Search Results

Search found 37607 results on 1505 pages for 'ms access 97'.

Page 392/1505 | < Previous Page | 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399  | Next Page >

• Samba Public and "Dropbox" folder

  - by cb0

  I want to create a special Group Directory structure for my Users. /home/groupA <-- home folder for groupA where every user of groupA can create/edit/delete files /home/groupA/Public <-- Public Folder where every user can read files /home/groupA/Public/Dropbox <-- Folder where every user can write files but only users of groupA can access this directory and create/edit/delete files Now I have: 4 drwxrwx--t 10 nobody groupA 4096 Feb 18 15:44 /home/groupA 4 drwxrwxr-x 7 nobody groupA 4096 Feb 18 15:40 /home/groupA/Public/ 4 drwxrwx-w- 10 nobody groupA 4096 Feb 18 15:55 /home/groupA/Public/Dropbox My smc.confcontains the following entrys [groupA] path = /home/groupA comment = Folder for users of groupA browseable = yes read only = no create mask = 0770 directory mask = 0770 force group = groupA [groupA Public] path = /home/groupA/Public comment = Admins Public Browseable = yes write list = @groupA create mask = 0775 directory mask = 0775 [groupA DropBox] path = /home/groupA/Public/Dropbox comment = groupA Dropbox read only = no valid users = @groupA browseable = yes inherit owner = yes directory mode = 3770 force directory mode = 3770 The working part is: Users of groupA can access and fully use /home/groupA All Users can access /home/groupA/Public/ and read the files from there. My problem is that all users, even those who are not in groupA can access the /home/groupA/Public/Dropbox and see all files. I just want them to be able to put files in there but not see the content of the folder and prohibit them from deleting any files in there. Does anybody have a clue what could be the problem and how I can fix it ?

  Read the article

• Why does MOSS sometimes delete an existing user from a site?

  - by Jesse

  I'm experiencing an issue with a MOSS installation. I am using the Site Settings Permissions to add an Active Directory account as a valid user of a site. This entails validating that the user account name is correct via the 'Check Names' button, then giving them 'Contribute' permissions. Once this is done they appear as a user on the 'All People' page. This works fine and the user is able to access the site. At some point in the future (sometimes several days later) the user account is somehow removed as a valid user from the site. This site resides in a test environment so access is pretty well controlled; which has allowed us to rule out someone else going in and removing the user manually. This appears to be something that is being done by the system itself and we have no idea why. We can manually add the user back, but then it will eventually get removed again later. I have an admittedly limited understanding of SharePoint permissions, but I believe that SharePoint stores valid users in a SQL database and I would assume that when dealing with Active Directory accounts it would be storing the user name and probably the SID. It appears that for some reason this record is later getting deleted out of the database, as the users will suddenly disappear from the "All People" page and will start getting "Access Denied: You are not authorized..." messages when trying to access the site. Has anyone seen this behavior before?

  Read the article

• Is browser based wireless authentication secure?

  - by johnnyb10

  Our wireless network previously used a preshared WPA/WPA2 key for guest access, which allows them access to the Internet. (Our employee access uses 802.1x authentication). We just had a wireless consultant come in to fix various wireless issues we had; one of the things he wound up doing was changing our guest access to HTML-based instead of the preshared key. So now that guest SSID is open (instead of using WPA) and users are presented with a browser-based login screen before they can get on the Internet. My question is: Is this an acceptable method from a security standpoint? I would assume that having an open network is necessarily a bad idea, but the consultant said that the traffic is still using PEAP, so it's secure. I didn't get a chance to question him further on this because we ran late and a bunch of other things came up. Please let me know what you think about the advantages/disadvantages of using HTML-based wireless authentication as opposed to using a preshared WPA key. Thanks...

  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

• How to set up port forwarding on a dedicated server running CentOS 5.4 to use Ubuntu 9.0.4

  - by mairtinh

  The basic situation that I have is a dedicated server running CentOS 5.4 At the moment I have one VM running Ubuntu 9.0.4. Later on, I will want to add another VM running Windows Server 2003 but at the moment I am focusing on getting Ubuntu up and running. The Ubuntu installation is working fine but I'm seriously struggling to get port forwarding working so that I can access websites to be hosted on the Ubuntu VM. As a newbie to Linux, I am confused about the relationship between IPTables and VMWare's own port forwarding. Here's what I've tried so far. The IP of my server is xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx and the provider support have told me that the subnet mask is 255.255.255.0, the gateway address is xxx.xxx.xxx.1 and the network address is xxx.xxx.xxx.0. (Those latter two surprise me a bit, I expected private gateway/network address rather than public ones.) First of all I tried Bridged Networking but had no success at all in communicating with the machine other than through the VMware console. I tried pinging it from the host (using ssh into the host) but no joy; also no Inernet access from the VM. I changed the interfaces configuration from DHCP to Static, using a static address of 192.168.1.100 and setting the gateway to xxx.xxx.xxx.1 as advised by the provider. No real difference, still cannot ping the guest from the host or vice versa and no Internet access from the guest. Then I tried NAT. The host automatically set the IP address to 192.168.132.128 with a gateway of 192.168.132.2 Now the guest has Internet access out and when I do a VNC to the host and open Firefox with 192.168.132.128 I can see the hosted website okay but I still cannot get into it from outside. I mentioned that I'm a bit confused about IPtables and VMware port forwarding, what I meant is that I'm not sure whether IPtable forwarding should be set to the IP address of the guest interface (192.168.132.128 in this case) or the gateway address 192.168.132.2 . I have a feeling that I'm missing something very simple here, can anybody tell me what it is?

  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

• Facing application redirection issue on nginx+tomcat

  - by Sunny Thakur

  I am facing a strange issue on application which is deployed on tomcat and nginx is using in front of tomcat to access the application from browser. The issue is, i deployed the application on tomcat and now setup the virtual host on nginx under conf.d directory [File i created is virtual.conf] and below is the content i am using for the same. server { listen 81; server_name domain.com; error_log /var/log/nginx/domain-admin-error.log; location / { proxy_pass http://localhost:100; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_set_header Host $http_host; } error_page 500 502 503 504 /50x.html; location = /50x.html { root html; } Now the issue is this when i am using rewrite ^(.*) http://$server_name$1 permanent; in server section and access the URL then this redirects to https://domain.com and i am able to log in to app and able to access the links also [I am not using ssl redirection in this host file and i don't know why this is happening] Now when i removed this from server section then i am able to access the application from :81 and able to logged into the application but when i click on any link in app this redirect me to the login page. I am not getting any logs in application logs as well as tomcat logs. Please help on this if this is a redirection issue of nginx. Thanks, Sunny

  Read the article

• Joining Samba to Active Directory with local user authentication

  - by Ansel Pol

  I apologise that this is somewhat incoherent, but hopefully someone will be able to make enough sense of this to understand what I'm trying to achieve and provide pointers. I have a machine with two network interfaces connected to two different networks (one of which it's providing several other services for, such as DNS), running two separate instances of Samba, one bound to each interface. One of the instances is just a workgroup-style setup using share-level authentication, which is all working fine. The problem is that I'm looking to join the other instance to an MS Active Directory domain (provided by MS Windows Small Business Server 2003) to enable a subset of the domain users to access the shares from Windows machines on the other network. The users who need access from the domain environment have accounts (whose names are all-lowercase versions of their domain usernames) on the machine running Samba, but I'm not sure about how to map the UIDs and everything I've read concerns authenticating accounts on that machine against either AD or another LDAP server. To clarify: I only want the credentials for AD users accessing the non-workgroup Samba instance to be authenticated against AD, not the accounts on the machine running Samba. I hope this is sufficiently clear. EDIT: In addition to being able to access the Samba shares from AD, I do also need to be able to access a share on the domain from the machine running Samba but would still like everything non-Samba-related to authenticate locally.

  Read the article

• Setting up port forwarding for web server

  - by reyjavikvi

  This could belong on Super User, but I thought this place was more appropiate. I want to run Apache in my computer and want to make it available to the outside world to test a couple things. Apparently, I have to go into my router's (a TP-LINK TD 8910G) settings and forward port 80 to my PC's IP. So far so good. Thing is, since the router uses a web based interface and it's kind of stupid, it told me that since I was using port 80 for this, I should access its settings through port 8080. Maybe it can't detect requests coming from the LAN, I don't know. Point is, now neither port can't access the configuration, and I can't access Internet. Specifically, trying to access anything (including 192.168.1.1, the router's settings) through port 80 turns up a blank page (maybe if I had the server running in my computer I'd get something, but I don't want to risk trying, I had to reset the router and restore the settings), and port 8080 gives a "Can't establish connection" error in Firefox (and similar ones in other browsers). Is there a way to configure the router to not redirect requests coming from inside the network? I'm a beginner with this stuff, so please try to explain in a simple way. If this is more appropiate in Super User, I'm sorry.

  Read the article

• su not giving proper message for restricted LDAP groups

  - by user1743881

  I have configured PAM authentication on Linux box to restrict particular group only to login. I have enabled pam and ldap through authconfig and modified access.conf like below, [root@test root]# tail -1 /etc/security/access.conf - : ALL EXCEPT root test-auth : ALL Also modified sudoers file, to get su for this group <code> [root@test ~]# tail -1 /etc/sudoers %test-auth ALL=/bin/su</code> Now, only this ldap group members can login to system. However when from any of this authorized user, I tried for su, it asks for password and then though I enter correct password it gives message like Incorrect password and login failed. /var/log/secure shows that user is not having permission to get the access, but then it should print message like Access denied.The way it prints for console login. My functionality is working but its no giving proper messages. Could anyone please help on this. My /etc/pam.d/su file, [root@test root]# cat /etc/pam.d/su #%PAM-1.0 auth sufficient pam_rootok.so # Uncomment the following line to implicitly trust users in the "wheel" group. #auth sufficient pam_wheel.so trust use_uid # Uncomment the following line to require a user to be in the "wheel" group. #auth required pam_wheel.so use_uid auth include system-auth account sufficient pam_succeed_if.so uid = 0 use_uid quiet account include system-auth password include system-auth session include system-auth session optional pam_xauth.so

  Read the article

• How to grant read/write to specific user in any existent or future subdirectory of a given directory? [migrated]

  - by Samuel Rossille

  I'm a complete newbie in system administration and I'm doing this as a hobby. I host my own git repository on a VPS. Let's say my user is john. I'm using the ssh protocol to access my git repository, so my url is something like ssh://[email protected]/path/to/git/myrepo/. Root is the owner of everything that's under /path/to/git I'm attempting to give read/write access to john to everything which is under /path/to/git/myrepo I've tried both chmod and setfacl to control access, but both fail the same way: they apply rights recursively (with the right options) to all the current existing subdirectories of /path/to/git/myrepo, but as soon as a new directory is created, my user can not write in the new directory. I know that there are hooks in git that would allow me to reapply the rights after each commit, but I'm starting to think that i'm going the wrong way because this seems too complicated for a very basic purpose. Q: How should I setup my right to give rw access to john to anything under /path/to/git/myrepo and make it resilient to tree structure change ? Q2: If I should take a step back change the general approach, please tell me.

  Read the article

• gitolite mac don't add new user to authorized_keys

  - by crashbus

  I installed gitolite and every thing works fine for me as admin. But when I'd like to add add a new user the new user can't connect to the server. After I looked into the file authorized_keys I saw that the new user wasn't added to the file. During the commit of the new public-key I get some workings: WARNING: split conf not set, gl-conf present for 'gitolite-admin' Counting objects: 6, done. Delta compression using up to 8 threads. Compressing objects: 100% (4/4), done. Writing objects: 100% (4/4), 882 bytes, done. Total 4 (delta 1), reused 0 (delta 0) remote: WARNING: split conf not set, gl-conf present for 'gitolite-admin' remote: WARNING: ?? @staff christianwaldmann markwelch remote: sh: find: command not found remote: sh: find: command not found remote: sh: sort: command not found remote: sh: find: command not found remote: /usr/local/bin/triggers/post-compile/update-gitweb-access-list: line 26: cut: command not found remote: /usr/local/bin/triggers/post-compile/update-gitweb-access-list: line 23: grep: command not found remote: /usr/local/bin/triggers/post-compile/update-gitweb-access-list: line 26: sort: command not found remote: /usr/local/bin/triggers/post-compile/update-gitweb-access-list: line 26: sed: command not found remote: sh: find: command not found remote: sh: find: command not found How can I fix it that gitolite auto-add the new user to the authorized_keys.

  Read the article

• Problem in accessing Windows shared folder on Ubuntu using terminal

  - by vikramtheone

  Hi Guys, Description I have 2 systems with me, one running on Windows(Host) and one on Ubuntu, both on a LAN. On the Windows(Host) I develop software intended for the Linux system and because the Linux system has little external memory, my idea to overcome this is by making the project folder on the Host side a Shared Folder with full access and access it on Ubuntu over the network. To achieve this, I have installed Samba on Ubuntu, when I go to Places -> Network I can see the shared project folder and I simply mount it. A link appears on the desktop. Next, using Nautilus I open the link and I can access the contents of the shared folder. Problem Even though I mount the shared project folder, I don't see it appearing in the /media or the /mnt folder, as a result of this I don't know what path to use to access this folder, from the terminal. For example: When, I mounted my USB stick, as expected, a link for the device appears on the Desktop and I also see a folder in the media folder. So, similarly, a mounted shared folder should have appeared on the /mnt folder, too. Can anyone suggest what I should do now? There are many posts around, but no solid solution for this problem. Help!!! :) Vikram

  Read the article

• What ways are there to set permissions on an Exchange 2003 mailbox?

  - by HopelessN00b

  I'm having a difficult/impossible time tracing down a permissions issue on an Exchange 2003 mailbox, and I was wondering if I'm missing any technical possibilities here. The basic question is what ways are there to set a user's permissions to access a mailbox in Exchange 2003? I know of two. Permissions on the mailbox itself (Mailbox Rights) and having delegated rights. And then, if it's possible, how would one view all the permissions (including delegated permissions) on the mailbox? The situation is that a new user who's been set up "exactly like all the others" in his department (pretty sure he was copied via the right click option in ADUC, in fact) can't access a specific shared mailbox, which I've been assured about a dozen other people do have access to and access on a regular basis. As to how they got permissions to the mailbox, no one knows, so it must have been granted by a white wizard whose spell has since worn off, so now IT has to handle it instead. Anyway... This mailbox is a normal AD user, created as a service account, for which no one knows the password (of course), so it's probably not the case that this service account was being used to delegate permissions. Upon taking examining the Mailbox Rights directly... Here are the permissions I see: This leads me to believe that one of two things are happening - the managers have been delegating full mailbox permissions to the rest of the department, or everyone's logging in using... not their own account. But, before I get too excited about the prospect of busting out the LART and strolling over to that department, I want to make sure I'm not missing another possible explanation. Like most of the rest of the world, I ditched Exchange 2003 at the earliest possible opportunity, and had been looking forward to never seeing it again, so I'm a bit rusty on the intricacies of how it [mostly, sort of] works. Anyone see any or possibilities, or things I may have missed, or does the LART get to come out and play?

  Read the article

• Terminal Server in Windows Server 2003

  - by Hemal

  I have a confusion regarding what I am doing here. At present I have a Windows Server 2003 server with SP2. I have assigned RAS/VPN server role to it (through Manage my server wizard) and in my router, I setup the IP address of my RAS/VPN server as PPTP server. Staff leave their workstations ON all the time and access them from home through RDP. They first connect thorugh VPN & in the RDC they simply type their respective IP or computer name to access the office network from home. Everything works fine so far except: Staff have to leave compuers always ON in the office Speed is very slow depend how many staff members access the VPN network I was told to install and configure Terminal service to improve this situation. I already added TS Role in the server but I don't know how to clients can access the TS server from home or remote location. I really appreciate any good links or guidence from the experts in this group regarding this. Thank you in advance for any replies!

  Read the article

• IIS / Virtual Directory authentication.

  - by Chris L

  I have an IIS(v6)/Windows 2003/.Net 3.5(app code, libraries etc.) server hosting a website at www.mywebsite.com mapped to E:\Inetpub\wwwroot\mywebsite, we also have a virtual directory (VirtDir) mapped out to E:\Inetpub\wwwroot\mywebsite\files (although in theory this could be in a different directory or a separate machine) where we store a customer's files(a bunch of .pdf & .xls). Currently to access a file you can enter into the url something like: www.mywebsite.com/VirtDir/Customer/myFile.pdf and get access to the file. The problem is the user doesn't have to log into www.mywebsite.com to get access to the file, we would prefer them to log in first. We would like the user to login via the mywebsite and if valid, let them download files from the virtual directory. The www.mywebsite.com and VirtDir are separate sites on the same farm. Allow Anon Access, and Integrated Windows Authentication both enabled. I'm more of a developer and less of a Sys Admin, but hopefully I'm in the right spot, any help would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• Managing arbitrary user permissions under PureFTPd

  - by Sebastián Grignoli

  I need to provide an FTP service that needs to be web-managed in the simplest way possible. My customer wants to create folders and users, and give them read only or read/write access arbitrarily. For example: The folder 'Documents' should be read only for several users, writable for internal users, and invisible for the rest. The folder 'Pictures' should be read only for journalists, writable for associates, and invisible for the rest. The folder 'Media' should be read only, writable or invisible for arbitrary users specified on the admin. There could be a large number of users and folders. I can't find a good way to accomplish that. I thought that I could give each user a home folder and put symlinks for the folders he has read access to, and make the user part of the folder's group when he has write access too, but now I think that this wouldn't work, because with PureFTPd (or ProFTPd) I can only specify the virtual user's mapping to a system user, and only one GUID for each virtual user. My approach requires that I could specify several GUIDs for each user (one by each folder he has write access to). I need to start programming this admin and I still don't know wich approach would work, if any. ¿Any ideas?

  Read the article

• SharePoint web services not protected?

  - by Philipp Schmid

  Using WSS 3.0, we have noticed that while users can be restricted to access only certain sub-sites of a site collection through permission settings, the same doesn't seem to be true for web services, such as /_vti_bin/Lists.asmx! Here's our experimental setup: http://formal/test : 'test' site collection - site1 : first site in test site collection, user1 is member - site2 : second site in test site collection, user2 is member With this setup, using a web browser user2 can: - access http://formal/test/site2/Default.aspx - cannot access http://formal/test/site1/Default.aspx That's what is expected. To our surprise however, using the code below, user2 can retrieve the names of the lists in site1, something he should not have access to! Is that by (unfortunate) design, or is there a configuration setting we've missed that would prevent user2 from retrieving the names of lists in site1? Is this going to be different in SharePoint 2010? Here's the web service code used in the experiment: class Program { static readonly string _url ="http://formal/sites/research/site2/_vti_bin/Lists.asmx"; static readonly string _user = "user2"; static readonly string _password = "password"; static readonly string _domain = "DOMAIN"; static void Main(string[] args) { try { ListsSoapClient service = GetServiceClient(_url, _user, _password, _domain); var result = service.GetListCollection(); Console.WriteLine(result.Value); } catch (Exception ex) { Console.WriteLine(ex.ToString()); } } private static ListsSoapClient GetServiceClient(string url, string userName, string password, string domain) { BasicHttpBinding binding = new BasicHttpBinding(BasicHttpSecurityMode.TransportCredentialOnly); binding.Security.Transport.ClientCredentialType = HttpClientCredentialType.Ntlm; ListsSoapClient service = new ListsSoapClient(binding, new System.ServiceModel.EndpointAddress(url)); service.ClientCredentials.UserName.Password = password; service.ClientCredentials.UserName.UserName = (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(domain)) ? domain + "\\" + userName : userName; return service; } }

  Read the article

• Destination NAT Onto the Same Network from internal clients

  - by mivi

  I have a DSL router which acts as NAT (SNAT & DNAT). I have setup a server on internal network (10.0.0.2 at port 43201). DSL router was configured to "port forward" (or DNAT) all incoming connections to 10.0.0.2:43201. I created a virtual server for port forwarding on DSL router. I also added following iptables rules for port forwarding. iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -i ppp_0_1_32_1 --dport 43201 -j DNAT --to-destination 10.0.0.2:43201 iptables -I FORWARD 1 -p tcp -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED,RELATED -d 10.0.0.2 --dport 43201 -j ACCEPT # ppp_0_1_32_1 is routers external interface. # routers internal IP address is 10.0.0.1 and server is setup at 10.0.0.2:43201 Problem is that connections coming from external IP addresses are able to access internal server using External IP address, but internal clients (under NAT) are not able to access server using external IP address. Example: http://<external_address>:43201 is working from external clients But, internal clients are not able to access using http://<external_address>:43201 This seems to be similar to the problem described in http://www.netfilter.org/documentation/HOWTO/NAT-HOWTO-10.html (NAT HOW-TO Destination NAT Onto the Same Network). Firstly, I am not able to understand why is this a problem for internal clients? Secondly, what iptables rule will enable internal clients to access server using external IP address? Please suggest.

  Read the article

• PowerConnect 3548p SNTP and web interface not working

  - by Force Flow

  I have been unable to get SNTP and access to the web interface working properly on a Dell PowerConnect 3548p. In the logs, this message appears over and over again: 04-Jan-2000 20:19:29 :%MNGINF-W-ACL: Management ACL drop packet received on interface Vlan 172 from 172.17.0.3 to 172.18.0.10 protocol 17 service Snmp 172 is the management vlan. 172.17.0.3 is the DNS server 172.18.0.10 is the switch's IP address. The DNS server and the switch are located on different subnets and separated by routers. I am unable to access the web interface of the switch from the 172.17.x.x subnet. I can only access the web interface of the switch if I am accessing it from the 172.18.x.x subnet. There is also a managed linksys switch on the 172.18.x.x subnet on the 172 vlan, which has no problem with SNTP. I can also access it from the 172.17.x.x network. So, it stands to reason that this is not a firewall or routing issue, but with the 3548p switch. I suspect the issue is with management permissions/ACLs on the 3348p switch, but that's about as much as I've been able to determine so far. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• files have no ownership permissions and can't assign ownership

  - by Force Flow

  I'm having problems with file permissions on a server 2008 R1 server. Office 2010 tmp files are being created, and don't have any security permissions assigned. They aren't being deleted, I can't assign ownership, and I can't delete them. I downloaded and ran the sysinternals tool handle.exe. When running it for the first time, handle64.exe was created, but not assigned any permissions. I cannot assign ownership and cannot delete it. Seemingly random files in random places don't seem to have any permissions assigned. Access is denied when attempting to change ownership to administrator or the administrators group. If I try to replace inheritable permissions of the folder these files are in, access is denied for the files with no permissions. I attempted to use subinacl to view the ownership information on the files that had no permissions, but access was denied here as well. I also tried setting the owner with setacl in an elevated cmd window, but access was denied as well. This problem only surfaced in the last few days, and I'm unsure as what the cause is or how to correct it.

  Read the article

• VLAN ACLs and when to go Layer 3

  - by wuckachucka

  I want to: a) segment several departments into VLANs with the hopes of restricting access between them completely (Sales never needs to talk to Support's workstations or printers and vice-versa) or b) certain IP addresses and TCP/UDP ports across VLANS -- i.e. permitting the Sales VLAN to access the CRM Web Server in the Server VLAN on port 443 only. Port-wise, I'll need a 48-port switch and another 24-port switch to go with the two existing 24-port Layer 2 switches (Linksys); I'm looking at going with D-Links or HP Procurves as Cisco is out of our price range. Question #1: From what I understand (and please correct me if I'm wrong), if the Servers (VLAN10) and Sales (VLAN20) are all on the same 48-port switch (or two stacked 24-port switches), afaik, the switch "knows" what VLANs and ports each device belongs to and will switch packets between them; I can also apply ACLs to restrict access between VLANs at this point. Is this correct? Question #2: Now lets say that Support (VLAN30) is on a different switch (one of the Linksys) switches. I'm assuming I'll need to trunk (tag) switch #2's VLANs across to switch #1, so switch #1 sees switch #2's VLAN30 (and vice-versa). Once Switch #1 can "see" VLAN30, I'm assuming I can then apply ACLs as stated in Question #1. Is this correct? Question #3: Once Switch #1 can see all the VLANs, can I achieve the seemingly "Layer 3" ACL filtering of restricting access to Server VLAN on only certain TCP/UDP ports and IP addresses (say, only permitting 3389 to the Terminal Server, 192.168.10.4/32). I say "seemingly" because some of the Layer 2 switches mention the ability to restrict ports and IP addresses through the ACLs; I (perhaps mistakenly) thought that in order to have Layer 3 ACLs (packet filtering), I'd need to have at least one Layer 3 switch acting as a core router. If my assumptions are incorrect, at which point do you need a Layer 3 switch for inter-VLAN routing vs. inter-VLAN switching? Is it generally only when you need that higher-level packet filtering ability between your departments?

  Read the article

• SVN checkout returns 400 error

  - by eboix

  I'm trying to download the http://code.opencv.org/svn/opencv/trunk/ repository of all of the OpenCV source code - as specified in an OpenCV installation tutorial. In the tutorial, the repository https://code.ros.org/svn/opencv/trunk/ is used, but they moved it to http://code.opencv.org/svn/opencv/trunk/, and now you need a password to access the code.ros.org repository. Anyway, I'm using TortoiseSVN to download the SVN repository. (I get the same error with http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32svn/) I get this: Checkout from http://code.opencv.org/svn/opencv/trunk, revision HEAD, Fully recursive, Externals included Server sent unexpected return value (400 Bad request. Method Unknown) in response to REPORT request for '/svn/opencv/!svn/vcc/default' On the TortoiseSVN site I found something about this 400 error: You're behind a firewall which blocks DAV requests. Most firewalls do that. Either ask your Administrator to change the firewall, or access the repository with https:// instead of http:// like in https://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/ That way you connect to the repository with SSL encryption, which firewalls can't interfere with (if they don't block the SSL port completely). Also some virus scanners (i.e. Kapersky) are known to interfere and cause this error. The code.ros.org repository is https://, so I would be able to access it, but I need a password, so I can't. I made an account on ros.org, but it seems that I still need a password (which I don't know) to access the code repository. My username-password combination does not work. I unblocked all of the TortoiseSVN programs in my firewall settings. Nothing changed. I temporarily stopped my firewall to see if it was interfering with my request. I got the same error. How can I do an svn checkout http://code.opencv.org/svn/opencv/trunk/opencv/ so that I don't get this error? Is there any way to make it https://? Any help would be appreciated!

  Read the article

• Setting up port forwarding for web server

  - by Javier Badia

  This could belong on Super User, but I thought this place was more appropiate. I want to run Apache in my computer and want to make it available to the outside world to test a couple things. Apparently, I have to go into my router's (a TP-LINK TD 8910G) settings and forward port 80 to my PC's IP. So far so good. Thing is, since the router uses a web based interface and it's kind of stupid, it told me that since I was using port 80 for this, I should access its settings through port 8080. Maybe it can't detect requests coming from the LAN, I don't know. Point is, now neither port can't access the configuration, and I can't access Internet. Specifically, trying to access anything (including 192.168.1.1, the router's settings) through port 80 turns up a blank page (maybe if I had the server running in my computer I'd get something, but I don't want to risk trying, I had to reset the router and restore the settings), and port 8080 gives a "Can't establish connection" error in Firefox (and similar ones in other browsers). Is there a way to configure the router to not redirect requests coming from inside the network? I'm a beginner with this stuff, so please try to explain in a simple way. If this is more appropiate in Super User, I'm sorry.

  Read the article

• Effective Permissions displays incorrect information

  - by Konrads

  I have a security mystery :) Effective permissions tab shows that a few sampled users (IT ops) have any and all rights (all boxes are ticked). The permissions show that Local Administrators group has full access and some business users have too of which the sampled users are not members of. Local Administrators group has some AD IT Ops related groups of which the sampled users, again, appear not be members. The sampled users are not members of Domain Administrators either. I've tried tracing backwards (from permissions to user) and forwards (user to permission) and could not find anything. At this point, there are three options: I've missed something and they are members of some groups. There's another way of getting full permissions. Effective Permissions are horribly wrong. Is there a way to retrieve the decision logic of Effective Permissions? Any hints, tips, ideas? UPDATE: The winning answer is number 3 - Effective Permissions are horribly wrong. When comparing outputs as ran from the server logged on as admin and when running it as a regular user from remote computer show different results: All boxes (FULL) access and on server - None. Actually testing the access, of course, denies access.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399  | Next Page >