really just means creating a public/private key pair, it seems pretty clear that creating a public/private key pair FROM such a "certificate authority" really just means generating a second public/private key pair and signing both with the private key that belongs to the "certificate authority". Since the keys are signed anyone can verify they came from the certificate authority I created, or if verisign gave me the pair they sign it with one of their own private keys, and anyone can use verisigns corresponding public key to confirm verisign as the source of the keys. Given this I don't understand when I go to verisign or godaddy why they have rates only for yearly plans, when all I really want from them is a single public/private key pair signed with one of their private keys (so that anyone else can use their public keys to confirm that, yes, they gave me that public/private key pair and they confirmed I was who I said I was so you can trust my public/private key pair as belonging to a legitimate third party). Clearly I am misunderstanding something, what is it? Does verisign retire their public/private key pairs periodically so that my verisign signed key pair "expires" and I need new ones? Edit: I learned that the certificate has an internal expiration date and it also maintains an internal value stating whether it can be used to sign other certificates (i.e. sign other private/public key pairs stored as certificates). Can't I get a few (even one) non-signing certificate signed by someone like verisign that I can use for authentication/encryption without a yearly subscription?

    Read the article

  • Root certificate authority works windows/linux but not mac osx - (malformed)

    - by AKwhat
    I have created a self-signed root certificate authority which if I install onto windows, linux, or even using the certificate store in firefox (windows/linux/macosx) will work perfectly with my terminating proxy. I have installed it into the system keychain and I have set the certificate to always trust. Within the chrome browser details it says "The certificate that Chrome received during this connection attempt is not formatted correctly, so Chrome cannot use it to protect your information. Error type: Malformed certificate" I used this code to create the certificate: openssl genrsa -des3 -passout pass:***** -out private/server.key 4096 openssl req -batch -passin pass:***** -new -x509 -nodes -sha1 -days 3600 -key private/server.key -out server.crt -config ../openssl.cnf If the issue is NOT that it is malformed (because it works everywhere else) then what else could it be? Am I installing it incorrectly? To be clear: Within the windows/linux OS, all browsers work perfectly. Within mac only firefox works if it uses its internal certificate store and not the keychain. It's the keychain method of importing a certificate that causes the issue. Thus, all browsers using the keychain will not work. Root CA Cert: -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- **some base64 stuff** -----END CERTIFICATE----- Intermediate CA Cert: Certificate: Data: Version: 3 (0x2) Serial Number: 1 (0x1) Signature Algorithm: sha1WithRSAEncryption Issuer: C=*****, ST=*******, L=******, O=*******, CN=******/emailAddress=****** Validity Not Before: May 21 13:57:32 2014 GMT Not After : Jun 20 13:57:32 2014 GMT Subject: C=*****, ST=********, O=*******, CN=*******/emailAddress=******* Subject Public Key Info: Public Key Algorithm: rsaEncryption RSA Public Key: (4096 bit) Modulus (4096 bit): 00:e7:2d:75:38:23:02:8e:b9:8d:2f:33:4c:2a:11: 6d:d4:f8:29:ab:f3:fc:12:00:0f:bb:34:ec:35:ed: a5:38:10:1e:f3:54:c2:69:ae:3b:22:c0:0d:00:97: 08:da:b9:c9:32:c0:c6:b1:8b:22:7e:53:ea:69:e2: 6d:0f:bd:f5:96:b2:d0:0d:b2:db:07:ba:f1:ce:53: 8a:5e:e0:22:ce:3e:36:ed:51:63:21:e7:45:ad:f9: 4d:9b:8f:7f:33:4c:ed:fc:a6:ac:16:70:f5:96:36: 37:c8:65:47:d1:d3:12:70:3e:8d:2f:fb:9f:94:e0: c9:5f:d0:8c:30:e0:04:23:38:22:e5:d9:84:15:b8: 31:e7:a7:28:51:b8:7f:01:49:fb:88:e9:6c:93:0e: 63:eb:66:2b:b4:a0:f0:31:33:8b:b4:04:84:1f:9e: d5:ed:23:cc:bf:9b:8e:be:9a:5c:03:d6:4f:1a:6f: 2d:8f:47:60:6c:89:c5:f0:06:df:ac:cb:26:f8:1a: 48:52:5e:51:a0:47:6a:30:e8:bc:88:8b:fd:bb:6b: c9:03:db:c2:46:86:c0:c5:a5:45:5b:a9:a3:61:35: 37:e9:fc:a1:7b:ae:71:3a:5c:9c:52:84:dd:b2:86: b3:2e:2e:7a:5b:e1:40:34:4a:46:f0:f8:43:26:58: 30:87:f9:c6:c9:bc:b4:73:8b:fc:08:13:33:cc:d0: b7:8a:31:e9:38:a3:a9:cc:01:e2:d4:c2:a5:c1:55: 52:72:52:2b:06:a3:36:30:0c:5c:29:1a:dd:14:93: 2b:9d:bf:ac:c1:2d:cd:3f:89:1f:bc:ad:a4:f2:bd: 81:77:a9:f4:f0:b9:50:9e:fb:f5:da:ee:4e:b7:66: e5:ab:d1:00:74:29:6f:01:28:32:ea:7d:3f:b3:d7: 97:f2:60:63:41:0f:30:6a:aa:74:f4:63:4f:26:7b: 71:ed:57:f1:d4:99:72:61:f4:69:ad:31:82:76:67: 21:e1:32:2f:e8:46:d3:28:61:b1:10:df:4c:02:e5: d3:cc:22:30:a4:bb:81:10:dc:7d:49:94:b2:02:2d: 96:7f:e5:61:fa:6b:bd:22:21:55:97:82:18:4e:b5: a0:67:2b:57:93:1c:ef:e5:d2:fb:52:79:95:13:11: 20:06:8c:fb:e7:0b:fd:96:08:eb:17:e6:5b:b5:a0: 8d:dd:22:63:99:af:ad:ce:8c:76:14:9a:31:55:d7: 95:ea:ff:10:6f:7c:9c:21:00:5e:be:df:b0:87:75: 5d:a6:87:ca:18:94:e7:6a:15:fe:27:dd:28:5e:c0: ad:d2:91:d3:2d:8e:c3:c0:9f:fb:ff:c0:36:7e:e2: d7:bc:41 Exponent: 65537 (0x10001) X509v3 extensions: X509v3 Subject Alternative Name: DNS:localhost, DNS:dropbox.com, DNS:*.dropbox.com, DNS:filedropper.com, DNS:*.filedropper.com X509v3 Subject Key Identifier: F3:E5:38:5B:3C:AF:1C:73:C1:4C:7D:8B:C8:A1:03:82:65:0D:FF:45 X509v3 Authority Key Identifier: keyid:2B:37:39:7B:9F:45:14:FE:F8:BC:CA:E0:6E:B4:5F:D6:1A:2B:D7:B0 DirName:/C=****/ST=******/L=*******/O=*******/CN=******/emailAddress=******* serial:EE:8C:A3:B4:40:90:B0:62 X509v3 Basic Constraints: CA:TRUE Signature Algorithm: sha1WithRSAEncryption 46:2a:2c:e0:66:e3:fa:c6:80:b6:81:e7:db:c3:29:ab:e7:1c: f0:d9:a0:b7:a9:57:8c:81:3e:30:8f:7d:ef:f7:ed:3c:5f:1e: a5:f6:ae:09:ab:5e:63:b4:f6:d6:b6:ac:1c:a0:ec:10:19:ce: dd:5a:62:06:b4:88:5a:57:26:81:8e:38:b9:0f:26:cd:d9:36: 83:52:ec:df:f4:63:ce:a1:ba:d4:1c:ec:b6:66:ed:f0:32:0e: 25:87:79:fa:95:ee:0f:a0:c6:2d:8f:e9:fb:11:de:cf:26:fa: 59:fa:bd:0b:74:76:a6:5d:41:0d:cd:35:4e:ca:80:58:2a:a8: 5d:e4:d8:cf:ef:92:8d:52:f9:f2:bf:65:50:da:a8:10:1b:5e: 50:a7:7e:57:7b:94:7f:5c:74:2e:80:ae:1e:24:5f:0b:7b:7e: 19:b6:b5:bd:9d:46:5a:e8:47:43:aa:51:b3:4b:3f:12:df:7f: ef:65:21:85:c2:f6:83:84:d0:8d:8b:d9:6d:a8:f9:11:d4:65: 7d:8f:28:22:3c:34:bb:99:4e:14:89:45:a4:62:ed:52:b1:64: 9a:fd:08:cd:ff:ca:9e:3b:51:81:33:e6:37:aa:cb:76:01:90: d1:39:6f:6a:8b:2d:f5:07:f8:f4:2a:ce:01:37:ba:4b:7f:d4: 62:d7:d6:66:b8:78:ad:0b:23:b6:2e:b0:9a:fc:0f:8c:4c:29: 86:a0:bc:33:71:e5:7f:aa:3e:0e:ca:02:e1:f6:88:f0:ff:a2: 04:5a:f5:d7:fe:7d:49:0a:d2:63:9c:24:ed:02:c7:4d:63:e6: 0c:e1:04:cd:a4:bf:a8:31:d3:10:db:b4:71:48:f7:1a:1b:d9: eb:a7:2e:26:00:38:bd:a8:96:b4:83:09:c9:3d:79:90:e1:61: 2c:fc:a0:2c:6b:7d:46:a8:d7:17:7f:ae:60:79:c1:b6:5c:f9: 3c:84:64:7b:7f:db:e9:f1:55:04:6e:b5:d3:5e:d3:e3:13:29: 3f:0b:03:f2:d7:a8:30:02:e1:12:f4:ae:61:6f:f5:4b:e9:ed: 1d:33:af:cd:9b:43:42:35:1a:d4:f6:b9:fb:bf:c9:8d:6c:30: 25:33:43:49:32:43:a5:a8:d8:82:ef:b0:a6:bd:8b:fb:b6:ed: 72:fd:9a:8f:00:3b:97:a3:35:a4:ad:26:2f:a9:7d:74:08:82: 26:71:40:f9:9b:01:14:2e:82:fb:2f:c0:11:51:00:51:07:f9: e1:f6:1f:13:6e:03:ee:d7:85:c2:64:ce:54:3f:15:d4:d7:92: 5f:87:aa:1e:b4:df:51:77:12:04:d2:a5:59:b3:26:87:79:ce: ee:be:60:4e:87:20:5c:7f -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- **some base64 stuff** -----END CERTIFICATE-----

    Read the article

  • Windows telling me, the local security authority is internally inconsistent upon mounting a network drive

    - by acme
    Since ages I've mounted a network share (via samba to a Linux machine) in Windows 7 to access it via drive letter. This worked flawlessly so far. Until now. Suddenly I couldn't access the drive anymore. Windows was telling me the network name (I didn't remember the exact term) was already in use. So I disconnected and tried to connect again: net use Y: \\10.10.10.208\work After a long time I get a message saying "The Local Security Authority (LSA) database contains an internal inconsistency" A restart didn't help. The mapped share is accessible (works on other machines in the same network), so obviously something strange is going on on my machine. Can anyone tell me how I can fix this inconsistency? Update: All machines that have saved the login information refuse with this error. So it must be something with the authorization. When I use net use Y: \\10.10.10.208\work /user:raphael it prompts me for the password and then returns that error message.

    Read the article

  • “NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON” error in Windows 7 (ASP.NET & Web Service)

    - by Tony_Henrich
    I have an asp.net web app which works fine in Windows XP machine in a domain. I am porting it to a Windows 7 stand alone machine. The app uses a web service which makes a call to sql server. The web server (IIS 7.5) and SQL Server are on the same stand alone machine. I enabled Windows authentication for the website and web service. The web service uses a trusted connection connection string. The web service credentials uses System.Net.CredentialCache.DefaultCredentials. I noticed username, password and domainname are blank after the call! The webservice and web site use the 'Classic .NET AppPool' with NetworkServices identity. I am getting an exception "NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON" in the database call in the web service. I am assuming it's related to the blank credentials. I am expecting ASPNET user to be the security token to the database. Why is this not happening? Did I miss a setting? (Usually this happens when sql server and web server are on two different machines in a domain, delegation & double hopping, but in my case everything is on a dev box)

    Read the article

  • How can i control how much Authority RRs a DNS answer returns ?

    - by Benoît
    Hello, i quite don't understand Authority RRs. Using dig to resolve some random A records, my caching DNS server sometimes also return Authority RRs and sometimes not. The number and the type of the returned Authority RRs also vary a lot. What does control whether Authority RRs are returned or not on a standard client query ? Is it a client or server setting ? What does control how many Authoriy RRs are returned ? What does control of the type of the Authority RRs records returned ? Sometimes it's multiple NS, sometimes it's a SOA. It's also often comes with Additional RRs of type A about the Authority RRs NS returned. I'm really looking for a RFC or kind of describing this. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE'.

    - by kumar
    Hi Guys, i tried to open the website from broswer project is deployed at IIS i am getting this exception Exception information: Exception type: SqlException Exception message: Cannot open database "TestDB" requested by the login. The login failed. Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE'. any solution? Regards kumar

    Read the article

  • User.Identity.Name returning NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE i want Domain\USER

    - by Jalvemo
    in my asp.net MVC project i have an database connection with connectionstring: Data Source=.;Initial Catalog=dbname;Integrated Security=True All users can execute Stored Procedures on that connection and i want to log those users. so after each execution I store "User.Identity.Name" to another database. This work great on my development machine but after deployment, to access the site i have to go through a VPN-connention and then remote desktop to the same server that the IIS is running on and use a web-browser there. Then i get User.Identity.Name: "NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE". i would expect it to be the credentials i entered in remote desktop that have access to the database. any idea how i can get this to work? iis6 authentication: "windows authentication: enabled" web.config:

    Read the article

  • Generated PersonController expects Authority to contain word ROLE

    - by Chip L
    I'm brand new to acegi and relatively new to Grails. I just followed the tutorial to set up a new role and a new user. Every time I saved the user (with a role checked), it saved the user information fine, but not the role associated with the user. I finally dug into the controller code that was generated, and noticed this: private void addRoles(person) { for (String key in params.keySet()) { if (key.contains('ROLE') && 'on' == params.get(key)) { Authority.findByAuthority(key).addToPeople(person) } } } So to be sure I was interpreting it correctly, I added the word ROLE to my authorties, and it worked like a charm. Am I missing something obvious, is this a bug, or.......? The examples showed simple role names like "user" or "manager".

    Read the article

  • Understanding Security Certificates (and thier pricing)

    - by John Robertson
    I work at a very small company so certificate costs need to be absolutely minimal. However for some applications we do Need to have our customers get that warm fuzzy not-using-a-self-signed certificate feeling. Since creating a "certificate authority" with makecert really just means creating a public/private key pair, it seems pretty clear that creating a public/private key pair FROM such a "certificate authority" really just means generating a second public/private key pair and signing both with the private key that belongs to the "certificate authority". Since the keys are signed anyone can verify they came from the certificate authority I created, or if verisign gave me the pair they sign it with one of their own private keys, and anyone can use verisigns corresponding public key to confirm verisign as the source of the keys. Given this I don't understand when I go to verisign or godaddy why they have rates only for yearly plans, when all I really want from them is a single public/private key pair signed with one of their private keys (so that anyone else can use their public keys to confirm that, yes, they gave me that public/private key pair and they confirmed I was who I said I was so you can trust my public/private key pair as belonging to a legitimate third party). Clearly I am misunderstanding something, what is it? Does verisign retire their public/private key pairs periodically so that my verisign signed key pair "expires" and I need new ones?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 R2 creating a multi-year client certificate using the IIS certsrv page while deploying SSTP VPN

    - by Warren P
    I am trying to follow instructions on Technet about deploying a Standard (non-enterprise) SSTP based VPN) that were originally written for Server 2008, but I am using Server 2008 R2, I have gotten as far as the part where it asks you to create a request a Server Authentication certificate. I have deployed IIS, and Active Directory Certificate Services, and chose "Standalone" and "Standard" (non-enterprise) Certificate Authority because I don't have an OID and don't think I should have to get one for a simple deployment of SSTP. The resulting certificates made by the Certification Authority "Issue" command, only have a 1 year period of validity, I want a multi-year certificate. At no point in this process is there any way to input this information unless it's through the Attributes text input area on the Advance Certificate Request page, which appears to be generated using an old ActiveX control, which means I can only do this using the workarounds in the article that I linked at the top, and only using Internet Explorer. Update:: It may be that this question is pointless since self-signed keys do not appear to work, when I try them, using Windows 8 as the VPN client. The problem is that the keys that are self-created by the technique shown here do not have any Certificate Revocation Server URLs and so you get an error "The revocation function was unable to check revocation", and the VPN connection fails.

    Read the article

  • "NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON" error in Windows 7 (ASP.NET & Web Service)

    - by Tony_Henrich
    I have an asp.net web app which works fine in Windows XP machine in a domain. I am porting it to a Windows 7 stand alone machine. The app uses a web service which makes a call to sql server. The web server (IIS 7.5) and SQL Server are on the same stand alone machine. I enabled Windows authentication for the website and web service. The web service uses a trusted connection connection string. The web service credentials uses System.Net.CredentialCache.DefaultCredentials. I noticed username, password and domainname are blank after the call! The webservice and web site use an application pool with identity "Network Service". I am getting an exception "NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON" in the database call in the web service. I am assuming it's related to the blank credentials. I am expecting ASPNET user to be the security token to the database. Why is this not happening? (Usually this happens when sql server and web server are on two different machines in a domain, delegation & double hopping, but in my case everything is on a dev box)

    Read the article

  • Failover Issuer CAs without Clustering

    - by James Santiago
    I am attempting to setup a Certificate Authority with some failover capabilities for the issuer CAs. I have an offline root CA and am attempting to setup two subordinate CAs on our domain which will handle issuing certificates. I'm trying to determine the architecture needed for these two CAs to allow one to go down and the other to take over without the use of failover clustering, as the two are in different geographic locales. Are there documents regarding this setup?

    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 | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >