Search Results

Search found 1053 results on 43 pages for 'encrypt'.

Page 34/43 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • publickey authentication only works with existing ssh session

    - by aaron
    publickey authentication only works for me if I've already got one ssh session open. I am trying to log into a host running Ubuntu 10.10 desktop with publickey authentication, and it fails when I first log in: [me@my-laptop:~]$ ssh -vv host ... debug1: Next authentication method: publickey debug1: Offering public key: /Users/me/.ssh/id_rsa ... debug2: we did not send a packet, disable method debug1: Next authentication method: password me@hosts's password: And the /var/log/auth.log output: Jan 16 09:57:11 host sshd[1957]: reverse mapping checking getaddrinfo for cpe-70-114-155-20.austin.res.rr.com [70.114.155.20] failed - POSSIBLE BREAK-IN ATTEMPT! Jan 16 09:57:13 host sshd[1957]: pam_sm_authenticate: Called Jan 16 09:57:13 host sshd[1957]: pam_sm_authenticate: username = [astacy] Jan 16 09:57:13 host sshd[1959]: Passphrase file wrapped Jan 16 09:57:15 host sshd[1959]: Error attempting to add filename encryption key to user session keyring; rc = [1] Jan 16 09:57:15 host sshd[1957]: Accepted password for astacy from 70.114.155.20 port 42481 ssh2 Jan 16 09:57:15 host sshd[1957]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session opened for user astacy by (uid=0) Jan 16 09:57:20 host sudo: astacy : TTY=pts/0 ; PWD=/home/astacy ; USER=root ; COMMAND=/usr/bin/tail -f /var/log/auth.log The strange thing is that once I've got this first login session, I run the exact same ssh command, and publickey authentication works: [me@my-laptop:~]$ ssh -vv host ... debug1: Server accepts key: pkalg ssh-rsa blen 277 ... [me@host:~]$ And the /var/log/auth.log output is: Jan 16 09:59:11 host sshd[2061]: reverse mapping checking getaddrinfo for cpe-70-114-155-20.austin.res.rr.com [70.114.155.20] failed - POSSIBLE BREAK-IN ATTEMPT! Jan 16 09:59:11 host sshd[2061]: Accepted publickey for astacy from 70.114.155.20 port 39982 ssh2 Jan 16 09:59:11 host sshd[2061]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session opened for user astacy by (uid=0) What do I need to do to make publickey authentication work on the first login? NOTE: When I installed Ubuntu 10.10, I checked the 'encrypt home folder' option. I'm wondering if this has something to do with the log message "Error attempting to add filename encryption key to user session keyring"

    Read the article

  • Mac OS X Disk Encryption - Automation

    - by jfm429
    I want to setup a Mac Mini server with an external drive that is encrypted. In Finder, I can use the full-disk encryption option. However, for multiple users, this could become tricky. What I want to do is encrypt the external volume, then set things up so that when the machine boots, the disk is unlocked so that all users can access it. Of course permissions need to be maintained, but that goes without saying. What I'm thinking of doing is setting up a root-level launchd script that runs once on boot and unlocks the disk. The encryption keys would probably be stored in root's keychain. So here's my list of concerns: If I store the encryption keys in the system keychain, then the file in /private/var/db/SystemKey could be used to unlock the keychain if an attacker ever gained physical access to the server. this is bad. If I store the encryption keys in my user keychain, I have to manually run the command with my password. This is undesirable. If I run a launchd script with my user credentials, it will run under my user account but won't have access to the keychain, defeating the purpose. If root has a keychain (does it?) then how would it be decrypted? Would it remain locked until the password was entered (like the user keychain) or would it have the same problem as the system keychain, with keys stored on the drive and accessible with physical access? Assuming all of the above works, I've found diskutil coreStorage unlockVolume which seems to be the appropriate command, but the details of where to store the encryption key is the biggest problem. If the system keychain is not secure enough, and user keychains require a password, what's the best option?

    Read the article

  • Client certificate based encryption

    - by Timo Willemsen
    I have a question about security of a file on a webserver. I have a file on my webserver which is used by my webapplication. It's a bitcoin wallet. Essentially it's a file with a private key in it used to decrypt messages. Now, my webapplication uses the file, because it's used to recieve transactions made trough the bitcoin network. I was looking into ways to secure it. Obviously if someone has root access to the server, he can do the same as my application. However, I need to find a way to encrypt it. I was thinking of something like this, but I have no clue if this is actually going to work: Client logs in with some sort of client certificate. Webapplication creates a wallet file. Webapplication encrypts file with client certificate. If the application wants to access the file, it has to use the client certificate. So basically, if someone gets root access to the site, they cannot access the wallet. Is this possible and does anyone know about an implementation of this? Are there any problems with this? And how safe would this be?

    Read the article

  • Windows EFS file sharing anomaly

    - by wbkang
    Fyi, I can confirm this happening in Windows Vista (Business) and Windows 7 Professional in WORKGROUP mode (as both a client and a server). I am not totally sure if this is a Superuser question or a ServerFault question. So there are two PCs, let's call them C (client) and S (server). Both servers have a user called U with the same password. Both C and S has the same private/public key pair for EFS. S shares a folder F with U given full permission. Also locally, the user U has the full permission on F. Now, U, from C, connects to F at the server S, everything works totally fine. I can read,write, delete files and create/delete folders in S. Things go weird from here. I encrypt the folder F in S. I can delete/modify files fine (so the files in F decrypted OK). However, U from C, cannot create a folder, or create a file getting Access Denied. But this Access Denied is very special. It takes over 10 seconds at C to receive the error and the explorer freezes while trying to create a folder, eventually returning error. In S, I can watch the folder created at the same time, and what I see is "New Folder" blinking like crazy and eventually disappearing when the client receives the error. i.e. it's created and deleted in a really rapid manner. What I do not understand is that permissions look fine, I can modify/delete files, and it looks like there is no problem with EFS because I can read/write files fine. Yet it fails to create a file or a folder. Any help is appreciated. Thanks, wbkang

    Read the article

  • Problems with "Read Only" on a Samba share from Windows machines

    - by fistameeny
    Hi, We have a Ubuntu 10.04 Server that has a bunch of Samba shares on it that Windows workstations connect to. Each Windows workstation has a valid username/password to access the shares, which have restricted access governed by Samba. The problem we are experiencing is that Samba doesn't seem to be able to mimic the Windows way of handling "Read Only" attributes. Say I have two users, UserA and UserB, both a group called Staff - UserA creates a file that is readable/writeable by the group (ie. chmod rwxrwx---). If UserA then sets the "Read Only" flag, this changes the permissions to r-xr-x--- (i.e. no write for anyone). As UserB is in the same group as UserA, they should be able to remove the "Read Only" permission - however, they can't as Samba won't allow it. Is there a way to force Samba to allow users within the same group to remove the "Read Only" from a file not created by them? Edit: The Samba smb.conf is as follows: The share is defined in the smb.conf as: [global] log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m passwd chat = *Enter\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *Retype\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* . obey pam restrictions = yes map to guest = bad user encrypt passwords = true passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u passdb backend = tdbsam dns proxy = no netbios name = ubsrv server string = ubsrv unix password sync = yes os level = 20 syslog = 0 usershare allow guests = yes panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d max log size = 1000 pam password change = yes workgroup = workgroup [Projects] valid users = @Staff writeable = yes user = @Staff create mode = 0777 path = /srv/samba/Projects directory mode = 0777 store dos attributes = Yes The folder itself looks like this: ls -l /srv/samba/ drwxrwxrwx 2 nobody Staff 4096 2010-11-04 10:09 Projects Thanks in advance, Matt

    Read the article

  • Fix Video timelines

    - by Josh
    So, I have been going through and riping all of my DVD's and it seems that the way to get the highest quality out of these is to have DVD Shrink de-encrypt, rip, and decompress, the DVD's. After that I usually end up with a high quality (high size) set of .vob files in a classic DVD structure. Then I use a python script that I wrote to automate the process of finding the title sequence and then combining all of the title sequences' .vob files together into one file(similar to the "copy /b" command in windows), and then changing the extension to .mpg (a more widely supported format then .vob). This allows me to get a high quality rip in about 40 min. The problem comes in playing the files. I need all of the ripped dvd's to play on my media computer using windows media center but windows media center (and vlc for that matter) all think that the video files are anywhere from 5 min. to 0 min. which is not a problem (the video will still play all the way through) but if you want to pause it, when it is unpaused the video will start all the way over (Also fast forward and rewind don't work). I suspect that it is something wrong with the way the timeline is encoded in the video file, various forums on the internet recommended using virtualdub to fix the errors. But when I try to open the file virtual dub says that the file is not in mpeg-1 encoding and may be in mpeg-2. Is there any way to fix this? PS: I am aware that there was a similar question but it hasn't had any activity for 2 months and is dealing more with wmv files.

    Read the article

  • How to best convert a fully encrypted drive into a Virtual Machine?

    - by SiegeX
    I have a Windows XP laptop that uses GuardianEdge's Encryption Plus to fully encrypt the drive from bootup. What I would like to do is install a much larger (unencrypted) hard drive with Windows 7 on it and turn this fully encrypted drive into a Virtual Machine that can be ran in either Virtualbox or VMWare on the Windows 7 host. I've read many howto's that talk about using an imaging tool like Acronis True Image to image the drive then passing that through VMWare's VCenter Converter to turn it into a format that VMWare can understand. Unfortunately this seems to all far apart when you are dealing with a fully encrypted drive because Acronis cannot recognize the file system and attempts to do a sector-by-sector copy of the entire hard drive. This is extremely wasteful since the drive is 120GB but the file system is only using 10GB of that. Even if I were OK with going with an inefficient 120GB sector-by-sector copy, I'm not sure that this would even work under VMWare or Virtualbox. Unfortunately, the Guardian Edge boot-time login comes up only after the hard drive has been selected as the boot device; preventing me from being able to decrypt the drive prior to booting an Acronis True Image CD so that it can recognize the underlying file system. I'm sure I'm not the first person to want to do this but I am having a heck of a time finding solutions to this problem. All suggested/answers welcomed. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Problems with "Read Only" on a Samba share from Windows machines

    - by fistameeny
    We have a Ubuntu 10.04 Server that has a bunch of Samba shares on it that Windows workstations connect to. Each Windows workstation has a valid username/password to access the shares, which have restricted access governed by Samba. The problem we are experiencing is that Samba doesn't seem to be able to mimic the Windows way of handling "Read Only" attributes. Say I have two users, UserA and UserB, both a group called Staff - UserA creates a file that is readable/writeable by the group (ie. chmod rwxrwx---). If UserA then sets the "Read Only" flag, this changes the permissions to r-xr-x--- (i.e. no write for anyone). As UserB is in the same group as UserA, they should be able to remove the "Read Only" permission - however, they can't as Samba won't allow it. Is there a way to force Samba to allow users within the same group to remove the "Read Only" from a file not created by them? Edit: The Samba smb.conf is as follows: The share is defined in the smb.conf as: [global] log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m passwd chat = *Enter\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *Retype\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* . obey pam restrictions = yes map to guest = bad user encrypt passwords = true passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u passdb backend = tdbsam dns proxy = no netbios name = ubsrv server string = ubsrv unix password sync = yes os level = 20 syslog = 0 usershare allow guests = yes panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d max log size = 1000 pam password change = yes workgroup = workgroup [Projects] valid users = @Staff writeable = yes user = @Staff create mode = 0777 path = /srv/samba/Projects directory mode = 0777 store dos attributes = Yes The folder itself looks like this: ls -l /srv/samba/ drwxrwxrwx 2 nobody Staff 4096 2010-11-04 10:09 Projects Thanks in advance, Matt

    Read the article

  • samba joined to AD canot see users when in the security tab on client

    - by Jonathan
    I've got samba joined via kerberos and winbindd to our AD network and user authentication and everything else is working great. However when I try to add users/groups to file permissions it tells me they are not found. All the users groups show up fine with getent so I'm not sure why they are not showing up. Here is my smb.conf and I would much appreciate any help with this. #GLOBAL PARAMETERS [global] socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_KEEPALIVE SO_RCVBUF=11264 SO_SNDBUF=11264 workgroup = [hidden] realm = [hidden] preferred master = no server string = xerxes web/file server security = ADS encrypt passwords = yes log level = 3 log file = /var/log/samba/%m max log size = 50 printcap name = cups printing = cups winbind enum users = Yes winbind enum groups = Yes winbind use default domain = Yes winbind nested groups = Yes winbind separator = + winbind refresh tickets = yes idmap uid = 1600-20000 idmap gid = 1600-20000 template primary group = "Domain Users" template shell = /bin/bash kerberos method = system keytab nt acl support = yes [homes] comment = Home Direcotries valid users = %S read only = No browseable = No create mask = 0770 directory mask = 0770 force create mode = 0660 force directory mode = 2770 inherit owner = no [test] comment = Test path=/mnt/test writeable=yes valid users = %s create mask = 0770 directory mask = 0770 force create mode = 0660 force directory mode = 2770 inherit owner = no [printers] comment = All Printers path = /var/spool/cups browseable = no printable = yes

    Read the article

  • Could local ISP capture my location whenever i launch a VPN to a VPN server?

    - by Ozgun Sunal
    I am extremely concerned that my ISP collects any information once I am connected to a VPN server. For instance, as far as I know, when I start a connection to a HotSpotShield VPN server, an IP address is assigned to me just before a successful connection. Besides, I'll be having an extra IP address at the beginning with the TAP Adapter. An encryption tunnel is set up between me and the VPN server. Whenever my request for a website reaches them (VPN server), they decrypt the data and later they encrypt the reply which returns from the web (targeted) server. This works like that. So, the ISP can not see what I am watching, displaying and writing because the connection is encrypted. But, the targeted websites see and record all actions. Still, they can not identify my real IP address. I'm really concerned about if the ISP can see "my location". OK, it has an IP address from another country as my real IP address, but how does my ISP detect the traffic going through them? Can they find out who I am? Won't they say "Hey, there is a traffic but who is and what he is doing right now?", because I get the Internet from them?

    Read the article

  • cannot connect to <server_name>\sqlexpress

    - by Jackson Sunuwar
    I have tried disabling firing wall and checked sqlbrowser is started but for some reason I cannnot connect to my datbase... called server_name\sqlexpress.. I have a virtual machine and a full scale MS SQL Server 2008 R2 running on it... and I have several other vm running sqlexpress. they run fine and I can connect to them using sqlexpress... but when i try to access from sqlserver... I get this error. A network-related or instance-specific error occurred while establishing a connection to SQL Server. The server was not found or was not accessible. Verify that the instance name is correct and that SQL Server is configured to allow remote connections. (provider: SQL Network Interfaces, error: 26 - Error Locating Server/Instance Specified) (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: -1) Digging deep into the error, I found this Error Number: -1 Severity: 20 State: 0 and finally this... Program Location: at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnection.OnError(SqlException exception, Boolean breakConnection) at System.Data.SqlClient.TdsParser.ThrowExceptionAndWarning(TdsParserStateObject stateObj) at System.Data.SqlClient.TdsParser.Connect(ServerInfo serverInfo, SqlInternalConnectionTds connHandler, Boolean ignoreSniOpenTimeout, Int64 timerExpire, Boolean encrypt, Boolean trustServerCert, Boolean integratedSecurity, SqlConnection owningObject) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds.AttemptOneLogin(ServerInfo serverInfo, String newPassword, Boolean ignoreSniOpenTimeout, Int64 timerExpire, SqlConnection owningObject) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds.LoginNoFailover(String host, String newPassword, Boolean redirectedUserInstance, SqlConnection owningObject, SqlConnectionString connectionOptions, Int64 timerStart) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds.OpenLoginEnlist(SqlConnection owningObject, SqlConnectionString connectionOptions, String newPassword, Boolean redirectedUserInstance) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds..ctor(DbConnectionPoolIdentity identity, SqlConnectionString connectionOptions, Object providerInfo, String newPassword, SqlConnection owningObject, Boolean redirectedUserInstance) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnectionFactory.CreateConnection(DbConnectionOptions options, Object poolGroupProviderInfo, DbConnectionPool pool, DbConnection owningConnection) at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.CreateNonPooledConnection(DbConnection owningConnection, DbConnectionPoolGroup poolGroup) at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.GetConnection(DbConnection owningConnection) at System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionClosed.OpenConnection(DbConnection outerConnection, DbConnectionFactory connectionFactory) at System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.Open() at Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.SqlStudio.Explorer.ObjectExplorerService.ValidateConnection(UIConnectionInfo ci, IServerType server) at Microsoft.SqlServer.Management.UI.ConnectionDlg.Connector.ConnectionThreadUser() Firewall is turned off on the VM that's running mssqlserver... I turned of firewall on one of the vm that's running the sqlexpress but I still get the error... can someone please help... thank you

    Read the article

  • Windows Server - share files without access for administrator

    - by Pawel
    We have a MS Windows Server 2008 R8 based server that is administrated by our IT department. We would like to achieve two things simultaneously: A folder on the server, containing several thousand files (new files added frequently) that is accessible to some ActiveDirectory users (e.g. board of directors) but is not accessible by IT department employees IT department employees still maintain rights to administrate the server, including installing new software and services We already checked some solutions: Using NTFS access rights. Unfortunately IT (members of "Administrators" group) can set themselves as new owners of the files and change the permissions so that they gain access to the files. Enabling EFS. Unfortunately even if you do not allow IT to access files, they still can disable EFS completely because they have administrative rights. Moreover as far as I know you have to manually add permissions for all users but the owner for each new file - very inconvenient. Creating a new role for the IT department that has all the privileges apart from taking ownership of files. Unfortunately if you're not a member of the Administrators group, you cannot install new software, no matter what privileges you add to the role. TrueCrypt - nice free encryption software, but with poor sharing capabilities. You can either mount an encryption container on the server (and then IT has access to its contents) or you mount them locally but only one user can mount it for writing. AxCrypt - free encryption software that enables file-by-file encryption on the server. There are some disadvantages though - you have to manually encrypt each new file added. The files have their extensions changes. You can only set one password for all files (so all users have to know this one password). Any other ideas? Our budget is limited so enterprise-class software from Symantec or PGP would probably be not an option.

    Read the article

  • Windows Network File Transfer to Samba server: “Are you sure you want to copy this file without its properties?”

    - by jimp
    I am transferring a lot of files to a new NAS based on OpenMediaVault, with the Samba 3.5.6 service running. I am transferring from Windows 7 64-bit to the NAS, and on some media files Windows is prompting about losing some property data across the transfer. I have never seen this before when transferring to Samba boxes I have built myself (vs this turnkey solution), so I'm guessing there must be a Samba setting I can change to preserve the file properties in question instead of permanently losing whatever they contain (Date Taken? Exposure? Flash Fired? etc). Or maybe I've just never encountered this before; I'm really not sure. I tried adding ea support = yes and store dos attributes = yes to the [global] section, but the problem remains. The Linux file system is ext4 mounted with user_xattr (full options: defaults,acl,user_xattr,noexec,usrjquota=aquota.user,grpjquota=aquota.group,jqfmt=vfsv0) as Samba requires. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Samba config: [global] workgroup = WORKGROUP server string = %h server include = /etc/samba/dhcp.conf dns proxy = no log level = 2 syslog = 2 log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m max log size = 1000 syslog only = yes panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d encrypt passwords = true passdb backend = tdbsam obey pam restrictions = yes unix password sync = no passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u passwd chat = *Enter\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *Retype\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* . pam password change = yes socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY guest account = nobody load printers = no disable spoolss = yes printing = bsd printcap name = /dev/null unix extensions = yes wide links = no create mask = 0777 directory mask = 0777 use sendfile = no null passwords = no local master = yes time server = yes wins support = yes ea support = yes store dos attributes = yes Note: I found this related question, but it explains the loss due to the user trying to transfer from NTFS to FAT32.

    Read the article

  • Samba between Ubuntu server 10.10 and Windows Vista, Windows 7

    - by chepukha
    I have a linux box running Linux server ubuntu 10.10. I have installed Samba on this linux box and want to share files with my laptops which run Windows Vista home and Windows 7 home. I have been struggling with the setup for almost a month but couldn't get it right. If I try to access share folder from Windows Vista, I get message "Windows cannot access \\server_ip_address". Error code: 0x80070035. The network path was not found. If I access from Windows 7, then after entering password to login I can see the list of share folders on Linux box. But if I click on a share folder, I get the same error message as above. Tail /var/log/samba/log.windows7-pc I got the following message: [2011/03/16 00:17:41.427238, 0] smbd/service.c:988(make_connection_snum) canonicalize_connect_path failed for service sharemedia, path /root/sharemedia Here is my setting in smb.conf [global] share modes = yes netbios name = Samba workgroup = WORKGROUP wins support = yes encrypt passwords = true [sharemedia] comment = Tesing sharing using Samba path=/root/sharemedia/ public = yes valid users = samba_usr_name ; make sure all files are sensible permissions create mask = 0660 force create mask = 0660 directory mask = 2770 force directory mask = 2770 directory security mask = 0000 ; Normal share parameters read only = no browseable = yes writable = yes guest ok = no

    Read the article

  • How can I make an encrypted email message into a .p7m file?

    - by Blacklight Shining
    This is a bit complicated, so I'll explain what I'm really trying to do here: I have a Debian server, and I want to automatically email myself certain logs every week. I'm going to use cron and a bash script to copy the logs into a tarball shortly after midnight every Monday. A bash script on my home computer will then download the tarball from the server, along with a file to be used as the body of the email, and call an AppleScript to make a new email message. This is where I'm stuck—I can't find a way to encrypt and sign the email using AppleScript and Apple's mail client. I've noticed that if I put a delay in before sending the message, Mail will automatically set it to be encrypted and signed (as it normally does when I compose a message myself). However, there's no way to be sure of this when the script runs—if something goes wrong there, the script will just blindly send the email unencrypted. My solution there would be to somehow manually create a .p7m file with the tarball and message and attach it to the email the AppleScript creates. Then, when I receive it, Mail will treat it just like any other encrypted message with an attachment (right?) If there's a better way to do this, please let me know. ^^ (Ideally, everything would be done from the server, but there doesn't seem to be a way to send mail automatically without storing a password in plaintext.) (The server is running Debian squeeze; my home computer is a Mac running OS X Lion.)

    Read the article

  • How do I remove encryption from a VMware Workstation 7 image?

    - by Chad
    I successfully encrypted a VM image and confirmed it still runs. I then closed the VM and reopened it and confirmed the encryption password was valid and worked. However, now I want to un-encrypt the VM. When I choose that option, it asks for "your password". I assume this means the password I created when I encrypted it. It doesn't work. I can still open the VM with the password and run it. But, it refuses to remove the encryption using that password. Am I missing something? Is there a password that I don't know about? Some details: I created this image (using standalone converter; physical machine source) I converted it to ACE Converted back to a normal VM (un-ACE'd it) Encrypted it Cannot remove the encryption but can open it and run it As you can see... I am exploring the VMware features. Thanks for any guidance you can give.

    Read the article

  • Windows Server - share files without access for administrator

    - by Pawel
    We have a MS Windows Server 2008 R8 based server that is administrated by our IT department. We would like to achieve two things simultaneously: A folder on the server, containing several thousand files (new files added frequently) that is accessible to some ActiveDirectory users (e.g. board of directors) but is not accessible by IT department employees IT department employees still maintain rights to administrate the server, including installing new software and services We already checked some solutions: Using NTFS access rights. Unfortunately IT (members of "Administrators" group) can set themselves as new owners of the files and change the permissions so that they gain access to the files. Enabling EFS. Unfortunately even if you do not allow IT to access files, they still can disable EFS completely because they have administrative rights. Moreover as far as I know you have to manually add permissions for all users but the owner for each new file - very inconvenient. Creating a new role for the IT department that has all the privileges apart from taking ownership of files. Unfortunately if you're not a member of the Administrators group, you cannot install new software, no matter what privileges you add to the role. TrueCrypt - nice free encryption software, but with poor sharing capabilities. You can either mount an encryption container on the server (and then IT has access to its contents) or you mount them locally but only one user can mount it for writing. AxCrypt - free encryption software that enables file-by-file encryption on the server. There are some disadvantages though - you have to manually encrypt each new file added. The files have their extensions changes. You can only set one password for all files (so all users have to know this one password). Any other ideas? Our budget is limited so enterprise-class software from Symantec or PGP would probably be not an option.

    Read the article

  • Execute encrypted files but don't let anybody read them.

    - by Stebi
    I want to provide a virtual machine image with an installed web application. The user should be able to boot the vm (don't login, just boot) and a webserver should start automatically. The point is I want to hide the (ruby) source code of the web application from everyone as there is no obfuscator for ruby. I thought I could use file system encryption to encrypt the directory with the sourcecode (or even a whole partition). But the webserver user must be able to read it automatically after booting. Nobody is allowed to login as the webserver user (or any other user) so no other can read the contents. My questions are now: Is this possible? Because I give away the whole vm everybody could mount its virtual discs and read them (except the encrypted one). Is it now possible to find the key the webserver user needs to decrypt the files and decrypt them manually? Or is it safe to give such a vm away? The problem is that everything needed to decrypt must be included somewhere in the vm else the webserver cannot start automatically. Maybe I'm completely wrong and you have another tip for me securing the source code.

    Read the article

  • How do I remove encryption from a VMware Workstation 7 image?

    - by Chad
    I successfully encrypted a VM image and confirmed it still runs. I then closed the VM and reopened it and confirmed the encryption password was valid and worked. However, now I want to un-encrypt the VM. When I choose that option, it asks for "your password". I assume this means the password I created when I encrypted it. It doesn't work. I can still open the VM with the password and run it. But, it refuses to remove the encryption using that password. Am I missing something? Is there a password that I don't know about? Some details: I created this image (using standalone converter; physical machine source) I converted it to ACE Converted back to a normal VM (un-ACE'd it) Encrypted it Cannot remove the encryption but can open it and run it As you can see... I am exploring the VMware features. Thanks for any guidance you can give.

    Read the article

  • Mass-migrating from POP3 to Exchange 2010, how do I copy mailboxes?

    - by Erik P. Skaalerud
    I'm in the process of planning our migration from an internal hosted POP3-server (dovecot) to Exchange 2010. We're using Outlook 2003 for the moment, but will soon upgrade to Outlook 2010. The big problem is that we have about 50 computers here in our HQ, plus ~30 clients in branch offices (wich will get their Exchange migration later sometime). I'm the only IT personel, and having to go around and manually set up Outlook and copy over their PST contents is not a option I'm looking for. Some users have set outlook to keep messages for X number of days on the POP3 server, others have not. Using a POP3 connector to transfer over the mails is not a viable option. Here is what I've done so far: Created a transform for the Office 2003 administrative installation point Created a .PRF file to modify any existing e-mail account to switch over to Exchange (including the RPC-encrypt hotfix described in MSKB 2006508) Tested both transform and PRF, both works Created a test-OU and GPO containing the Office 2003 installation with transform applied, also works My big question is: How can I force Outlook to import any existing .PST into the new Exchange mailbox when the user starts up Outlook for the first time after the MST/PRF have been applied? Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Samba share will not connect (was working yesterday)

    - by David Gard
    I have a CentOS websver with a Samba share set up (\\webserver\websites). I was connected to this share just yesterday without issue, but today my Windows 8 PC will not connect to it. I've also tried making a connection from Windows 7 and Windows XP, all without success. I initially tried restarting my computer, but that did not work. I then tried restarting the Samba service on the webserver (service smb restart), and when that failed I restarted the webserver. All of that was to no avail, and I still cannot connect to the share. The webserver is contactable from my PC (and the others I tried), as the websites it hosts work fine and I'm able to Putty to the server. When connected to the webserver, I can see that Samba is running by using service smb status - service smb status smbd (pid 4685) is running... nmbd (pid 4688) is running... Can anyone please help me to get this share working? Here is my full Samba config (/etc/samba/smb.conf) - [global] workgroup = MYGROUP server string = Samba Server %v log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m max log size = 50 security = user encrypt passwords = yes socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_RCVBUF=8192 SO_SNDBUF=8192 local master = no [websites] comment = Websites browseable = yes writable = yes path=/var/www/html/ valid users = dgard

    Read the article

  • Postfix relay all mail through SES except for one sending domain / address

    - by Kevin
    I'm thinking this is really really super simple, but I can't figure out what I need to do. I don't mess with Postfix much (Just let it run and do its thing) so I've got no idea where to even start with this. We have postfix currently configured to relay all mail out through SES using the code below. We need to modify this so that emails sent from one of our domains (domain.com) DO NOT go through SES. Everything else should continue to flow out through the SES connection. I'm assuming this is like a one line thing but my google skills are not helping me at all. relayhost = email-smtp.us-east-1.amazonaws.com:25 smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes smtp_sasl_security_options = noanonymous smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd smtp_use_tls = yes smtp_tls_security_level = encrypt smtp_tls_note_starttls_offer = yes smtp_tls_CAfile = /etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt smtp_destination_concurrency_limit = 450 Update I have created sender_transport file in /etc/postfix. In it is @domain.com smtp: I then ran this through postmap and placed sender_dependent_default_transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sender_transport above the above block of code and restarted postfix, but still all email is going out through SES. Log after sending Oct 22 14:38:48 web postfix/smtp[19446]: 4B19D640002: to=<[email protected]>, relay=email-smtp.us-east-1.amazonaws.com[54.243.47.187]:25, delay=1.4, delays=0.01/0/0.92/0.44, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 Ok 00000141e21b181f-ee6f7c4f-f0f5-4b0f-ba69-2db146a4f988-000000) Oct 22 14:38:48 web postfix/qmgr[19435]: 4B19D640002: removed I don't think this log is what you're looking for, but it's the only thing that is logged when mail goes out, and this is with me running /usr/sbin/postfix -v start manually and not with the init script.

    Read the article

  • Does anyone know how to "tcpdump" traffic decrypted by Mallory MITM? [migrated]

    - by chriv
    I'm looking for some help in capturing network traffic that I can analyze in Wireshare (or other tools). The tool I'm using is mallory. If anyone is familiar with mallory, I could use some help. I've got it configured and running correctly, but I don't know how to get the output that I want. The setup is on my private network. I have a VM (running Ubuntu 12.04 - precise) with two NICs: eth0 is on my "real" network eth1 is only on my "fake" network, and is using dnsmasq (for DNS and DHCP for other devices on the "fake" network) Effectively eth0 is the "WAN" on my VM, and eth1 is the "LAN" on my VM. I've setup mallory and iptables to intercept, decrypt, encrypt and rewrite all traffic coming in on destination port 443 on eth1. On the device I want intercepted, I have imported the ca.cer that mallory generated as a trusted root certificate. I need to analyze some strange behavior in the HTTPS stream between the client and server, so that's why mallory is setup in between for this MITM. I would like to take the decrypted HTTPS traffic and dump it to either a logfile or a socket in a format compatible with tcpdump/wireshark (so I can collect it later and analyze it). Running tcpdump on eth1 is too soon (it's encrypted), and running tcpdump on eth2 is too late (it's been re-encrypted). Is there a way to make mallory "tcpdump" the decrypted traffic (in both directions)?

    Read the article

  • Finding Bluetooth link key in Windows 7, to double pair a device on dualboot computer

    - by Ilari Kajaste
    How can I dig up the Bluetooth link key for a paired device in Windows 7? Is this something that is dependent on the Bluetooth stack I'm using (Toshiba), or is there a generic place to store these in Windows 7? Note: I'm not talking about the six-digit code usually typed by the user during pairing - that is worthless since it's discarded after pairing process. What I mean is the 128-bit link key that the devices exchange during pairing, and use thereafter to encrypt all their Bluetooth traffic. Background: I dualboot Windows 7 / Ubuntu on my laptop, and I would like to have my phone paired to both OS's. Since the dualbooting computer has only one Bluetooth adapter and thus only one Bluetooth address, I cannot do two pairings to the phone, since on the second pairing (Windows) the phone just replaces the previous pairing (Linux) to the same Bluetooth address. A thread on Ubuntu forums pointed me to what I have to do - pair first on Linux, then on Windows, and then replace the link key on Linux side with the one Windows negotiated. I can find the Linux side pairing key from /var/lib/Bluetooth/[BD_ADDR]/linkkeys - no problems there. However, on Windows side I can't find the key. According to the forum post, on Windows side the key should be in SYSTEM\ControlSet002\services\BTHPORT\Parameters\Keys\[BD_ADDR] but while that registry key does exist, it has no subkeys. (And a similar registry path in ControlSet001 didn't have any subkeys either.) One thing I've been instructed to do is to capture all events during pairing with Sysinternals Process Monitor. I did this, but I haven't been able to find any useful information from the captured events, not even by exporting the data to a huge XML and grepping that with the BD_ADDRs (with or without colons). So how could I find the link key for a paired device in Windows 7? Some reference information: Wikipedia: Bluetooth, Security Now: Bluetooth security

    Read the article

  • Bad performance with Linux software RAID5 and LUKS encryption

    - by Philipp Wendler
    I have set up a Linux software RAID5 on three hard drives and want to encrypt it with cryptsetup/LUKS. My tests showed that the encryption leads to a massive performance decrease that I cannot explain. The RAID5 is able to write 187 MB/s [1] without encryption. With encryption on top of it, write speed is down to about 40 MB/s. The RAID has a chunk size of 512K and a write intent bitmap. I used -c aes-xts-plain -s 512 --align-payload=2048 as the parameters for cryptsetup luksFormat, so the payload should be aligned to 2048 blocks of 512 bytes (i.e., 1MB). cryptsetup luksDump shows a payload offset of 4096. So I think the alignment is correct and fits to the RAID chunk size. The CPU is not the bottleneck, as it has hardware support for AES (aesni_intel). If I write on another drive (an SSD with LVM) that is also encrypted, I do have a write speed of 150 MB/s. top shows that the CPU usage is indeed very low, only the RAID5 xor takes 14%. I also tried putting a filesystem (ext4) directly on the unencrypted RAID so see if the layering is problem. The filesystem decreases the performance a little bit as expected, but by far not that much (write speed varying, but 100 MB/s). Summary: Disks + RAID5: good Disks + RAID5 + ext4: good Disks + RAID5 + encryption: bad SSD + encryption + LVM + ext4: good The read performance is not affected by the encryption, it is 207 MB/s without and 205 MB/s with encryption (also showing that CPU power is not the problem). What can I do to improve the write performance of the encrypted RAID? [1] All speed measurements were done with several runs of dd if=/dev/zero of=DEV bs=100M count=100 (i.e., writing 10G in blocks of 100M). Edit: If this helps: I'm using Ubuntu 11.04 64bit with Linux 2.6.38. Edit2: The performance stays approximately the same if I pass a block size of 4KB, 1MB or 10MB to dd.

    Read the article

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