Search Results

Search found 22588 results on 904 pages for 'click policy'.

Page 34/904 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • C++ Change image based on a click (Visual Studio C++)

    - by Jimbo
    In visual studio, when making a C++ windows application form. I want a picture to change when I click on it. So when I double click the picture and it brings up the click action script, what script do I use..... Similiar to int temp = System::Int32::Parse(label1->Text); temp++; label1->Text = temp.ToString(); Which just increments an integer in a label

    Read the article

  • how to avoid jQuery UI draggable from also triggering click event

    - by James Tauber
    A have a large div (a map) that is draggable via jQuery UI draggable. The div has child divs which are clickable. My problem is that if you drag the map, on mouse up, the click event is fired on whatever child div you started the drag from. How do I stop the mouse up from triggering the click event if its part of a drag (as opposed to someone just clicking without a drag, in which case the click event is desired).

    Read the article

  • Form allow click-through in C#

    - by Tommy
    Hey, so I have a form, and i've set it to semi-transparent. i'd like for people to be able to click on the forms area, and the form not handle the click, but instead whatever is underneath it handle the click. is this possible?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET button click event still firing even through custom server-side validation fails

    - by Josh
    I am having a problem where my button click event is still firing even though my custom server-side validation is set to args.IsValid = false. I am debugging through the code and the validation is definitely being fired before the button click, and args.IsValid is definitely being set to false once the custom validation takes place, but it always makes its way to the button click event afterwards. Any ideas on why this is?

    Read the article

  • on .bind('click') it is not deleting the first div

    - by Jean
    Hello, When I click on a particular div, that div should fade out, simple, but when I click on one of the divs it deletes the div on top of the stack. ie., when I click #sel6 it removes sel5 html code <div id="selc" class="selc" style="position:absolute; left:15px; top:200px; width:260px;"> <div id="sel5" class="sel">something</div> <div id="sel6" class="sel">something</div> <div id="sel7" class="sel">something</div> </div jquery code sel_id, sel_1 are variables $('.selc').bind('click',function(){ var sel_id = $('.sel').attr('id'); alert(sel_id); $('#'+sel_id).fadeOut('slow'); $('#'+sel_id).remove(); $('.search_box').append(sel_1); }); Thanks Jean

    Read the article

  • JavaScript - Multiple signals received after click

    - by Angelo A
    I'm creating a webapp using jQueryMobile. When I'm using the app and I click a button it runs the script multiple times. For example: I have a submit button: <input type="submit" id="login-normal" value="Login" /> And I have this JavaScript for debugging on which this error occurs: $("input#login-normal").live('click',function() { console.log("Test"); }); On the very first click it works (and it goes to another screen for example), but when I go back to that screen and I click again, it outputs multiple console.logs

    Read the article

  • jquery for loop on click image swap

    - by user2939914
    I've created a for loop of images. I would like each image to swap with another image on click individually. Here's the jQuery I've written so far: for ( var i = 1; i < 50; i++) { $('article').append('<div class="ps-block" id="' + i + '"><img src="img/bw/' + i + 'bw.png"></div>'); } $('img').click(function() { var imgid = $(this).attr('id'); $(this).attr("src", "img/color/" + imgid + ".png"); }); I also attempted to use this code inside the for loop after the append, but i ends up returning 50 every time you click since the loop has already ran: $('img[src="img/bw/' + i + 'bw.png"]').click(function() { $(this).attr("src", "img/color/" + this.id + ".png"); }); Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Click() works in IE but not Firefox

    - by Tom Andrews
    I have code which is trivial but only works in IE not Firefox. $(document).ready(function(){ $('li#first').click(); }); I have also tried: document.getElementById('first').click(); But that doesn't work either. Is this an IE bug/feature or is click() not supported in the other browsers? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • update dialog title for each click

    - by Scarface
    Hey guys I have a quick question, I have a dialog box that has multiple links with different attributes. Each time a link is clicked, the attribute src is printed inside of the dialog box so that each link has a unique output in the dialog. My problem is simply that only the first src title is in every box and I would like to change that as well with each click. I separated the line containing title to show the problem. If anyone has any ideas I would appreciate it. <a class="open" src="something" title="Click to play">link</a> <a class="open" src="something else" title="Click to play">link2</a> $('.open').click(function() { src=$(this).attr('src'); $('#show').html(''+src+''); $(\"#show\").dialog({hide: 'clip', width: 400,height: 150,position: 'center', show: 'clip',stack: true,title: ''+src+'', minHeight: 25, minWidth: 100, autoOpen: false,resizable:false}); $('#show').dialog('open'); })

    Read the article

  • HTML - Javascript: I cannot click on the links on top in IE7

    - by Patrick
    hi, I cannot click on the links (tags) on top of the page in IE7. I tried to change z-index of the elements but it doesn't work. Could you tell me what's wrong with it ? http://www.sanstitre.ch/drupal/portfolio?tid[0]=38 The mouse click is handled by jQuery function .click() I'm sure javascript works because" Hide - Alphabetical Order menus" work thanks

    Read the article

  • jQuery responds to click() differently for user and programmatic triggers

    - by Moss
    Here's the code: this.Form.find("input[type=checkbox]").click(function(event) { if ($(this).is(":checked")) { console.log("checked"); } else { console.log("unchecked"); } }); If the checkbox is not checked, and I click with the mouse, I get "checked". If I trigger it programmatically like $("#someCheckbox").click(), I get "unchecked". How to make the two behave the same way?

    Read the article

  • How to pass Button.Click into a function?

    - by Achilles
    I have a function that adds eventhandlers to control events. Right now I have several overloads that add events to different types of controls: Public Sub AddEventHandler(Button, ButtonEvent) 'adds event handling for Button.Click public Sub AddEventHandler(LinkButton, ButtonEvent)'adds event handling for LinkButton.Click The problem is I want to write a function that is more robust like: Public sub AddEventHandler(Control, EventToHandle, ControlEvent) where EventToHandle is the parameter representing Button.Click or whatever event that Button has associated with it. Any suggestions guys? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • click event being fired twice - jquery

    - by maxp
    I have the following simplified html: <div class="foo" style="width:200px; height:200px;"> <input type="checkbox" /> </div> <script type="text/javascript"> $('.foo').click(function(){$(this).find('input:checkbox')[0].click();}); </script> Clicking the 200x200 div 'foo' works well, and raises the click event for the checkbox inside it. However when I exactly click the checkbox itself, it fires its 'normal' event, plus the jquery bound event above, meaning the checkbox checks itself, then unchecks itself again. Is there a tidy way to prevent this from happening?

    Read the article

  • jquery ui dialog change position after first click

    - by user1958218
    I am using jquery uimodaldialog and this is setting $("#dialog").dialog({ autoOpen : false, minWidth : 700, show : { effect : "fade", duration : 1000 }, hide : { effect : "fade", duration : 1000 }, close : function(event, ui) { }, }); I am calling with this $('.mylink').on('click', function() { $( "#dialog" ).dialog( "open"); Now on first click it shows at center of page . if I click again then it goes about 200px upwards. On further clicking it says there

    Read the article

  • [jquery] Different function for same class on 'click' / 'dblclick'

    - by Shishant
    Hello, This are my two functions, on single click it works fine, but on dblclick both functions execute, any idea? I tried using live instead of delegate but still both functions execute on dblclick // Change Status on click $(".todoBox").delegate("li", "click", function() { var id = $(this).attr("id"); $.ajax({ //ajax stuff }); return false; }); // Double Click to Delete $(".todoBox").delegate("li", "dblclick", function(){ var id = $(this).attr("id"); $.ajax({ //ajax stuff }); return false; });

    Read the article

  • What is New in ASP.NET 4.0 Code Access Security

    - by Xiaohong
    ASP.NET Code Access Security (CAS) is a feature that helps protect server applications on hosting multiple Web sites, ASP.NET lets you assign a configurable trust level that corresponds to a predefined set of permissions. ASP.NET has predefined ASP.NET Trust Levels and Policy Files that you can assign to applications, you also can assign custom trust level and policy files. Most web hosting companies run ASP.NET applications in Medium Trust to prevent that one website affect or harm another site etc. As .NET Framework's Code Access Security model has evolved, ASP.NET 4.0 Code Access Security also has introduced several changes and improvements. The main change in ASP.NET 4.0 CAS In ASP.NET v4.0 partial trust applications, application domain can have a default partial trust permission set as opposed to being full-trust, the permission set name is defined in the <trust /> new attribute permissionSetName that is used to initialize the application domain . By default, the PermissionSetName attribute value is "ASP.Net" which is the name of the permission set you can find in all predefined partial trust configuration files. <trust level="Something" permissionSetName="ASP.Net" /> This is ASP.NET 4.0 new CAS model. For compatibility ASP.NET 4.0 also support legacy CAS model where application domain still has full trust permission set. You can specify new legacyCasModel attribute on the <trust /> element to indicate whether the legacy CAS model is enabled. By default legacyCasModel is false which means that new 4.0 CAS model is the default. <trust level="Something" legacyCasModel="true|false" /> In .Net FX 4.0 Config directory, there are two set of predefined partial trust config files for each new CAS model and legacy CAS model, trust config files with name legacy.XYZ.config are for legacy CAS model: New CAS model: Legacy CAS model: web_hightrust.config legacy.web_hightrust.config web_mediumtrust.config legacy.web_mediumtrust.config web_lowtrust.config legacy.web_lowtrust.config web_minimaltrust.config legacy.web_minimaltrust.config   The figure below shows in ASP.NET 4.0 new CAS model what permission set to grant to code for partial trust application using predefined partial trust levels and policy files:    There also some benefits that comes with the new CAS model: You can lock down a machine by making all managed code no-execute by default (e.g. setting the MyComputer zone to have no managed execution code permissions), it should still be possible to configure ASP.NET web applications to run as either full-trust or partial trust. UNC share doesn’t require full trust with CASPOL at machine-level CAS policy. Side effect that comes with the new CAS model: processRequestInApplicationTrust attribute is deprecated  in new CAS model since application domain always has partial trust permission set in new CAS model.   In ASP.NET 4.0 legacy CAS model or ASP.NET 2.0 CAS model, even though you assign partial trust level to a application but the application domain still has full trust permission set. The figure below shows in ASP.NET 4.0 legacy CAS model (or ASP.NET 2.0 CAS model) what permission set to grant to code for partial trust application using predefined partial trust levels and policy files:     What $AppDirUrl$, $CodeGen$, $Gac$ represents: $AppDirUrl$ The application's virtual root directory. This allows permissions to be applied to code that is located in the application's bin directory. For example, if a virtual directory is mapped to C:\YourWebApp, then $AppDirUrl$ would equate to C:\YourWebApp. $CodeGen$ The directory that contains dynamically generated assemblies (for example, the result of .aspx page compiles). This can be configured on a per application basis and defaults to %windir%\Microsoft.NET\Framework\{version}\Temporary ASP.NET Files. $CodeGen$ allows permissions to be applied to dynamically generated assemblies. $Gac$ Any assembly that is installed in the computer's global assembly cache (GAC). This allows permissions to be granted to strong named assemblies loaded from the GAC by the Web application.   The new customization of CAS Policy in ASP.NET 4.0 new CAS model 1. Define which named permission set in partial trust configuration files By default the permission set that will be assigned at application domain initialization time is the named "ASP.Net" permission set found in all predefined partial trust configuration files. However ASP.NET 4.0 allows you set PermissionSetName attribute to define which named permission set in a partial trust configuration file should be the one used to initialize an application domain. Example: add "ASP.Net_2" named permission set in partial trust configuration file: <PermissionSet class="NamedPermissionSet" version="1" Name="ASP.Net_2"> <IPermission class="FileIOPermission" version="1" Read="$AppDir$" PathDiscovery="$AppDir$" /> <IPermission class="ReflectionPermission" version="1" Flags ="RestrictedMemberAccess" /> <IPermission class="SecurityPermission " version="1" Flags ="Execution, ControlThread, ControlPrincipal, RemotingConfiguration" /></PermissionSet> Then you can use "ASP.Net_2" named permission set for the application domain permission set: <trust level="Something" legacyCasModel="false" permissionSetName="ASP.Net_2" /> 2. Define a custom set of Full Trust Assemblies for an application By using the new fullTrustAssemblies element to configure a set of Full Trust Assemblies for an application, you can modify set of partial trust assemblies to full trust at the machine, site or application level. The configuration definition is shown below: <fullTrustAssemblies> <add assemblyName="MyAssembly" version="1.1.2.3" publicKey="hex_char_representation_of_key_blob" /></fullTrustAssemblies> 3. Define <CodeGroup /> policy in partial trust configuration files ASP.NET 4.0 new CAS model will retain the ability for developers to optionally define <CodeGroup />with membership conditions and assigned permission sets. The specific restriction in ASP.NET 4.0 new CAS model though will be that the results of evaluating custom policies can only result in one of two outcomes: either an assembly is granted full trust, or an assembly is granted the partial trust permission set currently associated with the running application domain. It will not be possible to use custom policies to create additional custom partial trust permission sets. When parsing the partial trust configuration file: Any assemblies that match to code groups associated with "PermissionSet='FullTrust'" will run at full trust. Any assemblies that match to code groups associated with "PermissionSet='Nothing'" will result in a PolicyError being thrown from the CLR. This is acceptable since it provides administrators with a way to do a blanket-deny of managed code followed by selectively defining policy in a <CodeGroup /> that re-adds assemblies that would be allowed to run. Any assemblies that match to code groups associated with other permissions sets will be interpreted to mean the assembly should run at the permission set of the appdomain. This means that even though syntactically a developer could define additional "flavors" of partial trust in an ASP.NET partial trust configuration file, those "flavors" will always be ignored. Example: defines full trust in <CodeGroup /> for my strong named assemblies in partial trust config files: <CodeGroup class="FirstMatchCodeGroup" version="1" PermissionSetName="Nothing"> <IMembershipCondition    class="AllMembershipCondition"    version="1" /> <CodeGroup    class="UnionCodeGroup"    version="1"    PermissionSetName="FullTrust"    Name="My_Strong_Name"    Description="This code group grants code signed full trust. "> <IMembershipCondition      class="StrongNameMembershipCondition" version="1"       PublicKeyBlob="hex_char_representation_of_key_blob" /> </CodeGroup> <CodeGroup   class="UnionCodeGroup" version="1" PermissionSetName="ASP.Net">   <IMembershipCondition class="UrlMembershipCondition" version="1" Url="$AppDirUrl$/*" /> </CodeGroup> <CodeGroup class="UnionCodeGroup" version="1" PermissionSetName="ASP.Net">   <IMembershipCondition class="UrlMembershipCondition" version="1" Url="$CodeGen$/*"   /> </CodeGroup></CodeGroup>   4. Customize CAS policy at runtime in ASP.NET 4.0 new CAS model ASP.NET 4.0 new CAS model allows to customize CAS policy at runtime by using custom HostSecurityPolicyResolver that overrides the ASP.NET code access security policy. Example: use custom host security policy resolver to resolve partial trust web application bin folder MyTrustedAssembly.dll to full trust at runtime: You can create a custom host security policy resolver and compile it to assembly MyCustomResolver.dll with strong name enabled and deploy in GAC: public class MyCustomResolver : HostSecurityPolicyResolver{ public override HostSecurityPolicyResults ResolvePolicy(Evidence evidence) { IEnumerator hostEvidence = evidence.GetHostEnumerator(); while (hostEvidence.MoveNext()) { object hostEvidenceObject = hostEvidence.Current; if (hostEvidenceObject is System.Security.Policy.Url) { string assemblyName = hostEvidenceObject.ToString(); if (assemblyName.Contains(“MyTrustedAssembly.dll”) return HostSecurityPolicyResult.FullTrust; } } //default fall-through return HostSecurityPolicyResult.DefaultPolicy; }} Because ASP.NET accesses the custom HostSecurityPolicyResolver during application domain initialization, and a custom policy resolver requires full trust, you also can add a custom policy resolver in <fullTrustAssemblies /> , or deploy in the GAC. You also need configure a custom HostSecurityPolicyResolver instance by adding the HostSecurityPolicyResolverType attribute in the <trust /> element: <trust level="Something" legacyCasModel="false" hostSecurityPolicyResolverType="MyCustomResolver, MyCustomResolver" permissionSetName="ASP.Net" />   Note: If an assembly policy define in <CodeGroup/> and also in hostSecurityPolicyResolverType, hostSecurityPolicyResolverType will win. If an assembly added in <fullTrustAssemblies/> then the assembly has full trust no matter what policy in <CodeGroup/> or in hostSecurityPolicyResolverType.   Other changes in ASP.NET 4.0 CAS Use the new transparency model introduced in .Net Framework 4.0 Change in dynamically compiled code generated assemblies by ASP.NET: In new CAS model they will be marked as security transparent level2 to use Framework 4.0 security transparent rule that means partial trust code is treated as completely Transparent and it is more strict enforcement. In legacy CAS model they will be marked as security transparent level1 to use Framework 2.0 security transparent rule for compatibility. Most of ASP.NET products runtime assemblies are also changed to be marked as security transparent level2 to switch to SecurityTransparent code by default unless SecurityCritical or SecuritySafeCritical attribute specified. You also can look at Security Changes in the .NET Framework 4 for more information about these security attributes. Support conditional APTCA If an assembly is marked with the Conditional APTCA attribute to allow partially trusted callers, and if you want to make the assembly both visible and accessible to partial-trust code in your web application, you must add a reference to the assembly in the partialTrustVisibleAssemblies section: <partialTrustVisibleAssemblies> <add assemblyName="MyAssembly" publicKey="hex_char_representation_of_key_blob" />/partialTrustVisibleAssemblies>   Most of ASP.NET products runtime assemblies are also changed to be marked as conditional APTCA to prevent use of ASP.NET APIs in partial trust environments such as Winforms or WPF UI controls hosted in Internet Explorer.   Differences between ASP.NET new CAS model and legacy CAS model: Here list some differences between ASP.NET new CAS model and legacy CAS model ASP.NET 4.0 legacy CAS model  : Asp.net partial trust appdomains have full trust permission Multiple different permission sets in a single appdomain are allowed in ASP.NET partial trust configuration files Code groups Machine CAS policy is honored processRequestInApplicationTrust attribute is still honored    New configuration setting for legacy model: <trust level="Something" legacyCASModel="true" ></trust><partialTrustVisibleAssemblies> <add assemblyName="MyAssembly" publicKey="hex_char_representation_of_key_blob" /></partialTrustVisibleAssemblies>   ASP.NET 4.0 new CAS model: ASP.NET will now run in homogeneous application domains. Only full trust or the app-domain's partial trust grant set, are allowable permission sets. It is no longer possible to define arbitrary permission sets that get assigned to different assemblies. If an application currently depends on fine-tuning the partial trust permission set using the ASP.NET partial trust configuration file, this will no longer be possible. processRequestInApplicationTrust attribute is deprecated Dynamically compiled assemblies output by ASP.NET build providers will be updated to explicitly mark assemblies as transparent. ASP.NET partial trust grant sets will be independent from any enterprise, machine, or user CAS policy levels. A simplified model for locking down web servers that only allows trusted managed web applications to run. Machine policy used to always grant full-trust to managed code (based on membership conditions) can instead be configured using the new ASP.NET 4.0 full-trust assembly configuration section. The full-trust assembly configuration section requires explicitly listing each assembly as opposed to using membership conditions. Alternatively, the membership condition(s) used in machine policy can instead be re-defined in a <CodeGroup /> within ASP.NET's partial trust configuration file to grant full-trust.   New configuration setting for new model: <trust level="Something" legacyCASModel="false" permissionSetName="ASP.Net" hostSecurityPolicyResolverType=".NET type string" ></trust><fullTrustAssemblies> <add assemblyName=”MyAssembly” version=”1.0.0.0” publicKey="hex_char_representation_of_key_blob" /></fullTrustAssemblies><partialTrustVisibleAssemblies> <add assemblyName="MyAssembly" publicKey="hex_char_representation_of_key_blob" /></partialTrustVisibleAssemblies>     Hope this post is helpful to better understand the ASP.Net 4.0 CAS. Xiaohong Tang ASP.NET QA Team

    Read the article

  • Login failed for user 'sa' because the account is currently locked out. The system administrator can

    - by cabhilash
    Login failed for user 'sa' because the account is currently locked out. The system administrator can unlock it. (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 18486) SQL server has local password policies. If policy is enabled which locks down the account after X number of failed attempts then the account is automatically locked down.This error with 'sa' account is very common. sa is default administartor login available with SQL server. So there are chances that an ousider has tried to bruteforce your system. (This can cause even if a legitimate tries to access the account with wrong password.Sometimes a user would have changed the password without informing others. So the other users would try to lo) You can unlock the account with the following options (use another admin account or connect via windows authentication) Alter account & unlock ALTER LOGIN sa WITH PASSWORD='password' UNLOCK Use another account Almost everyone is aware of the sa account. This can be the potential security risk. Even if you provide strong password hackers can lock the account by providing the wrong password. ( You can provide extra security by installing firewall or changing the default port but these measures are not always practical). As a best practice you can disable the sa account and use another account with same privileges.ALTER LOGIN sa DISABLE You can edit the lock-ot options using gpedit.msc( in command prompt type gpedit.msc and press enter). Navigate to Account Lokout policy as shown in the figure The Following options are available Account lockout threshold This security setting determines the number of failed logon attempts that causes a user account to be locked out. A locked-out account cannot be used until it is reset by an administrator or until the lockout duration for the account has expired. You can set a value between 0 and 999 failed logon attempts. If you set the value to 0, the account will never be locked out. Failed password attempts against workstations or member servers that have been locked using either CTRL+ALT+DELETE or password-protected screen savers count as failed logon attempts. Account lockout duration This security setting determines the number of minutes a locked-out account remains locked out before automatically becoming unlocked. The available range is from 0 minutes through 99,999 minutes. If you set the account lockout duration to 0, the account will be locked out until an administrator explicitly unlocks it. If an account lockout threshold is defined, the account lockout duration must be greater than or equal to the reset time. Default: None, because this policy setting only has meaning when an Account lockout threshold is specified. Reset account lockout counter after This security setting determines the number of minutes that must elapse after a failed logon attempt before the failed logon attempt counter is reset to 0 bad logon attempts. The available range is 1 minute to 99,999 minutes. If an account lockout threshold is defined, this reset time must be less than or equal to the Account lockout duration. Default: None, because this policy setting only has meaning when an Account lockout threshold is specified.When creating SQL user you can set CHECK_POLICY=on which will enforce the windows password policy on the account. The following policies will be applied Define the Enforce password history policy setting so that several previous passwords are remembered. With this policy setting, users cannot use the same password when their password expires.  Define the Maximum password age policy setting so that passwords expire as often as necessary for your environment, typically, every 30 to 90 days. With this policy setting, if an attacker cracks a password, the attacker only has access to the network until the password expires.  Define the Minimum password age policy setting so that passwords cannot be changed until they are more than a certain number of days old. This policy setting works in combination with the Enforce password historypolicy setting. If a minimum password age is defined, users cannot repeatedly change their passwords to get around the Enforce password history policy setting and then use their original password. Users must wait the specified number of days to change their passwords.  Define a Minimum password length policy setting so that passwords must consist of at least a specified number of characters. Long passwords--seven or more characters--are usually stronger than short ones. With this policy setting, users cannot use blank passwords, and they have to create passwords that are a certain number of characters long.  Enable the Password must meet complexity requirements policy setting. This policy setting checks all new passwords to ensure that they meet basic strong password requirements.  Password must meet the following complexity requirement, when they are changed or created: Not contain the user's entire Account Name or entire Full Name. The Account Name and Full Name are parsed for delimiters: commas, periods, dashes or hyphens, underscores, spaces, pound signs, and tabs. If any of these delimiters are found, the Account Name or Full Name are split and all sections are verified not to be included in the password. There is no check for any character or any three characters in succession. Contain characters from three of the following five categories:  English uppercase characters (A through Z) English lowercase characters (a through z) Base 10 digits (0 through 9) Non-alphabetic characters (for example, !, $, #, %) A catch-all category of any Unicode character that does not fall under the previous four categories. This fifth category can be regionally specific.

    Read the article

  • How to Secure a Data Role by Multiple Business Units

    - by Elie Wazen
    In this post we will see how a Role can be data secured by multiple Business Units (BUs).  Separate Data Roles are generally created for each BU if a corresponding data template generates roles on the basis of the BU dimension. The advantage of creating a policy with a rule that includes multiple BUs is that while mapping these roles in HCM Role Provisioning Rules, fewer number of entires need to be made. This could facilitate maintenance for enterprises with a large number of Business Units. Note: The example below applies as well if the securing entity is Inventory Organization. Let us take for example the case of a user provisioned with the "Accounts Payable Manager - Vision Operations" Data Role in Fusion Applications. This user will be able to access Invoices in Vision Operations but will not be able to see Invoices in Vision Germany. Figure 1. A User with a Data Role restricting them to Data from BU: Vision Operations With the role granted above, this is what the user will see when they attempt to select Business Units while searching for AP Invoices. Figure 2.The List Of Values of Business Units is limited to single one. This is the effect of the Data Role granted to that user as can be seen in Figure 1 In order to create a data role that secures by multiple BUs,  we need to start by creating a condition that groups those Business Units we want to include in that data role. This is accomplished by creating a new condition against the BU View .  That Condition will later be used to create a data policy for our newly created Role.  The BU View is a Database resource and  is accessed from APM as seen in the search below Figure 3.Viewing a Database Resource in APM The next step is create a new condition,  in which we define a sql predicate that includes 2 BUs ( The ids below refer to Vision Operations and Vision Germany).  At this point we have simply created a standalone condition.  We have not used this condition yet, and security is therefore not affected. Figure 4. Custom Role that inherits the Purchase Order Overview Duty We are now ready to create our Data Policy.  in APM, we search for our newly Created Role and Navigate to “Find Global Policies”.  we query the Role we want to secure and navigate to view its global policies. Figure 5. The Job Role we plan on securing We can see that the role was not defined with a Data Policy . So will create one that uses the condition we created earlier.   Figure 6. Creating a New Data Policy In the General Information tab, we have to specify the DB Resource that the Security Policy applies to:  In our case this is the BU View Figure 7. Data Policy Definition - Selection of the DB Resource we will secure by In the Rules Tab, we  make the rule applicable to multiple values of the DB Resource we selected in the previous tab.  This is where we associate the condition we created against the BU view to this data policy by entering the Condition name in the Condition field Figure 8. Data Policy Rule The last step of Defining the Data Policy, consists of  explicitly selecting  the Actions that are goverened by this Data Policy.  In this case for example we select the Actions displayed below in the right pane. Once the record is saved , we are ready to use our newly secured Data Role. Figure 9. Data Policy Actions We can now see a new Data Policy associated with our Role.  Figure 10. Role is now secured by a Data Policy We now Assign that new Role to the User.  Of course this does not have to be done in OIM and can be done using a Provisioning Rule in HCM. Figure 11. Role assigned to the User who previously was granted the Vision Ops secured role. Once that user accesses the Invoices Workarea this is what they see: In the image below the LOV of Business Unit returns the two values defined in our data policy namely: Vision Operations and Vision Germany Figure 12. The List Of Values of Business Units now includes the two we included in our data policy. This is the effect of the data role granted to that user as can be seen in Figure 11

    Read the article

  • Cannot click send button in Outlook (+ Exchange) for unknown addresses

    - by Graphain
    Hi, I have a very unusual problem. I have Outlook 2010 connected to Exchange 2010. This can send emails perfectly to known addresses (that is, addresses in the address book or ones that have been sent to previously). However, if I put in an address that is unknown, I cannot actually click the Send button in Outlook. (it simply does nothing). Corresponding to this I get errors in the Event Log for each Send click stating "The connection to Microsoft Exchange is unavailable. Outlook must be online or connected to complete this action.". However, Outlook shows as connected the whole time, pings do not break, and I have no reason to suspect it has lost connection. To further complicate matters, Outlook is fine on all other PCs, and this was all perfect until I installed BitDefender on the PC in question and the Exchange Server. Outlook was still fine on these other PCs while BitDefender was installed, but I have removed it from the PC in question and the Server just in case (no success). Summary: Outlook encounters Exchange connectivity issues when sending to unknown (new) email addresses that prevent the Send button actually working at all. This is isolated to one machine and occurred after installation of AV/Firewall software which has since been thoroughly removed. If you have any potential solutions I'd love to hear them, as I will be resorting to reformatting the PC in question, and probably removing Exchange because I'm sick of its issues if I cannot resolve this soon. Big thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Event ID: 861 - The Windows Firewall has detected an application listening for incoming traffic

    - by Chris Marisic
    Firstly, my machines aren't compromised any person suggesting such will be DV'd. The security logs on some of my networks client machines (all Windows Xp Sp3) get filled with these useless error messages. Security Failure Audit Detailed Tracking Event ID: 861 User: NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE The Windows Firewall has detected an application listening for incoming traffic. Name: - Path: C:\WINDOWS\system32\svchost.exe Process identifier: 976 User account: NETWORK SERVICE User domain: NT AUTHORITY Service: Yes RPC server: No IP version: IPv4 IP protocol: UDP Port number: 55035 Allowed: No User notified: No It's always on various random ports of UDP so setting up a port exception isn't really an option. It's always from svchost or lsass both of which are running services from DLLs. One of the most offending processes seems to the be DnsCache. I have in my global policy under AT < Network < Network Connection < Widnows Firewall < Domain Profile (I haven't changed any standard profile options do both need configured? To allow remote administration and desktop exceptions and have a custom program exception list that has %SystemRoot%\system32\svchost.exe:*:enabled:svchost (Windows won't allow you to add this exception on a local machine but it let me have it on here in the global policy it just doesn't seem to do anything) %SystemRoot%\system32\lsass.exe:*enabled:lsass (I think this one ended all of my LSASS messages) %SystemRoot%\system32\dnsrslvr.dll:*:enabled:dnscache (I tried adding the dll itself to the exception list, this didn't seem to do anything) Is there really any other options left other than disabling the Windows Firewall entirely, disabling auditing entirely or just changing the event viewer to just auto overwrite when needed? I'd much rather fix the problem and get rid of these entries ever being created instead of just trying to cover up the problem.

    Read the article

  • DirectAccess Server firewall rules blocking ports

    - by StormPooper
    I have configured DirectAccess on my Server 2012 Essentials box and most of it works great - I can remotely access the server via RDP and the default IIS website on port 80. However, I can't access anything that uses other ports. For this example, the Team Foundation Server website. The only way to access it is by accessing http://localhost:8080/tfs on the server directly - even when using http://servername:8080/tfs or http://192.168.1.100:8080/tfs won't work. I've tried adding the ports to the NAT exceptions using Set-NetNatTransitionConfiguration –IPv4AddressPortPool and while that has allowed some ports used internally (Deluge, for example) it hasn't allowed me access to the URL. I think I've narrowed it down to the "DirectAccess Server Settings" Group Policy that is created when configuring DirectAccess. When I disable the link for this GPO, the TFS site works again, but the default IIS site stops working (but RDP still works). I already have rules in the firewall on the server for TFS and before enabling this Group Policy (so before configuring DirectAccess) I could access both sites. Does anybody have any suggestions for things I can change to allow access to both? I've uploaded the full GPO report and my Remote Access Configuration Summary for more details.

    Read the article

  • Active Directory Restricted Group confusion

    - by pepoluan
    I am trying to implement Restricted Group policy for my company's AD infrastructure, namely standardizing the local "Administrators" group. The documentation (and various webpages) said that the "Members of this group" policy will wipe out the "Administrators" group. However, an experiment made me confused: I created 2 GPOs: GPO-A replaces the Local Administrators with a list of domain users (e.g., "Alice" and "Bob") GPO-B inserts a domain user (e.g., "Charlie" -- not part of GPO A) into the Local Administrators Experiment 1: GPO-A gets applied first (link order 2) Everything happens as expected: GPO-A cleans out Local Admins and add "Alice" & "Bob" gets added; GPO-B adds "Charlie". Experiment 2: GPO-B is applied first What happens: "Charlie" gets added to the Local Admins group (which also contains 2 local users) The local users on the PC gets deleted, and "Alice" and "Bob" gets added. Result: Local Admins contain "Alice", "Bob", and "Charlie" My confusion: In Experiment 2, I thought GPO-A will totally erase the Local Admins group, including users added by GPO-B (since GPO-A gets applied after GPO-B). As it happens, it only erase local users from the Local Admins, but keeps the domain users. So, is that the way it should be? Or am I doing something incorrectly?

    Read the article

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