Search Results

Search found 16101 results on 645 pages for 'owsm webservices ws security ws trust soa secuirty'.

Page 35/645 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

  • How to setup a 1 way trust, Windows Server 2008 R2

    - by MichaelOz
    I am on my home network and connect to workplace via a VPN. I have a DC on my home network (DC1 , domain = home). How can I setup a 1 way trust, so that I am able to run executables, such as SQL Management Studio using RunAs - then type in credentials for work domain? First question is, will a 1 way trust solve this, and can I set this up without bothering a network admin at workplace (assuming I have a domain account with enough permissions on work domain) If yes - any good step by step guide to setup 1 way trust? Server is Windows Server 2008 R2. As mentioned its DC running DNS Role too. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Database Web Service using Toplink DB Provider

    - by Vishal Jain
    With JDeveloper 11gR2 you can now create database based web services using JAX-WS Provider. The key differences between this and the already existing PL/SQL Web Services support is:Based on JAX-WS ProviderSupports SQL Queries for creating Web ServicesSupports Table CRUD OperationsThis is present as a new option in the New Gallery under 'Web Services'When you invoke the New Gallery option, it present you with three options to choose from:In this entry I will explain the options of creating service based on SQL queries and Table CRUD operations.SQL Query based Service When you select this option, on 'Next' page it asks you for the DB Conn details. You can also choose if you want SOAP 1.1 or 1.2 format. For this example, I will proceed with SOAP 1.1, the default option.On the Next page, you can give the SQL query. The wizard support Bind Variables, so you can parametrize your queries. Give "?" as a input parameter you want to give at runtime, and the "Bind Variables" button will get enabled. Here you can specify the name and type of the variable.Finish the wizard. Now you can test your service in Analyzer:See that the bind variable specified comes as a input parameter in the Analyzer Input Form:CRUD OperationsFor this, At Step 2 of Wizard, select the radio button "Generate Table CRUD Service Provider"At the next step, select the DB Connection and the table for which you want to generate the default set of operations:Finish the Wizard. Now, run the service in Analyzer for a quick check.See that all the basic operations are exposed:

    Read the article

  • Security and the Mobile Workforce

    - by tobyehatch
    Now that many organizations are moving to the BYOD philosophy (bring your own devices), security for phones and tablets accessing company sensitive information is of paramount importance. I had the pleasure to interview Brian MacDonald, Principal Product Manager for Oracle Business Intelligence (BI) Mobile Products, about this subject, and he shared some wonderful insight about how the Oracle Mobile Security Tool Kit is addressing mobile security and doing some pretty cool things.  With the rapid proliferation of phones and tablets, there is a perception that mobile devices are a security threat to corporate IT, that mobile operating systems are not secure, and that there are simply too many ways to inadvertently provide access to critical analytic data outside the firewall. Every day, I see employees working on mobile devices at the airport, while waiting for their airplanes, and using public WIFI connections at coffee houses and in restaurants. These methods are not typically secure ways to access confidential company data. I asked Brian to explain why. “The native controls for mobile devices and applications are indeed insufficiently secure for corporate deployments of Business Intelligence and most certainly for businesses where data is extremely critical - such as financial services or defense - although it really applies across the board. The traditional approach for accessing data from outside a firewall is using a VPN connection which is not a viable solution for mobile. The problem is that once you open up a VPN connection on your phone or tablet, you are creating an opening for the whole device, for all the software and installed applications. Often the VPN connection by itself provides insufficient encryption – if any – which means that data can be potentially intercepted.” For this reason, most organizations that deploy Business Intelligence data via mobile devices will only do so with some additional level of control. So, how has the industry responded? What are companies doing to address this very real threat? Brian explained that “Mobile Device Management (MDM) and Mobile Application Management (MAM) software vendors have rapidly created solutions for mobile devices that provide a vast array of services for controlling, managing and establishing enterprise mobile usage policies. On the device front, vendors now support full levels of encryption behind the firewall, encrypted local data storage, credential management such as federated single-sign-on as well as remote wipe, geo-fencing and other risk reducing features (should a device be lost or stolen). More importantly, these software vendors have created methods for providing these capabilities on a per application basis, allowing for complete isolation of the application from the mobile operating system. Finally, there are tools which allow the applications themselves to be distributed through enterprise application stores allowing IT organizations to manage who has access to the apps, when updates to the applications will happen, and revoke access after an employee leaves. So even though an employee may be using a personal device, access to company data can be controlled while on or near the company premises. So do the Oracle BI mobile products integrate with the MDM and MAM vendors? Brian explained that our customers use a wide variety of mobile security vendors and may even have more than one in-house. Therefore, Oracle is ensuring that users have a choice and a mechanism for linking together Oracle’s BI offering with their chosen vendor’s secure technology. The Oracle BI Mobile Security Toolkit, which is a version of the Oracle BI Mobile HD application, delivered through the Oracle Technology Network (OTN) in its component parts, helps Oracle users to build their own version of the Mobile HD application, sign it with their own enterprise development certificates, link with their security vendor of choice, then deploy the combined application through whichever means they feel most appropriate, including enterprise application stores.  Brian further explained that Oracle currently supports most of the major mobile security vendors, has close relationships with each, and maintains strong partnerships enabling both Oracle and the vendors to test, update and release a cooperating solution in lock-step. Oracle also ensures that as new versions of the Oracle HD application are made available on the Apple iTunes store, the same version is also immediately made available through the Security Toolkit on OTN.  Rest assured that as our workforce continues down the mobile path, company sensitive information can be secured.  To listen to the entire podcast, click here. To learn more about the Oracle BI Mobile HD, click  here To learn more about the BI Mobile Security Toolkit, click here 

    Read the article

  • Mac Management and Security

    - by Bart Silverstrim
    I was going through some literature on managing OS X laptops and asked someone some questions about usage scenarios when using the MacBooks. I asked someone more knowledgeable than I about whether it was possible for my Mac to be taken over if I were visiting another site for a conference or if I went on a wifi network at a local coffee house with policies from an OS X Server with workgroup manager (either legit for the site or someone running a version of OS X Server on hardware they have hidden somewhere on the network), which apparently could be set up to do things like limit my access to Finder or impose other neat whiz-bang management features. He said that it is indeed possible for it to happen as it would be assigned via the DHCP server and the OS X server would assume my Mac is a guest and could hand out restrictions and apparently my Mac will happily accept them without notifying me or giving me an option, unlike Windows which I believe would need to be joined to a domain before it becomes "managed" by Active Directory. So my question is as network admins and sysadmins with users traveling with MacBooks, is there a way to reasonably protect your users from having their machines hijacked without resorting to just turning off networking all the time? Or isn't this much of a security hazard? What threat does this pose to the road warriors in your businesses?

    Read the article

  • Online Storage and security concerns

    - by Megge
    I plan to set up a small fileserver. I already own a small server at HostEurope (VirtualServer L, 250GB space), but they don't offer enough space (there is the HostEurope Cloud, but paying for bandwidth isn't an option here, video-streaming should be possible) Requirements summarized: Storage: 2TB, Users: ~15, Filesizes: < 100GB, should be easily reachable (Mount as a networkdrive or at least have solid "communication" software) My first question would be: Where can I get halfway affordable online storages? And how should I connect them to my server? Getting an additional server is a bit overkill, as I know no hoster which allows 2 TB on a small 2 Ghz Dual Core 2 GB RAM thingy (that would be enough by far, I just need much space), and connecting it via NFS or FTP over Internet seems a bit strange and cripples performance. Do you have any advice where I could get that storage service from? (I sent HostEurope a custom request today, but they didn't answer till now. If they can provide me with that space, this question will be irrelevant, but the 2nd one is the more important one anway, don't do much more than recommend me some based on experience, you don't have to crawl hours through hosting services) livedrive for example offers 5 TB for 17€ / month, I'd be happy with 2 TB for 20 €, the caveat is: It doesn't allow multiple users, which leads me to my second question: Where are the security problems? Which protocol is sufficient (I want private and "public" folders etc. the usual "every user has its own and a public space"-thing), secure and fast? (I'd tend to (S)FTP, problem with FTP is: Most of those hosting services don't even allow FTP with mutliple users and single users lead me into "hacking" a solution (you could map the basic folder structure on the main server and just mount every subfolder from the storage, things get difficult with a public folder with 644 permissions though) Is useing something like PKI or 802.1X overkill for private uses?

    Read the article

  • Managing Apache to Compensate for WebDAV's Security Masking

    - by Tohuw
    When a user creates a file via WebDAV, the default behavior is that the file is owned by the user and group running the Apache process, with a umask of 022. Unfortunately, this makes it impossible for unprivileged users to write to the files by other means without being a member of the group Apache runs under (which strikes me as a particularly bad idea). My current solution is to set umask 000 in Apache's envvars and remove all world permissions from the webdav parent directory for the user. So, if the WebDAV share is /home/foo/www, then /home/foo/www is owned by www-data:foo with permissions of 770. This keeps other unprivileged users out, more or less, but it's hokey at best and a security disaster awaiting at worst. From my research and poking around at mod_dav and Apache, I cannot find a reasonable solution short of a cron job flipping all the permissions back (I'd rather not have the load and increased complexity on the server). SuExec won't work, either, because WebDAV operations are not going to execute as a different user. Any thoughts on this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Mac Management Without Permission and Security

    - by Bart Silverstrim
    I was going through some literature on managing OS X laptops and asked someone some questions about usage scenarios when using the MacBooks. I asked someone more knowledgeable than I about whether it was possible for my Mac to be taken over if I were visiting another site for a conference or if I went on a wifi network at a local coffee house with policies from an OS X Server with workgroup manager (either legit for the site or someone running a version of OS X Server on hardware they have hidden somewhere on the network), which apparently could be set up to do things like limit my access to Finder or impose other neat whiz-bang management features. He said that it is indeed possible for it to happen as it would be assigned via the DHCP server and the OS X server would assume my Mac is a guest and could hand out restrictions and apparently my Mac will happily accept them without notifying me or giving me an option, unlike Windows which I believe would need to be joined to a domain before it becomes "managed" by Active Directory. So my question is as network admins and sysadmins with users traveling with MacBooks, is there a way to reasonably protect your users from having their machines hijacked without resorting to just turning off networking all the time? Or isn't this much of a security hazard? What threat does this pose to the road warriors in your businesses?

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Security Essentials & MsMpEng.exe hogging resources

    - by Mike
    I've been using MSE for a couple months now, never had a single problem. All of a sudden the process "MsMpEng.exe" will randomly go crazy and hog all my system resources so I can't do anything unless I kill it in the task manager. (I've quit the program for now and my comp is running smooth). When I restart the program, reboot, whatever, it goes off and hogs all the resources again after a couple minutes. If I kill the process it will go away and then come back a couple minutes later and do the same thing. I've scanned with MSE, another antivirus and malware with no probs. Any ideas? Should I uninstall and find something else? The thing is I've liked it so far. I'm running Win7 64-bit. Also, I'm not running any other conflicting security programs. This is the only one on my PC right now. Windows Defender is also off.

    Read the article

  • Resources for Smartphone Security

    - by Shial
    My organization is currently working on improving our data and network security due to increasing HIPAA laws and a general need to get a better grasp on controlling our health related information. We are a non-profit working with people with developmental disabilities so we handle a lot of medical related information. One area that has been identified as a risk is our use of smartphones, specifically at this time Windows Mobile 6.1 devices from T-Mobile. We do not utilize the VPNs on the phones so there isn't any way they can access our databases or file servers (username/password for VPNs is not the domain logons). What would be exposed however is the particular user's email account since you could extract out the username/password and access the email either on the device or on our web email (Exchange 2003) which could contain HIPAA protected confidential information about clients and services and this would be an incident that would have to be reported. What resources or ideas would help us secure these devices? I'm not worried about data interception (using SSL) but more about physical theft or loss of the device. Are there websites that I just have not found with guidelines and suggestions or particualar products that would help protect us? I also don't want to limit the discussion to windows Mobile either. I myself am looking at an android 2.0 device and there is always the eventual possibility we could get pushed to enable the VPNs. I know this is a subject that likely won't have any particular correct answer and it is something we should all be aware of since there devices are sitting outside of our immediate control most of the time.

    Read the article

  • Securing SSH/SFTP and best practices on security

    - by MultiformeIngegno
    I'm on a fresh VPS with Ubuntu Server 12.04. I wanted to ask you the good practices to apply to enhance security over a stock Ubuntu-server. This is what I did up to now: I added Google Authenticator to SSH, then I created a new user (whom I'll use instead of 'root' for SSH & SFTP access) which I added to my /etc/sudoers list below 'root', so now it's: # User privilege specification root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL new_user ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL Then I edited sshd_config and set PermitRootLogin to 'no'. Then restarted the ssh service. Is this ok? There are a few things I'd like to ask you though: 1) What's the sense of adding a new (sudoer) user whilst the root user still exist (ok it can't access with root privilege but it's still there..)? 2) System files are owned by 'root'.. I want to use my new_user to access via SFTP but with it I can't edit those files!! Should I mass-CHMOD 'em so that new_user has write perms too? What's the good practice on this? Thanks in advance, I hope you'll tell me if I did something wrong and/or other ways to secure the system. :)

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 server smart card security module problem

    - by chris13work
    Hi, I've got a smart card reader and a server application using it as a security module. If I run it under DOS prompt, everything is fine. The server is running and clients can connect to it. I tried to install the server as window service and start it. The server starts but always gives back authentication error because it cannot call the smart card to do encryption. Then I tried to start it with task scheduler and set the trigger factor as "on startup". The server starts also but still cannot access the smart card reader. Then I tried remote desktop to the machine and run the server application under DOS prompt. Same error is returned. The situation is that the smart card reader only works under active console desktop environment. In the server application, WINSCARD API is used to access the smart card reader. Any suggestion so that we can access the smart card reader in running services? OS: Windows Server 2008 Smart Card Driver: Windows USB smart card Reader Smart Card API: WINSCARD

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 server smart card security module problem

    - by chris13work
    Hi, I've got a smart card reader and a server application using it as a security module. If I run it under DOS prompt, everything is fine. The server is running and clients can connect to it. I tried to install the server as window service and start it. The server starts but always gives back authentication error because it cannot call the smart card to do encryption. Then I tried to start it with task scheduler and set the trigger factor as "on startup". The server starts also but still cannot access the smart card reader. Then I tried remote desktop to the machine and run the server application under DOS prompt. Same error is returned. The situation is that the smart card reader only works under active console desktop environment. In the server application, WINSCARD API is used to access the smart card reader. Any suggestion so that we can access the smart card reader in running services? OS: Windows Server 2008 Smart Card Driver: Windows USB smart card Reader Smart Card API: WINSCARD

    Read the article

  • Hiding subfolders from users with Windows Server security

    - by Frans
    Using Windows Server 2008. I would like to allow all users to map to a common network drive and be able to browse it. But, I only want them to be able to see the subfolders they actually have access rights to. Is this doable? Example I have a share with two folders on it; \\domain\share\FolderA \\domain\share\FolderB With three different security groups, I would like to map a network drive for all three to \\domain\share. However, for group1, I want them to only be able to see FolderA, group2 should only see FolderB and group3 should see both. I am not just talking about denying access to the actual folder, which is easy enough, I don't want the user to even be able to see that the folder exists. In other words, when group 1 logs in and do "dir n:\" they should see N:\FolderA When group 2 logs in, they should see N:\FolderB and when group 3 logs in they should see N:\Folder A N:\Folder B My half-baked solution If I completely block access to the root then I can't map a drive to it. I can give everyone the traverse right which then allows the user to map a drive. However, if a member of group1 or group2 tries to go to "N:\" they get an access denied error. If they go to N:\FolderA (for group1) then it works. So, that sort of works, but it would be nicer if the user could actually browse to N:\ and just only see the subfolders they have access to. I am pretty sure I have seen this done but not sure how to do it myself. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Webcam security camera software that runs as a service

    - by hurfdurf
    I've been looking for Windows webcam software that will run as a Windows service without any user login. The goal is to use the webcam as a cheap security camera and log the results to secure networked storage (windows share, not FTP). The requirements are: Motion detection Video capture Runs as a service (should start recording immediately after reboot) Nice to have: Round-robin storage, e.g. 10Gb limit, oldest files overwritten/deleted when space gets low I've read the other webcam questions but still haven't stumbled across anything suitable. Evaluations thus far: Title MotionDetect Service Snapshots Video SpaceLimit License Yawcam Yes Yes Yes No No GPL WebCam ZoneTrigger Yes No Yes Yes No Commercial Dorgem Yes No Yes Yes No GPL AbelCam Yes No Yes Yes No Commercial Logitech Yes No Yes Yes No Paired with camera IspyConnect Yes No Yes Yes Yes Free SecureCam (SourcefoYes No Yes Yes No GPL AbelCam Yes No Yes Yes No Commercial Active WebCam Yes Yes(?) Yes Yes Volume Free Commercial WebCam Surveyor Yes No Yes Yes No Commercial WebCamsPy NA NA NA NA NA GPL Camera: Logitech Webcam Pro 9000 Windows 7 32-bit WebCamsPy failed to initialize so couldn't be tested So far, the contenders: Active Webcam comes the closest, and claims to run as a service, but i haven't been able to get it to record after a cold boot even though a service is running. Yawcam can be set up as a service but doesn't record video. IspyConnect has exactly the type of space limit I want and looks great, but doesn't run as a service (seems also to be a bit of a cpu hog) Any other suggestions? I'm locked into Windows so can't use linux Motion, which looks almost perfect. Any pointers to rich Windows webcam/motion detection libraries out there that could easily be turned into a command line program would also be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Linux security: The dangers of executing malignant code as a standard user

    - by AndreasT
    Slipping some (non-root) user a piece of malignant code that he or she executes might be considered as one of the highest security breaches possible. (The only higher I can see is actually accessing the root user) What can an attacker effectively do when he/she gets a standard, (let's say a normal Ubuntu user) to execute code? Where would an attacker go from there? What would that piece of code do? Let's say that the user is not stupid enough to be lured into entering the root/sudo password into a form/program she doesn't know. Only software from trusted sources is installed. The way I see it there is not really much one could do, is there? Addition: I partially ask this because I am thinking of granting some people shell (non-root) access to my server. They should be able to have normal access to programs. I want them to be able to compile programs with gcc. So there will definitely be arbitrary code run in user-space...

    Read the article

  • What do I need to do to make a WPF Browser Application (XBAP) that requires Full Trust work on Windo

    - by Benoit J. Girard
    So this is a Visual Studio 2008, .NET, WPF, XBAP, Windows 7 question, regarding .NET trust policies. At work, we have several Web Browser Applications (.XBAP files) developed with Visual Studio 2008 (so .NET 3.5) that we deployed internally. These required a .NET FullTrust policy, we found a way to make a .MSI that adjusted the policy on individual stations, everything worked great. Users love in-browser apps. This was last year and on Windows XP. This year our company started upgrading users to Windows 7, and now none of our Web Browser Applications work. The error message is "Trust Not Granted", as if the policy-changing .MSI had not been run. Other details: I can confirm that our apps work on Windows XP for Internet Explorer 7 and Firefox, and do not work on Windows 7 for Internet Explorer 8 nor Firefox. I must admit that .NET security policies mystify me. Still, I could not find any mention of this problem on the Net at large or on this site. Did anybody else encounter this problem? Any and all help welcome.

    Read the article

  • Turn off transparency to perform CAS Asserts

    - by MainMa
    Hi, I apologize if my question is too stupid. I want to run from a sandboxed application a method from a full trusted assembly. But when trying to do so, as described in C# 4.0 in a Nutshell: The Definitive Reference, Fourth Edition, Chapter 20, each time I call Permission.Assert, an InvalidOperationException "Cannot perform CAS Asserts in Security Transparent methods" is thrown. So how is it possible to turn off transparency to be able to use CAS Asserts?

    Read the article

  • Security failure - This is not a secure document but has security embed parameters

    - by dimitris mistriotis
    I try to create a private version and therefore I used something like this in php: var scribd_doc = scribd.Document.getDoc( 28394353, 'xxx'); scribd_doc.addParam("use_ssl", true); scribd_doc.addParam('public', false); scribd_doc.grantAccess("cbccf6e7-1ff7-9034-8a7c-a0c2a5b225ed", <?php echo "'" . trim($_COOKIE['PHPSESSID']) . "'" ?>, <?php echo "'" . scribd_calculate_signature($documentID = '28394353', $sessionID = trim($_COOKIE['PHPSESSID']), $userID = "cbccf6e7-1ff7-9034-8a7c-a0c2a5b225ed") . "'" ?>); ... ... scribd_doc.write( 'embedded_flash' ); Which is the api of scribd for javascript with the addition of the signature. My result is the "Security failure - This is not a secure document but has security embed parameters" Error, which is not well documented. The document is set to private. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Design: Website calling a webservice on the same machine

    - by Chris L
    More of a design/conceptual question. At work the decision was made to have our data access layer be called through webservices. So our website would call the webservices for any/all data to and from the database. Both the website & the webservices will be on the same machine(so no trip across the wire), but the database is on a separate machine(so that would require a trip across the wire regardless). This is all in-house, the website, webservice, and database are all within the same company(AFAIK, the webservices won't be reused by another other party). To the best of my knowledge: the website will open a port to the webservices, and the webservices will in turn open another port and go across the wire to the database server to get/submit the data. The trip across the wire can't be avoided, but I'm concerned about the webservices standing in the middle. I do agree there needs to be distinct layers between the functionality(such as business layer, data access layer, etc...), but this seems overly complex to me. I'm also sensing there will be some performance problems down the line. Seems to me it would be better to have the (DAL)assemblies referenced directly within the solution, thus negating the first port to port connection. Any thoughts(or links) both for and against this idea would be appreciated P.S. We're a .NET shop(migrating from vb to C# 3.5)

    Read the article

  • How can you become a competent web application security expert without breaking the law?

    - by hal10001
    I find this to be equivalent to undercover police officers who join a gang, do drugs and break the law as a last resort in order to enforce it. To be a competent security expert, I feel hacking has to be a constant hands-on effort. Yet, that requires finding exploits, testing them on live applications, and being able to demonstrate those exploits with confidence. For those that consider themselves "experts" in Web application security, what did you do to learn the art without actually breaking the law? Or, is this the gray area that nobody likes to talk about because you have to bend the law to its limits?

    Read the article

  • How do I get security updates for restricted/partner packages?

    - by laramichaels
    I want to perform just security updates on Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, keeping the rest of the system unchanged. I need to do this from the command line, no the GUI update manager. I have implemented the solution described here, which seems to work great for this purpose. I merely substituted 'precise' for 'lucid' given that I am on 12.04. My question is: by using apt pinning as described in that answer, will I still receive security updates for packages distributed through the "other" repositories - partner, restricted, multiverse, etc? Or will it only get me updates for the packages in the "core" distribution? thanks! ~l

    Read the article

  • Are all "Important security updates", updates to already installed packages?

    - by Omnicomment
    I'm running 12.04, and I've never downloaded any drivers for the installation of any peripheral devices. Yet, I noticed a fair few "Important security updates" involving drivers/utilities for HP devices/software. I understand if the default installation of Ubuntu came with a set of drivers for these devices - and the update manager, having noticed that they live on my system, went and found newer versions, but still - given I don't use any devices - I'm either forced to download an irrelevant update, sift through the updates to check applicability, or turn off Update Manager altogether: none of which are desirable. First; the obvious - can someone confirm that the list of "Important security updates" on the server that Update manager connects to, is not actually populated with every patch ever written (i.e. for all Ubuntu packages regardless of whether they're installed or not)? Unlikely, but..

    Read the article

  • How to learn what the industry standards/expectations are, particularly with security?

    - by Aerovistae
    For instance, I was making my first mobile web-application about a year ago, and half-way through, someone pointed me to jQuery Mobile. Obviously this induced a total revolution in my app. Rewrote everything. Now, if you're in the field long enough, maybe that seems like common knowledge, but I was totally new to it. But this set me wondering: there are so many libraries and extensions and frameworks. This seems particularly crucial in the category of security. I'm afraid I'm going to find myself doing something in a professional setting eventually (I'm still a student) and someone's going to walk over and be like, My god, you're trying to secure user data that way? Don't you know about the Gordon-Wokker crypto-magic-hash-algorithms library? Without it you may as well go plaintext. How do you know what the best ways are to maximize security? Especially if you're trying to develop something on your own...

    Read the article

  • Would security be comprimised if I install a gui (e.g. zPanel) for LAMP?

    - by Kirk
    I am an Ubuntu/Linux noob. There are many questions I have regarding the use of my system as a server. First and foremost is security. I want to install a simple GUI (zPanel appears the most user friendly) that will allow others to log into the server and database with ease, similar to a hosting service, though my intent is for the development of one site. Upon looking at the instructions of numerous GUI's, they require installation as root. This makes me uneasy, as my thoughts spiral to the possibilities of the developers creating the elusive 'back-door', thereby giving them root access to my entire system. Am I just being paranoid or is that theoretically possible? If it is possible, what steps are necessary to ensure security?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >