Search Results

Search found 11364 results on 455 pages for 'port blocking'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 39/455 | < Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >

  • Open ports in Windows 7, firewall, public network, port 445

    - by chris
    I selected "public network" in Windows 7. Windows is listening on TCP port 445: TCP 0.0.0.0:445 WIN7TEST:0 ABHÖREN The corresponding incoming firewall rule isn't activated (4th column): When I choose "workplace network" the SMB incoming port 445 rule is still disabled in the advanced windows firewall configuration. I thought "public network" / "workplace network" and so on is influencing the windows firewall rules!? Where's the difference between workplace and public network then? http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=winfire2nxku0.png

    Read the article

  • Running Sonatype Nexus in Tomcat 7.0, Tomcat blocking PUT requests

    - by gdm
    I was previously running Nexus 1.8 on OSX and uploading jars for releases without any issues. The OSX box died, so I moved to a FreeBSD server. Since Nexus doesn't have binaries for FreeBSD, I decided to run it in my Tomcat container. Now, I have set up Nexus 1.9 in Tomcat 7.0 on FreeBSD. Everything is working well, except I can't upload jars to my release or snapshot repositories. If I try via Hudson, I get a 401 error (and no further details). If I try manually via curl, I get an error message back from Tomcat: "This request requires HTTP authentication.". Why is Tomcat giving this error, and how do I stop it? If I look in the Nexus logs I can see that the PUT request doesn't even reach Nexus, Tomcat is intercepting it.

    Read the article

  • Blocking HTTP clients which request certain URLs repeatedly

    - by Guido Domenici
    I run a website on Windows Server 2008 R2. Looking through the IIS logs, I have noticed that there are some IP addresses repeatedly requesting certain URLs (such as for example /mysql/phpmyadmin/main.php, /phpadmin/main.php) which do not exist, as the site is entirely served off of ASP.NET. They are obviously fishing for known vulnerabilities. My question is, are there any firewall or other tools (Windows built-in or commercial) that allow me to block those IP addresses which request certain URLs multiple times?

    Read the article

  • Virus blocking incoming connections ?

    - by Benoît
    Hello, on my windows 2003 server, all incoming connections are dropped. I can see them getting in using Wireshark, but even a single ping from another computer fails. All locally initiated connection work fine (i'm asking from the server). This server is the DC/DHCP/DNS/File server, so computer clients are in the dark. I've run varius antivirus and removal tools without any luck. The Windows Firewall is disabled. I'm wild-guessing at some virus/worm. How can i check why these incoming ICMP/TCP SYN/etc are dropped ? Anyone has any knowledge about such situations ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Blocking ICMP outgoing requests only in eth1

    - by Raj
    I am creating a NAT with iptables: Computer A: eth0 (dhcp) + eth1 (static ip 192.168.0.1 - gateway) Computer B: eth1 (static ip 192.168.0.2, using Computer A as gateway) I know how to block ICMP outgoing requests (-A OUTPUT -p icmp --icmp-type echo-request -j DROP), but that would block ICMP requests from Computer A, but not from Computer B (in fact, only for Computer A - Computer B can keep doing those). I tried with the same command, but adding -o eth1, but that does not block at all. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • Blocking an IP from connecting

    - by Sam W.
    I have a problem with my Apache webserver where there's and IP than connecting to my server, using alot of connection and wont die which eventually making my webserver timeout. The connection will stay as SYN_SENT state if I check using netstat -netapu I even flush my iptables and use the basic rules and it still doesn't work. The IP will get connected when I start my Apache Basic rules that I use: iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT ! -i lo -d 127.0.0.0/8 -j REJECT iptables -A INPUT -s 89.149.244.117 -j REJECT iptables -A OUTPUT -s 89.149.244.117 -j REJECT iptables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 21 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -p icmp -m icmp --icmp-type 8 -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -j REJECT iptables -A FORWARD -j REJECT The bold part is rule in question. Not sure this is related but tcp_syncookies value is 1. Can someone point out my mistake? Is there a way to block it for good. Thank you

    Read the article

  • Symantec Gateway Security 320 VPN/Port Forwarding trouble

    - by Owl
    How do I check to see if port forward is enabled with one of my dynamic tunnels on this device? I'm having trouble using a feature in our software that requires a vpn to be used. My firewalls shows it as connected but I'm unable to ping the subnet ip. Our software vendor told me that port forwarding might be causing this problem, but I didn't set up this network I'm on and I don't fully know symantec hardware.

    Read the article

  • The canonical "blocking BitTorrent" question

    - by Aphex5
    How can one block, or severely slow down, BitTorrent and similar peer-to-peer (P2P) services on one's small home/office network? In searching Server Fault I wasn't able to find a question that served as a rallying point for the best technical ideas on this. The existing questions are all about specific situations, and the dominant answers are social/legal in nature. Those are valid approaches, but a purely technical discussion would be useful to a lot of people, I suspect. Let's assume that you don't have access to the machines on the network. With encryption use increasing in P2P traffic, it seems like stateful packet inspection is becoming a less workable solution. One idea that seems to make sense to me is simply throttling down heavy users by IP, regardless of what they're sending or receiving -- but it doesn't seem many routers support that functionality at the moment. What's your preferred method to throttle P2P/BitTorrent traffic? My apologies if this is a dupe.

    Read the article

  • blocking hotlinking with .htaccess only works for plain domain, when preceeded by www no block

    - by casualprogrammer
    Having tried all sorts of suggestions popping up from google, I am at my wit's end. Presently I use a solution created with htaccesstools.com/hotlink-protection/ RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^$ RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://(www\.)?mydomain.tld/.*$ [NC] RewriteRule \.(gif|jpg|jpeg|png|js|css)$ - [NC,F,L] Checking it out with altlab.com/htaccess_tutorial.html testing facility (near bottom of page ) shows no image if mydomain.tld/mypic.jpg is entered, while if prefixed with www (www.mydomain.tld/mypic.jpg) the pic is displayed. Any helpful comments welcome.

    Read the article

  • SeLinux blocking connection to sshd on Ubuntu 9.10

    - by Barton Chittenden
    When I try to log on to my laptop, which runs Ubuntu 9.10, the server rejects my login attempts. Checking /var/log/auth.log, I see the following: Feb 14 12:41:16 tiger-laptop sshd[6798]: error: ssh_selinux_getctxbyname: Failed to get default SELinux security context for tiger I googled for this, and ran across the following: http://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-.../msg13049.html Here's the part that I think relates to the problem that I'm having: Quote: What's wrong on my system? Why it's not possible to login even if selinux is in permissive mode? Any suggestions? I'd start by trying to figure out why sshd isn't running in sshd_t (it seems to be running in sysadm_t). Paul. selinux mailing list selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mail...stinfo/selinux Yes, sshd is running in sysadm_t: ps axZ | grep sshd system_u:system_r:sysadm_t 3632 ? Ss 0:00 /usr/sbin/sshd -o PidFile=/var/run/sshd.init.pi ls -Z /usr/sbin/sshd system_ubject_r:sshd_exec_t /usr/sbin/sshd Don't know why it's not sshd_t. I didn't modified something. It's a standard installation of sles11 with the default reference policy from tresys. Maybe this code snippet from policy/modules/services/ssh.te is responsible for that: Allow ssh logins as sysadm_r:sysadm_t gen_tunable(ssh_sysadm_login, true) Any ideas? Do you have boolean init_upstart set to on? if not try setting it to on. I do not believe ssh_sysadm_login boolean works currently but i may be mistaken. -- Yeah, setting init_upstart to on did the trick! THANK A LOT! Do you know why this prevents the user from logging in through ssh even if selinux is set to permissive?? Ok, so the million dollar question is "where do I set 'init_upstart=1'"? It's not clear from context which configuration file needs to be edited, and I'm not at all familiar with SELinux configuration.

    Read the article

  • Set default system audio output port (for all accounts)

    - by Ludwik Trammer
    The default output audio port Ubuntu doesn't work on my system. It should be "Analog Mono Output/Amplifier", instead of "Analog Output/Amplifier". I can easily change that in sound preferences, just by choosing the right port in the "Output" tab. The problem is this would only apply to a single account, and I would like to change it system-wide, so it applies to all accounts on the system (I have more than 100 users...). I'm after 2 hours of Googling, so any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • htaccess IP blocking with custom 403 Error not working

    - by mrc0der
    I'm trying to block everyone but 1 IP address from my site on a server running apache & centos. My setup is follows the example below. My server: `http://www.myserver.com/` My .htaccess file <limit GET> order deny,allow deny from all allow from 176.219.192.141 </limit> ErrorDocument 403 http://www.google.com ErrorDocument 404 http://www.google.com When I visit http://www.myserver.com/ from an invalid IP, it gives me a generic 403 error. When I visit http://www.myserver.com/page-does-not-exist/ it redirects me correctly to http://www.google.com but I can't figure out why the 403 error doesn't redirect me too. Anyone have any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How can I port forward with iptables?

    - by stu
    I want connections coming in on ppp0 on port 8001 to route to 192.168.1.200 on eth0 on port 8080 I've got these two rules -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp --dport 8001 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.200:8080 -A FORWARD -m state -p tcp -d 192.168.1.200 --dport 8080 --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT and it doesn't work, what am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Manually closing a port from commandline

    - by codingfreak
    Hi I want to close an open port which is in listening mode between my client and server application. Is there any manual command line option in Linux to close a port ?? NOTE: I came to know that "only the application which owns the connected socket should close it, which will happen when the application terminates." I dont understand why it is only possible by the application which opens it ... But still eager to know if there is any another way to do it ??

    Read the article

  • Blocking non-virtual host access in Apache?

    - by cmbrnt
    I'm running an apache-server, with a bunch of virtual hosts for about seven domain names. Now I'd like to disallow access for clients who try to access my server using only its IP-adress. So: When someone accesses my website through www.domain.com, they reach the site hosted in /var/www/domain.com/public_html/. When someone enters the ip-address of the server they reach a 403 Forbidden-message. The problem with this is that they are theoretically able to reach my other sites through bruteforce, when getting http://11.22.33.44/domain.com/public_html/. I rather want them to reach a 403 Forbidden all the time, as long as they don't access my server by a valid domain name. How do I solve this problem?

    Read the article

  • Dynamically blocking excessive HTTP bandwidth use?

    - by Jeff Atwood
    We were a little surprised to see this on our Cacti graphs for June 4 web traffic: We ran Log Parser on our IIS logs and it turns out this was a perfect storm of Yahoo and Google bots indexing us.. in that 3 hour period, we saw 287k hits from 3 different google ips, plus 104k from yahoo. Ouch? While we don't want to block Google or Yahoo, this has come up before. We have access to a Cisco PIX 515E, and we're thinking about putting that in front so we can dynamically deal with bandwidth offenders without touching our web servers directly. But is that the best solution? I'm wondering if there is any software or hardware that can help us identify and block excessive bandwidth use, ideally in real time? Perhaps some bit of hardware or open-source software we can put in front of our web servers? We are mostly a windows shop but we have some linux skills as well; we're also open to buying hardware if the PIX 515E isn't sufficient. What would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • Using wildcard domains to serve images without http blocking

    - by iopener
    I read that browsers sometimes block waiting for multiple images from the same host, and I'm trying to do everything I can to speed up page load times. One caveat: I need to serve files over HTTPS. Any opinions about whether this is feasible: Setup a wildcard cert for *.domain.com. Whenever I need an image, generate an number based on a hash mod 5 of the filename, and append it to an 'img' subdomain (eg img1.domain.com, img4.domain.com, img3.domain.com, etc.); the hash will make any filename always use the same subdomain, and therefore the browser should be able to cache the images Configure a dynamic virtualhost record to point all img#. subdomains to /var/www/img I am looking for feedback about this plan. My concerns are: Will I get warnings when my page has https:// links to multiple subdomains? Is the dynamic virtualhost record I'm talking about even possible? Considering the amount of processing this would require, is it likely to even produce any kind of overall benefit? I'm probably averaging a half-dozen images per page, with only half being changed on each page refresh. Thanks in advance for you feedback.

    Read the article

  • Blocking of certain file downloads

    - by Philip Fourie
    I have a problem where I cannot completely download a certain file from a server. The file is 1.9MB in size but only 68% is downloaded and then it hangs. I tried and these cases, which failed: Downloaded the file with HTTP Downloaded the file with FTP Moved the file to different FTP and web servers behind the ISA firewall Tried with IIS 6.0 & IIS 7.0 Multiple download clients. Which included FireFox, FileZilla (on Windows) and wget (on Linux) This worked: Downloading other files from the same location on the server. Both bigger and smaller and in size than the original. FTP and HTTP worked. Earlier version of this file (.DLL) works. It is as if the content of this file has an influence on this file being served. Network architecture: Client Machine - Internet (ISP) - ISA Server - IIS 7.0 The only constants are the ISP, Cisco router and the ISA server. Is it possible that something is rejecting the download because of the contents of the file? I am hoping ISA is the culprit... I am not a ISA expert is there somewhere I can look to establish if it is indeed ISA causing this? Update: Splitting the file into two parts with a hex editor results in one half of the file being served correctly and the other part not. Zipping the file results in the file being downloaded successfully. However this is not an option for this particular scenario. Renaming the file and its extension also doesn't work. Update 2009/10/22: It does NOT seems to be ISA that is causing this problem. We connected a laptop (running IIS) on an available public IP and still the file download to 68% before it hanged. The two remaining components are the ISP and the Cisco 800 series router. Anyone knows about an issue on the router perhaps?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 r2 FTP blocking outside connections

    - by nbon
    I have a windows server 2008r2 running IIS 7.5. I am trying to setup a FTP-server in IIS but I'm running into some annoying problems. Setting up the server works fine but when I try to connect from a remote client the connection times out. I have tried to connect to the FTP-server from the localhost and it works flawlessly. I figured that it should be some trouble with the firewall so I went into firewall settings and disabled the Public Profile and my remote connections worked! In my inbound rules there are rules for FTP-connections to allow all profiles etc. I guess they are made automatically when setting up the FTP-server. Anyone got any idea how to allow remote connections without turning off the public firewall?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >