Search Results

Search found 414 results on 17 pages for '401'.

Page 4/17 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Trying to use Digest Authentication for Folder Protection

    - by Jon Hazlett
    StackOverflow users suggested I try my question here. I'm using Server 2008 EE and IIS 7. I've got a site that I've migrated over from XP Pro using IIS 5. On the old system, I was using IIS Password to use simple .htaccess files to control a couple of folders that I didn't want to be publicly viewable. Now that I'm running a full-blown DC with a more powerful version of IIS, I decided it'd be a good idea to start using something slightly more sophisticated. After doing my research and trying to keep things as cheap as possible with a touch of extra security, I decided that Digest Authentication would be the best way to go. My issue is this: With Anon access disabled and Digest enabled, I am never prompted for credentials. when on the server, viewing domain[dot]com/example will simply show my 401.htm page without prompting me for credentials. when on a different network/computer, viewing domain[dot]com/example again shows my 401.htm without prompting for credentials. At the site level I only have Anon enabled. Every subfolder, unless I want it protected, has just Anon enabled. Only the folders I want protected have Anon disabled and Digest enabled. I have tried editing the bindings to see if that would spark any kind of change... www.domain.com, domain.com, and localhost have all been tried. There was never a change in behavior at any permutation (aside from the page not being found when I un-bound localhost to the site). I might have screwed up when I deleted the default site from IIS. I didn't think I'd actually need it for anything, but some of what I have read online is telling me otherwise now. As for Digest settings, I have it pointed to local.domain.com, which is the name assigned to my AD Domain. I'm guessing that's right, but honestly have no clue about what a realm actually is. Would it matter that I have an A record for local.domain.com pointing to my IP address? I had problems initially with an absolute link for 401.htm pages, but have since resolved that. Instead of D:\HTTP\401.htm I've used /401.htm and all is well. I used to get error 500's because it couldn't find the custom 401.htm file, but now it loads just fine. As for some data, I was getting entries like this from access logs: 2009-07-10 17:34:12 10.0.0.10 GET /example/ - 80 - [workip] Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+7.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+.NET+CLR+1.1.4322;+.NET+CLR+2.0.50727;+InfoPath.2) 401 2 5 132 But after correcting my 401.htm links now get logs like this: 2009-07-10 18:56:25 10.0.0.10 GET /example - 80 - [workip] Mozilla/5.0+(Windows;+U;+Windows+NT+5.1;+en-US;+rv:1.9.0.11)+Gecko/2009060215+Firefox/3.0.11 200 0 0 146 I don't know if that means anything or not. I still don't get any credential challenges, regardless of where I try to sign in from ( my workstation, my server, my cellphone even ). The only thing that's seemed to work is viewing localhost and I donno what could be preventing authentication from finding it's way out of the server. Thanks for any help! Jon

    Read the article

  • Remotely from Chrome or IE page loads ~60seconds, from Firefox or IE on local machine - instantly.

    - by Janis Veinbergs
    The problem: If i access SharePoint from Windows 7 with IE8 or Chrome5 - I must wait for like a minute to get a response. If i use other Windows 7 with IE8, just the same - just wait a MINUTE. If i use Firefox3.6 on W7 machine - page opens up instantly. Now switch to IE rendering engine in Firefox, you will have to wait just as with IE. Now i tried IE8 on XP SP3 - page opens up instantly. I tried IE8 on Windows Server 2003 SP2 (machine on which SharePoint is hosted) - page opens up instantly. IIS6 Logs I did request almost instantly from all 3 browsers and this is what shows up in IIS logs (first 2 entries for each browser): Chrome Ok, IIS saw first Chrome request when i Hit enter in browser, but i had to wait long for things to move on 2010-06-01 05:46:04 W3SVC1794621940 192.168.0.9 GET /sapulces - 80 - 192.168.0.186 Mozilla/5.0+(Windows;+U;+Windows+NT+6.1;+en-US)+AppleWebKit/533.4+(KHTML,+like+Gecko)+Chrome/5.0.375.55+Safari/533.4 401 2 2148074254 Loading... 2010-06-01 05:47:07 W3SVC1794621940 192.168.0.9 GET /sapulces - 80 - 192.168.0.186 Mozilla/5.0+(Windows;+U;+Windows+NT+6.1;+en-US)+AppleWebKit/533.4+(KHTML,+like+Gecko)+Chrome/5.0.375.55+Safari/533.4 401 1 0 ... etc... Firefox All Instantly 2010-06-01 05:46:06 W3SVC1794621940 192.168.0.9 GET /sapulces - 80 - 192.168.0.186 Mozilla/5.0+(Windows;+U;+Windows+NT+6.1;+lv;+rv:1.9.2.3)+Gecko/20100401+Firefox/3.6.3 401 2 2148074254 2010-06-01 05:46:06 W3SVC1794621940 192.168.0.9 GET /sapulces - 80 - 192.168.0.186 Mozilla/5.0+(Windows;+U;+Windows+NT+6.1;+lv;+rv:1.9.2.3)+Gecko/20100401+Firefox/3.6.3 401 1 0 ... etc... IE I did hit enter when it was 05:46:06, but these are first entries in IIS logs 2010-06-01 05:47:08 W3SVC1794621940 192.168.0.9 GET /sapulces - 80 - 192.168.0.186 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+7.0;+Windows+NT+6.1;+Trident/4.0;+SLCC2;+.NET+CLR+2.0.50727;+.NET+CLR+3.5.30729;+.NET+CLR+3.0.30729;+Media+Center+PC+6.0;+Tablet+PC+2.0;+.NET+CLR+1.1.4322;+.NET4.0C;+.NET4.0E) 401 1 0 2010-06-01 05:47:08 W3SVC1794621940 192.168.0.9 GET /sapulces - 80 - 192.168.0.186 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+7.0;+Windows+NT+6.1;+Trident/4.0;+SLCC2;+.NET+CLR+2.0.50727;+.NET+CLR+3.5.30729;+.NET+CLR+3.0.30729;+Media+Center+PC+6.0;+Tablet+PC+2.0;+.NET+CLR+1.1.4322;+.NET4.0C;+.NET4.0E) 401 1 0 ... etc... Nothing to see in Event Logs. The question Similar question has been asked but there is no response and i`m trying to access page without SSL and that happens even on GET requests. Where do I look? Where would be the problem? Browser? OS? I don't even know what to think about. Just a note Just a note about chrome's process isolation: I found it sad that while I was waiting that minute with Chrome, i could not use any other tab (i could switch, but i could not, for example, scroll or use any controls)

    Read the article

  • .NET WebRequest.PreAuthenticate not quite what it sounds like

    - by Rick Strahl
    I’ve run into the  problem a few times now: How to pre-authenticate .NET WebRequest calls doing an HTTP call to the server – essentially send authentication credentials on the very first request instead of waiting for a server challenge first? At first glance this sound like it should be easy: The .NET WebRequest object has a PreAuthenticate property which sounds like it should force authentication credentials to be sent on the first request. Looking at the MSDN example certainly looks like it does: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.net.webrequest.preauthenticate.aspx Unfortunately the MSDN sample is wrong. As is the text of the Help topic which incorrectly leads you to believe that PreAuthenticate… wait for it - pre-authenticates. But it doesn’t allow you to set credentials that are sent on the first request. What this property actually does is quite different. It doesn’t send credentials on the first request but rather caches the credentials ONCE you have already authenticated once. Http Authentication is based on a challenge response mechanism typically where the client sends a request and the server responds with a 401 header requesting authentication. So the client sends a request like this: GET /wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus HTTP/1.1 Host: rasnote User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506) Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Language: en,de;q=0.7,en-us;q=0.3 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7 Keep-Alive: 300 Connection: keep-alive and the server responds with: HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized Cache-Control: private Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5 WWW-Authenticate: basic realm=rasnote" X-AspNet-Version: 2.0.50727 WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate WWW-Authenticate: NTLM WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="rasnote" X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:58:20 GMT Content-Length: 5163 plus the actual error message body. The client then is responsible for re-sending the current request with the authentication token information provided (in this case Basic Auth): GET /wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus HTTP/1.1 Host: rasnote User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506) Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Language: en,de;q=0.7,en-us;q=0.3 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7 Keep-Alive: 300 Connection: keep-alive Cookie: TimeTrakker=2HJ1998WH06696; WebLogCommentUser=Rick Strahl|http://www.west-wind.com/|[email protected]; WebStoreUser=b8bd0ed9 Authorization: Basic cgsf12aDpkc2ZhZG1zMA== Once the authorization info is sent the server responds with the actual page result. Now if you use WebRequest (or WebClient) the default behavior is to re-authenticate on every request that requires authorization. This means if you look in  Fiddler or some other HTTP client Proxy that captures requests you’ll see that each request re-authenticates: Here are two requests fired back to back: and you can see the 401 challenge, the 200 response for both requests. If you watch this same conversation between a browser and a server you’ll notice that the first 401 is also there but the subsequent 401 requests are not present. WebRequest.PreAuthenticate And this is precisely what the WebRequest.PreAuthenticate property does: It’s a caching mechanism that caches the connection credentials for a given domain in the active process and resends it on subsequent requests. It does not send credentials on the first request but it will cache credentials on subsequent requests after authentication has succeeded: string url = "http://rasnote/wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus"; HttpWebRequest req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Credentials = new NetworkCredential("rick", "secret", "rasnote"); req.AuthenticationLevel = System.Net.Security.AuthenticationLevel.MutualAuthRequested; req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; WebResponse resp = req.GetResponse(); resp.Close(); req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Credentials = new NetworkCredential("rstrahl", "secret", "rasnote"); req.AuthenticationLevel = System.Net.Security.AuthenticationLevel.MutualAuthRequested; req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; resp = req.GetResponse(); which results in the desired sequence: where only the first request doesn’t send credentials. This is quite useful as it saves quite a few round trips to the server – bascially it saves one auth request request for every authenticated request you make. In most scenarios I think you’d want to send these credentials this way but one downside to this is that there’s no way to log out the client. Since the client always sends the credentials once authenticated only an explicit operation ON THE SERVER can undo the credentials by forcing another login explicitly (ie. re-challenging with a forced 401 request). Forcing Basic Authentication Credentials on the first Request On a few occasions I’ve needed to send credentials on a first request – mainly to some oddball third party Web Services (why you’d want to use Basic Auth on a Web Service is beyond me – don’t ask but it’s not uncommon in my experience). This is true of certain services that are using Basic Authentication (especially some Apache based Web Services) and REQUIRE that the authentication is sent right from the first request. No challenge first. Ugly but there it is. Now the following works only with Basic Authentication because it’s pretty straight forward to create the Basic Authorization ‘token’ in code since it’s just an unencrypted encoding of the user name and password into base64. As you might guess this is totally unsecure and should only be used when using HTTPS/SSL connections (i’m not in this example so I can capture the Fiddler trace and my local machine doesn’t have a cert installed, but for production apps ALWAYS use SSL with basic auth). The idea is that you simply add the required Authorization header to the request on your own along with the authorization string that encodes the username and password: string url = "http://rasnote/wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus"; HttpWebRequest req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; string user = "rick"; string pwd = "secret"; string domain = "www.west-wind.com"; string auth = "Basic " + Convert.ToBase64String(System.Text.Encoding.Default.GetBytes(user + ":" + pwd)); req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.AuthenticationLevel = System.Net.Security.AuthenticationLevel.MutualAuthRequested;req.Headers.Add("Authorization", auth); req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; WebResponse resp = req.GetResponse(); resp.Close(); This works and causes the request to immediately send auth information to the server. However, this only works with Basic Auth because you can actually create the authentication credentials easily on the client because it’s essentially clear text. The same doesn’t work for Windows or Digest authentication since you can’t easily create the authentication token on the client and send it to the server. Another issue with this approach is that PreAuthenticate has no effect when you manually force the authentication. As far as Web Request is concerned it never sent the authentication information so it’s not actually caching the value any longer. If you run 3 requests in a row like this: string url = "http://rasnote/wconnect/admin/wc.wc?_maintain~ShowStatus"; HttpWebRequest req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; string user = "ricks"; string pwd = "secret"; string domain = "www.west-wind.com"; string auth = "Basic " + Convert.ToBase64String(System.Text.Encoding.Default.GetBytes(user + ":" + pwd)); req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Headers.Add("Authorization", auth); req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; WebResponse resp = req.GetResponse(); resp.Close(); req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Credentials = new NetworkCredential(user, pwd, domain); req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; resp = req.GetResponse(); resp.Close(); req = HttpWebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; req.PreAuthenticate = true; req.Credentials = new NetworkCredential(user, pwd, domain); req.UserAgent = ": Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 4.0.20506)"; resp = req.GetResponse(); you’ll find the trace looking like this: where the first request (the one we explicitly add the header to) authenticates, the second challenges, and any subsequent ones then use the PreAuthenticate credential caching. In effect you’ll end up with one extra 401 request in this scenario, which is still better than 401 challenges on each request. Getting Access to WebRequest in Classic .NET Web Service Clients If you’re running a classic .NET Web Service client (non-WCF) one issue with the above is how do you get access to the WebRequest to actually add the custom headers to do the custom Authentication described above? One easy way is to implement a partial class that allows you add headers with something like this: public partial class TaxService { protected NameValueCollection Headers = new NameValueCollection(); public void AddHttpHeader(string key, string value) { this.Headers.Add(key,value); } public void ClearHttpHeaders() { this.Headers.Clear(); } protected override WebRequest GetWebRequest(Uri uri) { HttpWebRequest request = (HttpWebRequest) base.GetWebRequest(uri); request.Headers.Add(this.Headers); return request; } } where TaxService is the name of the .NET generated proxy class. In code you can then call AddHttpHeader() anywhere to add additional headers which are sent as part of the GetWebRequest override. Nice and simple once you know where to hook it. For WCF there’s a bit more work involved by creating a message extension as described here: http://weblogs.asp.net/avnerk/archive/2006/04/26/Adding-custom-headers-to-every-WCF-call-_2D00_-a-solution.aspx. FWIW, I think that HTTP header manipulation should be readily available on any HTTP based Web Service client DIRECTLY without having to subclass or implement a special interface hook. But alas a little extra work is required in .NET to make this happen Not a Common Problem, but when it happens… This has been one of those issues that is really rare, but it’s bitten me on several occasions when dealing with oddball Web services – a couple of times in my own work interacting with various Web Services and a few times on customer projects that required interaction with credentials-first services. Since the servers determine the protocol, we don’t have a choice but to follow the protocol. Lovely following standards that implementers decide to ignore, isn’t it? :-}© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2010Posted in .NET  CSharp  Web Services  

    Read the article

  • what should be limit to use for IPTABLE rate limiting for a webserver

    - by Registered User
    I see on my webserver some logs as follows 203.252.157.98 - :25:02 "GET //phpmyadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 393 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :25:03 "GET //phpMyAdmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 394 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :25:03 "GET //pma/ HTTP/1.1" 404 388 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :25:04 "GET //dbadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 391 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :25:05 "GET //myadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 391 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :25:06 "GET //phppgadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 394 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :25:06 "GET //PMA/ HTTP/1.1" 404 389 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :25:07 "GET //admin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 389 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :25:08 "GET //MyAdmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 392 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :27:36 "GET //phpmyadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 393 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :27:42 "GET //phpMyAdmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 394 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :27:42 "GET //pma/ HTTP/1.1" 404 388 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - :27:43 "GET //dbadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 391 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" 203.252.157.98 - - "GET //myadmin/ HTTP/1.1" 404 391 "-" "Made by ZmEu @ WhiteHat Team - www.whitehat.ro" and some more as follows 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:41 "GET /pma/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 399 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:41 "GET /scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 397 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:42 "GET /sqlweb/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 401 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:42 "GET /web/phpMyAdmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 408 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:43 "GET /web/phpmyadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 408 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:44 "GET /web/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 400 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:44 "GET /webadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 403 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:45 "GET /webdb/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 401 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:22:57:45 "GET /websql/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 401 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:51 "GET /admin/phpmyadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 407 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:52 "GET /admin/pma/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 404 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:52 "GET /admin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 401 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:53 "GET /db/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 399 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:54 "GET /dbadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 402 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:54 "GET /myadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 403 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:55 "GET /mysql/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 401 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:55 "GET /mysqladmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 405 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:56 "GET /phpMyAdmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 405 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:56 "GET /phpadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 403 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:57 "GET /phpmyadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 404 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:57 "GET /pma/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 399 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:58 "GET /scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 397 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:58 "GET /sqlweb/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 401 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:59 "GET /web/phpMyAdmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 408 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:38:59 "GET /web/phpmyadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 408 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:39:00 "GET /web/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 400 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:39:01 "GET /webadmin/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 403 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:39:01 "GET /webdb/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 401 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" 118.219.234.254 - - [19/Oct/2010:05:39:02 "GET /websql/scripts/setup.php HTTP/1.1" 404 401 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98)" I have 2 questions 1) When such an attack happens on my site then while such scanning is going on how do I detect it? (In a very less time) 2)I have decided to rate limit the IPTABLES so as to reduce such DOS attacks by some script kiddies (to scan for vulnerabilities in phpmyadmin or some other script) to some extent.So how much should it be limited so that genuine users do not get kicked out.What is the best practise for question 2?

    Read the article

  • org.apache.http.conn.HttpHostConnectException:Connection to http://172.20.38.143 refused

    - by Passion
    I have developed client server Application .I am accessing mysql with php running on my machine and client running on my cell which is connected to machine.WI-FI is also switched ON. Internet Permission are also added in Manifest file but then also the i encounter error 172.20.38.143 is IP OF MY MACHINE 06-01 13:20:10.391: W/System.err(11157): org.apache.http.conn.HttpHostConnectException: Connection to http://172.20.38.143 refused 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.impl.conn.DefaultClientConnectionOperator.openConnection(DefaultClientConnectionOperator.java:183) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.impl.conn.AbstractPoolEntry.open(AbstractPoolEntry.java:164) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.impl.conn.AbstractPooledConnAdapter.open(AbstractPooledConnAdapter.java:119) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.impl.client.DefaultRequestDirector.execute(DefaultRequestDirector.java:360) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.impl.client.AbstractHttpClient.execute(AbstractHttpClient.java:674) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.impl.client.AbstractHttpClient.execute(AbstractHttpClient.java:511) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.impl.client.AbstractHttpClient.execute(AbstractHttpClient.java:489) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at nineandroid.net.example.library.JSONParser.getJSONFromUrl(JSONParser.java:42) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at nineandroid.net.example.library.UserFunctions.registerUser(UserFunctions.java:59) 06-01 13:20:10.401: W/System.err(11157): at nineandroid.net.example.RegisterActivity$1.onClick(RegisterActivity.java:52) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at android.view.View.performClick(View.java:3567) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at android.view.View$PerformClick.run(View.java:14224) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at android.os.Handler.handleCallback(Handler.java:605) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at android.os.Handler.dispatchMessage(Handler.java:92) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at android.os.Looper.loop(Looper.java:137) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at android.app.ActivityThread.main(ActivityThread.java:4517) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at java.lang.reflect.Method.invokeNative(Native Method) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:511) 06-01 13:20:10.411: W/System.err(11157): at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit$MethodAndArgsCaller.run(ZygoteInit.java:993) 06-01 13:20:10.421: W/System.err(11157): at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.main(ZygoteInit.java:760) 06-01 13:20:10.421: W/System.err(11157): at dalvik.system.NativeStart.main(Native Method) 06-01 13:20:10.421: W/System.err(11157): Caused by: java.net.ConnectException: failed to connect to /172.20.38.143 (port 80): connect failed: ENETUNREACH (Network is unreachable) 06-01 13:20:10.431: W/System.err(11157): at libcore.io.IoBridge.connect(IoBridge.java:114) 06-01 13:20:10.431: W/System.err(11157): at java.net.PlainSocketImpl.connect(PlainSocketImpl.java:192) 06-01 13:20:10.431: W/System.err(11157): at java.net.PlainSocketImpl.connect(PlainSocketImpl.java:459) 06-01 13:20:10.431: W/System.err(11157): at java.net.Socket.connect(Socket.java:848) 06-01 13:20:10.431: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.conn.scheme.PlainSocketFactory.connectSocket(PlainSocketFactory.java:119) 06-01 13:20:10.431: W/System.err(11157): at org.apache.http.impl.conn.DefaultClientConnectionOperator.openConnection(DefaultClientConnectionOperator.java:144) 06-01 13:20:10.431: W/System.err(11157): ... 20 more 06-01 13:20:10.431: W/System.err(11157): Caused by: libcore.io.ErrnoException: connect failed: ENETUNREACH (Network is unreachable) 06-01 13:20:10.441: W/System.err(11157): at libcore.io.Posix.connect(Native Method) 06-01 13:20:10.441: W/System.err(11157): at libcore.io.BlockGuardOs.connect(BlockGuardOs.java:85) 06-01 13:20:10.441: W/System.err(11157): at libcore.io.IoBridge.connectErrno(IoBridge.java:127) 06-01 13:20:10.441: W/System.err(11157): at libcore.io.IoBridge.connect(IoBridge.java:112) 06-01 13:20:10.441: W/System.err(11157): ... 25 more 06-01 13:20:10.441: E/Buffer Error(11157): Error converting result java.lang.NullPointerException 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/JSON Parser(11157): Error parsing data org.json.JSONException: End of input at character 0 of 06-01 13:20:10.451: D/AndroidRuntime(11157): Shutting down VM 06-01 13:20:10.451: W/dalvikvm(11157): threadid=1: thread exiting with uncaught exception (group=0x40c0aa68) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): FATAL EXCEPTION: main 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): java.lang.NullPointerException 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at nineandroid.net.example.RegisterActivity$1.onClick(RegisterActivity.java:56) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at android.view.View.performClick(View.java:3567) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at android.view.View$PerformClick.run(View.java:14224) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at android.os.Handler.handleCallback(Handler.java:605) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at android.os.Handler.dispatchMessage(Handler.java:92) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at android.os.Looper.loop(Looper.java:137) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at android.app.ActivityThread.main(ActivityThread.java:4517) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at java.lang.reflect.Method.invokeNative(Native Method) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:511) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit$MethodAndArgsCaller.run(ZygoteInit.java:993) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.main(ZygoteInit.java:760) 06-01 13:20:10.451: E/AndroidRuntime(11157): at dalvik.system.NativeStart.main(Native Method) UserFunctions.java to call jsonParser public class UserFunctions { private JSONParser jsonParser; private static String loginURL = "http://172.20.38.143/ah_login_api/"; private static String registerURL = "http://172.20.38.143/ah_login_api/"; private static String login_tag = "login"; private static String register_tag = "register"; // constructor public UserFunctions(){ jsonParser = new JSONParser(); } /** * function make Login Request * @param email * @param password * */ public JSONObject loginUser(String email, String password){ // Building Parameters List<NameValuePair> params = new ArrayList<NameValuePair>(); params.add(new BasicNameValuePair("tag", login_tag)); params.add(new BasicNameValuePair("email", email)); params.add(new BasicNameValuePair("password", password)); JSONObject json = jsonParser.getJSONFromUrl(loginURL, params); // return json // Log.e("JSON", json.toString()); return json; } /** * function make Login Request * @param name * @param email * @param password * */ public JSONObject registerUser(String name, String email, String password){ // Building Parameters List<NameValuePair> params = new ArrayList<NameValuePair>(); params.add(new BasicNameValuePair("tag", register_tag)); params.add(new BasicNameValuePair("name", name)); params.add(new BasicNameValuePair("email", email)); params.add(new BasicNameValuePair("password", password)); // getting JSON Object JSONObject json = jsonParser.getJSONFromUrl(registerURL, params); // return json return json; } /** * Function get Login status * */ public boolean isUserLoggedIn(Context context){ DatabaseHandler db = new DatabaseHandler(context); int count = db.getRowCount(); if(count > 0){ // user logged in return true; } return false; } /** * Function to logout user * Reset Database * */ public boolean logoutUser(Context context){ DatabaseHandler db = new DatabaseHandler(context); db.resetTables(); return true; } } jsonParser.java public class JSONParser { static InputStream is = null; static JSONObject jObj = null; static String json = ""; // constructor public JSONParser() { } public JSONObject getJSONFromUrl(String url, List<NameValuePair> params) { // Making HTTP request try { // defaultHttpClient DefaultHttpClient httpClient = new DefaultHttpClient(); HttpPost httpPost = new HttpPost(url); httpPost.setEntity(new UrlEncodedFormEntity(params)); HttpResponse httpResponse = httpClient.execute(httpPost); HttpEntity httpEntity = httpResponse.getEntity(); is = httpEntity.getContent(); } catch (UnsupportedEncodingException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } catch (ClientProtocolException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } try { BufferedReader reader = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader( is, "iso-8859-1"), 8); StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); String line = null; while ((line = reader.readLine()) != null) { sb.append(line + "\n"); } is.close(); json = sb.toString(); Log.e("JSON", json); } catch (Exception e) { Log.e("Buffer Error", "Error converting result " + e.toString()); } // try parse the string to a JSON object try { jObj = new JSONObject(json); } catch (JSONException e) { Log.e("JSON Parser", "Error parsing data " + e.toString()); } // return JSON String return jObj; } } RegisterActivity.java public class RegisterActivity extends Activity { Button btnRegister; Button btnLinkToLogin; EditText inputFullName; EditText inputEmail; EditText inputPassword; TextView registerErrorMsg; // JSON Response node names private static String KEY_SUCCESS = "success"; private static String KEY_UID = "uid"; private static String KEY_NAME = "name"; private static String KEY_EMAIL = "email"; private static String KEY_CREATED_AT = "created_at"; @Override public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); setContentView(R.layout.register); // Importing all assets like buttons, text fields inputFullName = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.registerName); inputEmail = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.registerEmail); inputPassword = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.registerPassword); btnRegister = (Button) findViewById(R.id.btnRegister); btnLinkToLogin = (Button) findViewById(R.id.btnLinkToLoginScreen); registerErrorMsg = (TextView) findViewById(R.id.register_error); // Register Button Click event btnRegister.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() { public void onClick(View view) { String name = inputFullName.getText().toString(); String email = inputEmail.getText().toString(); String password = inputPassword.getText().toString(); UserFunctions userFunction = new UserFunctions(); JSONObject json = userFunction.registerUser(name, email, password); // check for login response try { if (json.getString(KEY_SUCCESS) != null) { registerErrorMsg.setText(""); String res = json.getString(KEY_SUCCESS); if(Integer.parseInt(res) == 1){ // user successfully registred // Store user details in SQLite Database DatabaseHandler db = new DatabaseHandler(getApplicationContext()); JSONObject json_user = json.getJSONObject("user"); // Clear all previous data in database userFunction.logoutUser(getApplicationContext()); db.addUser(json_user.getString(KEY_NAME), json_user.getString(KEY_EMAIL), json.getString(KEY_UID), json_user.getString(KEY_CREATED_AT)); // Launch Dashboard Screen Intent dashboard = new Intent(getApplicationContext(), DashboardActivity.class); // Close all views before launching Dashboard dashboard.addFlags(Intent.FLAG_ACTIVITY_CLEAR_TOP); startActivity(dashboard); // Close Registration Screen finish(); }else{ // Error in registration registerErrorMsg.setText("Error occured in registration"); } } } catch (JSONException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } }); // Link to Login Screen btnLinkToLogin.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener() { public void onClick(View view) { Intent i = new Intent(getApplicationContext(), LoginActivity.class); startActivity(i); // Close Registration View finish(); } }); } }

    Read the article

  • How to get an id from the results in two tables

    - by Chris Lively
    Consider an order. An order will have one or more line items. Each line item is for a particular product. Given a filter table with a couple of products, how would I get the order id's that had at least all of the products listed in the second table? table Orders( OrderId int ) table LineItems ( OrderId int, LineItemId int, ProductId int ) table Filter ( ProductId int ) data Orders OrderId -------- 1 2 3 LineItems OrderId LineItemId ProductId ------- ---------- --------- 1 1 401 1 2 502 2 3 401 3 4 401 3 5 603 3 6 714 Filter ProductId --------- 401 603 Desired result of the query: OrderId: 3

    Read the article

  • yum not working on EC2 Red Hat instance: Cannot retrieve repository metadata

    - by adev3
    For some reason yum has stopped working in my Amazon EC2 instance, located in the EU West sector. There seems to be something wrong with the path of the repo metadata, is this correct? I would be very grateful for any help, as my experience in this field is somewhat limited. Thank you very much. cat /etc/redhat-release: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.2 (Santiago) yum repolist: Loaded plugins: amazon-id, rhui-lb, security https://rhui2-cds01.eu-west-1.aws.ce.redhat.com/pulp/repos//rhui-client-config/rhel/server/6/x86_64/os/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] PYCURL ERROR 22 - "The requested URL returned error: 401" Trying other mirror. https://rhui2-cds02.eu-west-1.aws.ce.redhat.com/pulp/repos//rhui-client-config/rhel/server/6/x86_64/os/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] PYCURL ERROR 22 - "The requested URL returned error: 401" Trying other mirror. repo id repo name status rhui-eu-west-1-client-config-server-6 Red Hat Update Infrastructure 2.0 Client Configuration Server 6 0 rhui-eu-west-1-rhel-server-releases Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 6 (RPMs) 0 rhui-eu-west-1-rhel-server-releases-optional Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server 6 Optional (RPMs) 0 repolist: 0 yum update: (I needed to remove the base URLs below because of ServerFault's restrictions for new users) Loaded plugins: amazon-id, rhui-lb, security [same as base url 1 above]/pulp/repos//rhui-client-config/rhel/server/6/x86_64/os/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] PYCURL ERROR 22 - "The requested URL returned error: 401" Trying other mirror. [same as base url 2 above]/pulp/repos//rhui-client-config/rhel/server/6/x86_64/os/repodata/repomd.xml: [Errno 14] PYCURL ERROR 22 - "The requested URL returned error: 401" Trying other mirror. Error: Cannot retrieve repository metadata (repomd.xml) for repository: rhui-eu-west-1-client-config-server-6. Please verify its path and try again

    Read the article

  • allow public access to subfolder of protected folder on apache

    - by UnnamedMook
    I have password-protected the root folder of my website while i do maintenance, but I want to display a custom 401 error page to let people know the site is under construction. Unfortunately, my web host doesn't allow me write access to anything outside the root folder of my website, so this custom error page must by stored in the root folder or one of its subfolders. Instead of my custom error page I get the Apache default error page and it also says "Additionally, a 401 Authorization Required error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request." I searched for ways to make a subfolder of a protected directory public, and all I could find was to use the "Satisfy any" directive, but this doesn't work for me. It doesn't work on a file-only basis either, as with the .htaccess file below. #Authorization Restriction AuthType Basic AuthName "Access to root" AuthUserFile ********************************* Require user *********** Order Allow,Deny Satisfy any #Error Documents ErrorDocument 401 Error-401.html #Allow access to error documents <Files Error-*,html> Order Deny,Allow Allow from all Satisfy any </Files> I can only use .htaccess files; I don't have access to httpd.conf

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting Windows Authentication problems (no challenge) in IIS 7.5?

    - by Aaronaught
    I know that there are thousands of reports of people having trouble getting Integrated Windows Authentication to work with IIS, but they all seem to lead to web pages that don't apply or solutions that I've already tried. I've deployed dozens of sites like this before, so either there's something bizarre going on with the server/configuration, or I've been looking at this too long and not seeing the obvious. Simply put, everything works perfectly on my local machine, but falls apart on the production server, which as far as I can tell has the exact same configuration. On the local machine: The machine is running Windows 7 Ultimate, Service Pack 1, IIS 7.5. The site has been tested successfully, using both IIS and the VS Web Development Server. The IIS site config has all authentication methods disabled except Windows Authentication. The local machine is not on any domain. The Providers set up are Negotiate and NTLM (not Negotiate:Kerberos). Extended Protection is Off. All browsers tested (IE, Firefox, Chrome) show the challenge prompt and allow me to log in to the localhost domain with my (local) Windows account. All browsers tested also work using an opaque local IP address - so the browsers themselves don't seem to care whether the site appears "local" or "remote". I've added a display line to the web page which shows the currently-logged-in user and it shows exactly what I would expect (whichever local user I logged in with). On the remote machine: The server is running Windows Server 2008 R2, IIS 7.5. Loading the web page results in an immediate 401.2 error: You are not authorized to view this page due to invalid authentication headers. No challenge prompt ever appears. The IIS site config has all authentication methods disabled except Windows Authentication. The remote machine is not on any domain. The Providers set up are Negotiate and NTLM (not Negotiate:Kerberos). Extended Protection is Off. On the remote machine (remote desktop session), the same error appears in Internet Explorer regardless of whether the domain is localhost or the external IP address. If I try to view the remote web site from my local machine, the error is still 401, but a slightly different 401. No subcode, with the text: Access is denied due to invalid credentials. The Windows Authentication IIS role feature is installed. The WindowsAuthentication Module is added (at the Server level). The exact same error occurs if I turn off Windows Authentication and enable Basic Authentication. The site does load if I turn off Windows Authentication and enable Anonymous (obviously). I've already followed all of the troubleshooting steps on Microsoft Support: Troubleshooting HTTP 401 errors in IIS I've already tried the workaround shown on another Microsoft support page (supposedly to force NTLM as the only method). Last but not least, I tried turning on FREB for 401.2 errors and the results don't seem to tell me anything useful, all I see is the following warning: MODULE_SET_RESPONSE_ERROR_STATUS ModuleName IIS Web Core Notification 2 HttpStatus 401 HttpReason Unauthorized HttpSubStatus 2 ErrorCode 2147942405 ConfigExceptionInfo Notification AUTHENTICATE_REQUEST ErrorCode Access is denied. (0x80070005) ...this seems to just be telling me what I already know (that it's simply rejecting the request instead of negotiating the credentials). The trace does indicate that the WindowsAuthentication module is correctly loaded because there is a NOTIFY_MODULE_START line with ModuleName = WindowsAuthentication (and various other ASP.NET follow-up events - [un]fortunately, no interesting errors or warnings here). Can anyone tell me what I might be missing here? Quick Update: I'm a little uncomfortable sending a whole Wireshark dump as it would reveal IPs, URLs and other stuff, but I did a side-by-side comparison of the HTTP responses from localhost and the remote server in Fiddler, and it seems fairly self-evident what the problem is: Localhost: HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized Cache-Control: private Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5 WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate WWW-Authenticate: NTLM X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 23:42:34 GMT Content-Length: 6399 Proxy-Support: Session-Based-Authentication Remote: HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized Content-Type: text/html Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 23:43:13 GMT Content-Length: 1293 Aside from a few seemingly-inconsequential differences like cache-control, the main difference is that the remote server is not sending the WWW-Authenticate headers back to the client. So, I guess that narrows the question down to: Why is IIS not sending WWW-Authenticate headers when Windows Authentication appears to be installed, loaded, and exclusively enabled?

    Read the article

  • LINQ to Twitter Maintenance Feedback

    - by Joe Mayo
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/WinAZ/archive/2013/06/16/linq-to-twitter-maintenance-feedback.aspxIt’s always fun to receive positive feedback on your work. If you receive a sufficient amount of positive feedback, you know you’re doing something right. Sometimes, people provide negative feedback too. There are a couple ways to handle it: come back fighting or engage for clarification. The way you handle the negative feedback depends on what your goals are. Feedback Approaches If you know the feedback is incorrect and you need to promote your idea or product, you might want to come back fighting. The feedback might just be comments by a troll or competitor wanting to spread FUD. However, this could be the totally wrong approach if you misjudge the source and intentions of the feedback. In a lot of cases, feedback is a golden opportunity. Sometimes, a problem exists that you either don’t know about or don’t realize the true impact of the problem. If you decide to come back fighting, you might loose the opportunity to learn something new. However, if you engage the person providing the feedback, looking for clarification, you might learn something very important. Negative feedback and it’s clarification can lead to the collection of useful and actionable data. In my case, something that prompted this blog post, I noticed someone who tweeted a negative comment about LINQ to Twitter. Normally, any less than stellar comments are usually from folks that need help – so I help if I can. This was different. I was like “Don’t use LINQ to Twitter”. This is an open source project, the comment didn’t come from a competing project, and  sounded more like an expression of frustration. So I engaged. Not only did the person respond, but I got some decent quality feedback. What’s also interesting is a couple other side conversations sprouted on the subject, which gave me more useful data. LINQ to Twitter Thread Actions Essentially, this particular issue centered around maintenance. There are actually several sub-issues at play here: dependencies, error handling, debugging, and visibility. I’ll describe each one and my interpretation. Dependencies Dependencies are where a library has references to other libraries. This means that when you build your application, you need DLLs for the entire dependency graph for your application. There are several potential problems with this that include more libraries for configuration management, potential versioning mismatches, and lack of cross-platform support. In the early days of LINQ to Twitter, I allowed developers to contribute and add dependencies, but it became very problematic (for reasons stated). It was like a ball and chain that kept me from moving forward. So, I refactored and pulled other open-source into my project to eliminate external dependencies. This lets me fix the code in my project without relying on someone else to upgrade or fix their DLL. The motivation for this was from early negative feedback that translated as important data and acted on it. Today, LINQ to Twitter has zero dependencies. Note: Rejecting good code from community members who worked hard to make your project better is a painful experience in itself. I have to point out that any contribution was not in vain because they had a positive influence on my subsequent refactoring that resulted in a better developer experience. Error Handling Error handling has been a problem in the past. I have this combination of supporting both synchronous and asynchronous (APM) processing that can be complex at times. Within the last 6 months, I did a fair amount of refactoring to detect errors and process them properly. I also refactored TwitterQueryException so it includes important data from Twitter. During this refactoring, I’ve made breaking changes that I felt would improve the development experience (small things like renaming a callback property to Exception, rather than Error). I think the async error handling is much better than it was a year ago. For all the work I’ve done, there is more to do. I think that a combination of more error handling support, e.g. improving semantics, and education through documentation and samples will improve the error handling story. Because of what I’ve done so far, it isn’t bad, but I see opportunities for improvement. Debugging Debugging can be painful. Here’s why: you have multiple layers of technology to navigate and figure out where the real problem is – Twitter API, Security, HTTP, LINQ to Twitter, and application. You can probably add your own nuances to that list, but the point is that debugging in this environment can be complex. I think that my plans for error handling will contribute to making the debugging process easier. However, there’s more I can do in the way of documentation and guidance. Some of the questions to be answered revolve around when something goes wrong, how does the developer figure out that there is a problem, what the problem is, and what to do about it. One example that has gone a long way to helping LINQ to Twitter developers is the 401 FAQ. A 401 Unauthorized is the error that the Twitter API returns when a use isn’t able to authenticate and is one of the most difficult problems faced by LINQ to Twitter developers. What I did was read guidance from Twitter and collect techniques from my own development and actions helping other developers to compile an extensive list of reasons for the 401 and ways to fix the problem. At one time, over half of the questions I answered in the forums were to help solve 401 issues. After publishing the 401 FAQ, I rarely get a 401 question and it’s because the person didn’t know about the FAQ. If the person is too lazy to read the FAQ, that’s not my issue, but the results in support issues have been dramatic. I think debugging can benefit from the education and documentation approach, but I’m always open to suggestions on whatever else I can do. Visibility Visibility is a nuance of the error handling/debugging discussion but is deeply rooted in comfort and control. The questions to ask in this area are what is happening as my code runs and how testable is the code. In support of these areas, LINQ to Twitter does have logging and TwitterContext properties that help see what’s happening on requests. The logging functionality allows any developer to connect a TextWriter to the Log property of TwitterContext to see what’s happening. Further, TwitterContext has a Headers property to see the headers Twitter returns and a RawResults property to show the Json string Twitter returns. From a testing perspective, I’ve been able to write hundreds of unit tests, over 600 when this post is published, and growing. If you write your own library, you have full control over all of these aspects. The tradeoff here is that while you have access to the LINQ to Twitter source code and modify it for all the visibility, LINQ to Twitter *will* change (which is good) and you will have to figure out how to merge that with your changes (which is hard). The fact is that this is a limitation of any 3rd party library, not just LINQ to Twitter. So, it’s a design decision where the tradeoff is between control and productivity. That said, there are things I can do with LINQ to Twitter to make the visibility story more compelling. I think there are opportunities to improve diagnostics. This would be a ton of work because it would need to provide multi-level logging that can be tuned for production and support any logging provider you want to attach. I’ve considered approaches such as how the new Semantic Logging application block connects to Windows Error Reporting as a potential target. Whatever I do would need to be extensible without creating native external dependencies. e.g. how many 3rd party libraries force a dependency on a logging framework that you don’t use. So, this won’t be an easy feat, but I believe it can be part of the roadmap. I think that a lot of developers are unaware of existing visibility features, so the first step would be to provide more documentation and guidance. My thought are that this would lead to more feedback that will help improve this area. Summary Recent feedback highlights some of items that are important to LINQ to Twitter developers, such as dependencies, error handling, debugging, and visibility. I know that there are maintenance issues that have been problems for LINQ to Twitter developers in the past. I’ve done a lot of work in this area, such as improving error handling, adding visibility features, and providing extensive API documentation. That said, there is more to be done to make LINQ to Twitter the best Twitter API experience available for .NET developers and I welcome anyone’s thoughts on what I’ve written here or new improvements. @JoeMayo

    Read the article

  • LinkedIn API returns 'Unauthorized' response (PHP OAuth)

    - by Jim Greenleaf
    I've been struggling with this one for a few days now. I've got a test app set up to connect to LinkedIn via OAuth. I want to be able to update a user's status, but at the moment I'm unable to interact with LinkedIn's API at all. I am able to successfully get a requestToken, then an accessToken, but when I issue a request to the API, I see an 'unauthorized' error that looks something like this: object(OAuthException)#2 (8) { ["message:protected"]=> string(73) "Invalid auth/bad request (got a 401, expected HTTP/1.1 20X or a redirect)" ["string:private"]=> string(0) "" ["code:protected"]=> int(401) ["file:protected"]=> string(47) "/home/pmfeorg/public_html/dev/test/linkedin.php" ["line:protected"]=> int(48) ["trace:private"]=> array(1) { [0]=> array(6) { ["file"]=> string(47) "/home/pmfeorg/public_html/dev/test/linkedin.php" ["line"]=> int(48) ["function"]=> string(5) "fetch" ["class"]=> string(5) "OAuth" ["type"]=> string(2) "->" ["args"]=> array(2) { [0]=> string(35) "http://api.linkedin.com/v1/people/~" [1]=> string(3) "GET" } } } ["lastResponse"]=> string(358) " 401 1276375790558 0000 [unauthorized]. OAU:Bhgk3fB4cs9t4oatSdv538tD2X68-1OTCBg-KKL3pFBnGgOEhJZhFOf1n9KtHMMy|48032b2d-bc8c-4744-bb84-4eab53578c11|*01|*01:1276375790:xmc3lWhXJvLSUZh4dxMtrf55VVQ= " ["debugInfo"]=> array(5) { ["sbs"]=> string(329) "GET&http%3A%2F%2Fapi.linkedin.com%2Fv1%2Fpeople%2F~&oauth_consumer_key%3DBhgk3fB4cs9t4oatSdv538tD2X68-1OTCBg-KKL3pFBnGgOEhJZhFOf1n9KtHMMy%26oauth_nonce%3D7068001084c13f2ee6a2117.22312548%26oauth_signature_method%3DHMAC-SHA1%26oauth_timestamp%3D1276375790%26oauth_token%3D48032b2d-bc8c-4744-bb84-4eab53578c11%26oauth_version%3D1.0" ["headers_sent"]=> string(401) "GET /v1/people/~?GET&oauth_consumer_key=Bhgk3fB4cs9t4oatSdv538tD2X68-1OTCBg-KKL3pFBnGgOEhJZhFOf1n9KtHMMy&oauth_signature_method=HMAC-SHA1&oauth_nonce=7068001084c13f2ee6a2117.22312548&oauth_timestamp=1276375790&oauth_version=1.0&oauth_token=48032b2d-bc8c-4744-bb84-4eab53578c11&oauth_signature=xmc3lWhXJvLSUZh4dxMtrf55VVQ%3D HTTP/1.1 User-Agent: PECL-OAuth/1.0-dev Host: api.linkedin.com Accept: */*" ["headers_recv"]=> string(148) "HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized Server: Apache-Coyote/1.1 Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 20:49:50 GMT Content-Type: text/xml;charset=UTF-8 Content-Length: 358" ["body_recv"]=> string(358) " 401 1276375790558 0000 [unauthorized]. OAU:Bhgk3fB4cs9t4oatSdv538tD2X68-1OTCBg-KKL3pFBnGgOEhJZhFOf1n9KtHMMy|48032b2d-bc8c-4744-bb84-4eab53578c11|*01|*01:1276375790:xmc3lWhXJvLSUZh4dxMtrf55VVQ= " ["info"]=> string(216) "About to connect() to api.linkedin.com port 80 (#0) Trying 64.74.98.83... connected Connected to api.linkedin.com (64.74.98.83) port 80 (#0) Connection #0 to host api.linkedin.com left intact Closing connection #0 " } } My code looks like this (based on the FireEagle example from php.net): $req_url = 'https://api.linkedin.com/uas/oauth/requestToken'; $authurl = 'https://www.linkedin.com/uas/oauth/authenticate'; $acc_url = 'https://api.linkedin.com/uas/oauth/accessToken'; $api_url = 'http://api.linkedin.com/v1/people/~'; $callback = 'http://www.pmfe.org/dev/test/linkedin.php'; $conskey = 'Bhgk3fB4cs9t4oatSdv538tD2X68-1OTCBg-KKL3pFBnGgOEhJZhFOf1n9KtHMMy'; $conssec = '####################SECRET KEY#####################'; session_start(); try { $oauth = new OAuth($conskey,$conssec,OAUTH_SIG_METHOD_HMACSHA1,OAUTH_AUTH_TYPE_URI); $oauth->enableDebug(); if(!isset($_GET['oauth_token'])) { $request_token_info = $oauth->getRequestToken($req_url); $_SESSION['secret'] = $request_token_info['oauth_token_secret']; header('Location: '.$authurl.'?oauth_token='.$request_token_info['oauth_token']); exit; } else { $oauth->setToken($_GET['oauth_token'],$_SESSION['secret']); $access_token_info = $oauth->getAccessToken($acc_url); $_SESSION['token'] = $access_token_info['oauth_token']; $_SESSION['secret'] = $access_token_info['oauth_token_secret']; } $oauth->setToken($_SESSION['token'],$_SESSION['secret']); $oauth->fetch($api_url, OAUTH_HTTP_METHOD_GET); $response = $oauth->getLastResponse(); } catch(OAuthException $E) { var_dump($E); } I've successfully set up a connection to Twitter and one to Facebook using OAuth, but LinkedIn keeps eluding me. If anyone could offer some advice or point me in the right direction, I will be extremely appreciative!

    Read the article

  • How to elegantly handle ReturnUrl when using UrlRewrite in ASP.NET 2.0 WebForms

    - by Brian Kim
    I have a folder with multiple .aspx pages that I want to restrict access to. I have added web.config to that folder with <deny users="?"/>. The problem is that ReturnUrl is auto-generated with physical path to the .aspx file while I'm using UrlRewrite. Is there a way to manipulate ReturnUrl without doing manual authentication check and redirection? Is there a way to set ReturnUrl from code-behind or from web.config? EDIT: The application is using ASP.NET 2.0 WebForms. I cannot use 3.5 routing. EDIT 2: It seems like 401 status code is never captured. It returns 302 for protected page and redirects to login page with ReturnUrl. It does not return 401 for protected page. Hmm... Interesting... Ref: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480476.aspx This makes things harder... I might have to write reverse rewrite mapping rules to regex match ReturnUrl and replace it if it doesn't return 401... If it does return 401 I can either set RawUrl to Response.RedirectLocation or replace ReturnUrl with RawUrl. Anyone else have any other ideas?

    Read the article

  • Forms authentication: disable redirect to the login page

    - by codeka
    I have an application that uses ASP.NET Forms Authentication. For the most part, it's working great, but I'm trying to add support for a simple API via an .ashx file. I want the ashx file to have optional authentication (i.e. if you don't supply an Authentication header, then it just works anonymously). But, depending on what you do, I want to require authentication under certain conditions. I thought it would be a simple matter of responding with status code 401 if the required authentication was not supplied, but it seems like the Forms Authentcation module is intercepting that and responding with a redirect to the login page instead. What I mean is, if my ProcessRequest method looks like this: public void ProcessRequest(HttpContext context) { Response.StatusCode = 401; Response.StatusDescription = "Authentication required"; } Then instead of getting a 401 error code on the client, like I expect, I'm actually getting a 302 redirect to the login page. For nornal HTTP traffic, I can see how that would be useful, but for my API page, I want the 401 to go through unmodified so that the client-side caller can respond to it programmatically instead. Is there any way to do that?

    Read the article

  • Proxying webmin with nginx

    - by TheLQ
    I am attempting to proxy webmin behind nginx for various reasons that are outside the scope of this question. However I've been trying for a while now and can't seem to figure it out and think I'm to the point where I've exhausted all the permutations of the config file I can think of. What I have now: relevant nginx config (commented out options removed, I tried many) # Proxy for webmin location /admin/quackwall-webmin { proxy_pass http://127.0.0.1:10000; # Also tried ending with /admin/quackwall-webmin proxy_set_header Host $host; } /etc/webmin/config - Relevant parts webprefix=/admin/quackwall-webmin webprefixnoredir=1 referer=(nginx domain name) Webmin itself is on the standard ports, listening on all addresses temporarily for debugging. SSL has been disabled for right now. So I make a standard request for the login page. However all the CSS and images are broken, with the standard login page returned for all of the resources. In the webmin miniserv logs I see 127.0.0.1 - - [29/Oct/2012:12:29:00 -0400] "GET /admin/quackwall-webmin/session_login.cgi HTTP/1.0" 401 2453 127.0.0.1 - - [29/Oct/2012:12:29:01 -0400] "GET /admin/quackwall-webmin/unauthenticated/style.css HTTP/1.0" 401 2453 127.0.0.1 - - [29/Oct/2012:12:29:01 -0400] "GET /admin/quackwall-webmin/unauthenticated/sorttable.js HTTP/1.0" 401 2453 127.0.0.1 - - [29/Oct/2012:12:29:01 -0400] "GET /admin/quackwall-webmin/unauthenticated/toggleview.js HTTP/1.0" 401 2453 So all the URL's are returning 401s. Interestingly ngrep seems to show that the requests suceeded on the backend communication between nginx and webmin T 127.0.0.1:58908 -> 127.0.0.1:10000 [AP] POST /admin/quackwall-webmin/session_login.cgi HTTP/1.0..Host: (host)..Connection: close..User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW 64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/16.0..Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8..Accept-Language: en-US,en;q=0.5. .Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate..Referer: http://(host)/admin/quackwall-webmin/session_login.cgi..Cookie: testing=1..Cache-Control: ma x-age=0..Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded..Content-Length: 41....page=%2F&user=(user)&pass=(pass) T 127.0.0.1:10000 -> 127.0.0.1:58908 [AP] HTTP/1.0 200 Document follows.. Various other permutations of these config options and others show similar results, with the URL sent to webmin by nginx either being /admin/quackwall-webmin/session_login.cgi, /admin/quackwall-webmin//session_login.cgi, and just /session_login.cgi. All give 201 Unauthenticated responses. All requests, even those that somewhat succeed (as in I can actually load the resources of the page) Is changing the webprefix in webmin even supported? What am I doing wrong? What else can I try?

    Read the article

  • Basic Auth on DirectoryIndex Only

    - by Brad
    I am trying to configure basic auth for my index file, and only my index file. I have configured it like so: <Files index.htm> Order allow,deny Allow from all AuthType Basic AuthName "Some Auth" AuthUserFile "C:/path/to/my/.htpasswd" Require valid-user </Files> When I visit the page, 401 Authorization Required is returned as expected, but the browser doesn't prompt for the username/password. Some further inspection has revealed that Apache is not sending the WWW-Authenticate header. GET http://myhost/ HTTP/1.1 Host: myhost Connection: keep-alive User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.100 Safari/534.30 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate,sdch Accept-Language: en-US,en;q=0.8 Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.3 HTTP/1.1 401 Authorization Required Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 21:36:48 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.16 (Win32) Content-Length: 401 Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>401 Authorization Required</title> </head><body> <h1>Authorization Required</h1> <p>This server could not verify that you are authorized to access the document requested. Either you supplied the wrong credentials (e.g., bad password), or your browser doesn't understand how to supply the credentials required.</p> </body></html> Why is Apache doing this? How can I configure it to send that header appropriately? It is worth noting that this exact same set of directives work fine if I set them for a whole directory. It is only when I configure them to a directory index that they do not work. This is how I know my .htpasswd and such are fine. I am using Apache 2.2 on Windows. On another note, I found this listed as a bug in Apache 1.3. This leads me to believe that this is actually a configuration problem on my end.

    Read the article

  • Why there are three rounds of message exchanges for integrated windows authentication for IE

    - by user197658
    According to the result monitored by fiddler, there are totally 3 handshakes for integrated windows authentication for IE. GET /home - 401 Unauthorized WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate, NTLM GET /home Authorization: Negotiate UYTYGHGYKHKJPPP-=== - 401 Unauthorized WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate UYUGKJKJKJ+++766== Get /home Authorization: Negotiate HJGKJLJLJ+++=== - 200 OK WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate UHLKJKJKJJLK=== Who knows what concrete things are done for the three, especially the 2nd one. P.S. The network environment is work group mode, other than domain mode, and the server is a website hosted on my local PC. In other words, the client (IE) & the server are both in the same machine.

    Read the article

  • MVC Authorize Attribute + HttpUnauthorizedResult + FormsAuthentication

    - by Anthony
    After browsing the MVC section on CodePlex I noticed that the [Authorize] attribute in MVC returns a HttpUnauthorizedResult() when authorization fails (codeplex AuthorizeAttribute class). In the source of HttpUnauthorizedResult() from CodePlex is the code (I'm not allowed to enter another URL as my rep isn't high enough, but replace the numbers on the URL above with 22929#266476): // 401 is the HTTP status code for unauthorized access - setting this // will cause the active authentication module to execute its default // unauthorized handler context.HttpContext.Response.StatusCode = 401; In particular, the comment describes the authentication module's default unauthorized handler. I can't seem to find any information on this default unauthorized handler. In particular, I'm not using FormsAuthentication and when authorization fails I get an ugly IIS 401 error page. Does anyone know about this default unauthorized handler, and in particular how FormsAuthentication hooks itself in to override it? I'm writing a really simple app for my football team who confirm or deny whether they can play a particular match. If I enable FormsAuthentication in the web.config the redirect works, but I'm not using FormsAuthentication and I'd like to know if there's a workaround.

    Read the article

  • Apache ErrorDocument not working for PHP 500 error

    - by Jason
    I have a number of ErrorDocuments setup in my .htaccess file for errors such as 404, 401, 403 etc which all redirect to my error page but the ErrorDocument set for a 500 error is never displayed when PHP reports a 500. The 500 code is sent to the browser and the output is blank. Is there something special I need to do to enable 500 error documents for use with PHP? My directives look like this: ErrorDocument 401 /errorpage.php?error=401 ErrorDocument 403 /errorpage.php?error=403 ErrorDocument 404 /errorpage.php?error=404 ErrorDocument 500 /errorpage.php?error=500 I've looked through the php.ini and can't see anything that would obviously override the Apache settings and there are no ErrorDocument directives in my httpd.conf either. Anywhere else I should be looking? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Rails 2.x http basic authentication

    - by randombits
    I'm trying to get basic http authentication working on my Rails app. I'm offering a simple REST interface served by a Rails server, only xml/json output. Every method needs authentication, so I put the authenticate filter in ApplicationController: class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base helper :all # include all helpers, all the time before_filter :authenticate protected def authenticate authenticate_or_request_with_http_basic do |u, p| true end end end Even with having the method return true, I'm receiving a 401 from the server: $ curl http://127.0.0.1:3000/myresource/1.xml -i HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized Cache-Control: no-cache WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="Application" X-Runtime: 1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Length: 27 Server: WEBrick/1.3.1 (Ruby/1.9.1/2010-01-10) Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2010 02:43:55 GMT Connection: Keep-Alive HTTP Basic: Access denied. If I'm explicitly returning true, yet getting served a 401.

    Read the article

  • Shouldn't storage classes be taught early in a C class or book?

    - by Adam Mendoza
    Shouldn't storage classes be taught early in a C class or book? I notice that a lot of books, even some of the better ones, covert it toward and end of the book and some books just add it as an appendix. I would teach it together with variables. This is so foundational and I think unfortunately many do not make it that far in a book. Now that auto has a different meaning (vs being optional) it may confuse people that didn't realize it has always been there. for example: C Programming: A Modern Approach 18.2 Storage Classes 401 Properties of Variables 401 The auto Storage Class 402 The static Storage Class 403 The extern Storage Class 404 The register Storage Class 405 The Storage Class of a Function 406 Summary 407

    Read the article

  • Rewrite rule to show as directory using .htaccess

    - by chanchal1987
    I want to implement a rewrite rule in my .htaccess file to show a specific url as a directory of my server. See the code below I written, RewriteRule ^(.*)/$ ?page=$1 [NC] This will rewrites urls like www.mysite.com/abc/ to www.mysite.com/index.php?page=abc. But if I request www.mysite.com/abc then it is throwing an 404 error. How can I write a rewrite rule which will match www.mysite.com/abc and www.mysite.com/abc/ both? Edit: My current .htaccess file (After Litso's answer's 3rd revision) is like below: ## ErrorDocument 401 /index.php?error=401 ErrorDocument 400 /index.php?error=400 ErrorDocument 403 /index.php?error=403 ErrorDocument 500 /index.php?error=500 ErrorDocument 404 /index.php?error=404 DirectoryIndex index.htm index.html index.php RewriteEngine on RewriteBase / Options +FollowSymlinks RewriteRule ^(.+)\.html?$ $1.php RewriteCond !-d RewriteRule ^(.*)/$ ?page=$1 [NC,L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !index.php RewriteRule ^(.*)$ ?page=$1 [NC,L] ##

    Read the article

  • apache using mod_auth_kerb always asks for the password twice

    - by DrStalker
    (Debian Squeeze) I'm trying to set apache up to use Kerberos authentication to allow AD users to log in. It is working, but prompts the user twice for a username and password, with the first time being ignored (no matter what is put it in.) Only the second prompt includes the AuthName string from the config (i.e.: the first windows is a generic username/password one, the second includes the title "Kerberos Login") I'm not worried about integrated windows authentication working at this stage, I just want users to be able to login with their AD account so we don't need to set up a second repository of user accounts. How do I fix this to eliminate that first useless prompt? The directives in the apache2.conf file: <Directory /var/www/kerberos> AuthType Kerberos AuthName "Kerberos Login" KrbMethodNegotiate On KrbMethodK5Passwd On KrbAuthRealms ONEVUE.COM.AU.LOCAL Krb5KeyTab /etc/krb5.keytab KrbServiceName HTTP/[email protected] require valid-user </Directory> krb5.conf: [libdefaults] default_realm = ONEVUE.COM.AU.LOCAL [realms] ONEVUE.COM.AU.LOCAL = { kdc = SYD01PWDC01.ONEVUE.COM.AU.LOCAL master_kdc = SYD01PWDC01.ONEVUE.COM.AU.LOCAL admin_server = SYD01PWDC01.ONEVUE.COM.AU.LOCAL default_domain = ONEVUE.COM.AU.LOCAL } [login] krb4_convert = true krb4_get_tickets = false The access log when accessing the secured directory (note the two seperate 401's) 192.168.10.115 - - [24/Aug/2012:15:52:01 +1000] "GET /kerberos/ HTTP/1.1" 401 710 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/21.0.1180.83 Safari/537.1" 192.168.10.115 - - [24/Aug/2012:15:52:06 +1000] "GET /kerberos/ HTTP/1.1" 401 680 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/21.0.1180.83 Safari/537.1" 192.168.10.115 - [email protected] [24/Aug/2012:15:52:10 +1000] "GET /kerberos/ HTTP/1.1" 200 375 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/21.0.1180.83 Safari/537.1" And one line in error.log [Fri Aug 24 15:52:06 2012] [error] [client 192.168.0.115] gss_accept_sec_context(2) failed: An unsupported mechanism was requested (, Unknown error)

    Read the article

  • IE6 does not follow 302 redirect - displays 404 instead

    - by Dexter
    One of our clients has reported that they are experiencing 404 (file not found) errors when attempting to navigate a website that we support. The behaviour only appears to affect her - other users on the same machine can navigate the website fine, but the problem follows her from one PC to another. I've had a good look through the IIS server logs and have identified the requests in question. The normal request pattern is as follows: POST /page.aspx - 80 - ... 401 1 0 POST /page.aspx - 80 DOMAIN/user ... 302 0 0 GET /anotherPage.aspx Request=833f80a5-f34c-4b0e-addb-d73e1ee1663a 80 - ... 401 1 0 GET /anotherPage.aspx Request=833f80a5-f34c-4b0e-addb-d73e1ee1663a 80 DOMAIN/user ... 200 0 However, requests for the affected user do not include a request for the redirected page, nor an entry for the 404, i.e.: POST /page.aspx - 80 - ... 401 1 0 POST /page.aspx - 80 DOMAIN/user ... 302 0 0 ... other unrelated requests Can anyone suggest what might trigger this behaviour, and how I might investigate the cause or prevent it from occuring? I read here that the Allow META refresh option in IE6 might trigger this behaviour, but I have not been able to replicate the behaviour by modifying this setting only.

    Read the article

  • Office documents on intranet all requiring second login and can't pass auth? Disable webdav?

    - by DOTang
    I am not sure what is going on, but recently all the Office documents on our intranet get prompted a second time for login and according to the error logs it looks like it's trying to use webdav to open (an editable?) version of the document to save directly on the server? We have no sharepoint server setup or anything, but this shouldn't be happening. All I want is for the document to be saved or opened from a local copy in temp like normal. Here is the log: Line 57499: 2011-04-12 15:57:10 (ip) OPTIONS (address) - 443 (username) (user ip) Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/6.1.7601 - 401 1 1326 1525 238 0 Line 57500: 2011-04-12 15:57:10 (ip) OPTIONS (address) - 443 (username) (user ip) Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/6.1.7601 - 401 1 1326 1525 238 0 Line 57501: 2011-04-12 15:57:10 (ip) OPTIONS (address) - 443 (username) (user ip) Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/6.1.7601 - 401 1 1326 1525 238 0 The log basically contains a bunch of these. How can I disable this behavior so that office documents that are downloaded aren't attempted to be used through webdav?? Edit: I should clarify behavior, it asks if you want to save or open it, upon choosing open open, it asks to re-authenicate, you put in the user information and the login box comes up 3 times acting like you entered the wrong password. For some users, after passing the login box the third time, it still opens up, for others their browser just locks up. It also doesn't even look like webdav is installed on our server, I see no config options in IIS for it as outlined on this page: http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/350/installing-and-configuring-webdav-on-iis-7/#001

    Read the article

  • What's an appropriate HTTP status code to return by a REST API service for a validation failure?

    - by michaeljoseph
    I'm currently returning 401 Unauthorized whenever I encounter a validation failure in my Django/Piston based REST API application. Having had a look at the HTTP Status Code Registry I'm not convinced that this is an appropriate code for a validation failure, what do y'all recommend? 400 Bad Request 401 Unauthorized 403 Forbidden 405 Method Not Allowed 406 Not Acceptable 412 Precondition Failed 417 Expectation Failed 422 Unprocessable Entity 424 Failed Dependency Update: "Validation failure" above means an application level data validation failure ie. incorrectly specified datetime, bogus email address etc.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >