Search Results

Search found 16455 results on 659 pages for 'hosts allow'.

Page 41/659 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

  • How do I specify a crossdomain policy file to allow Flash to grab a bitmap from an RTMP (Wowza) vide

    - by Ken Smith
    I'm trying to get a bitmap/snapshot of a Wowza video stream playing on my client, like so: var bitmapData:BitmapData = new BitmapData(view.videoPlayerComponent.width, view.videoPlayerComponent.height); bitmapData.draw(view.videoPlayerComponent); When I do this, I get this error message: SecurityError: Error #2123: Security sandbox violation: BitmapData.draw: http://localhost:51150/Resources/WRemoteWebCam.swf cannot access rtmp://localhost/videochat/smithkl42._default/. No policy files granted access. I presume the error comes from not being able to locate the appropriate crossdomain.xml file. I'm not quite sure where it's looking for it, and a wireshark sniff was inconclusive, so I've tried placing one in each of the following places: http://localhost/crossdomain.xml http://localhost:1935/crossdomain.xml http://localhost:51150/crossdomain.xml I can retrieve the file successfully from each of those three locations. (I'm pretty sure that the last one wouldn't have any effect, since it's just the location of the web site which hosts the page that hosts the .swf file, but on the off chance...) These are the contents of the file that it's grabbing in each instance: <cross-domain-policy> <allow-access-from domain="*" to-ports="*" /> </cross-domain-policy> And it's still throwing that same error message. I've also followed the instructions on the Wowza forums, to turn on StreamVideoSampleAccess in the [install]\conf[appname]\Application.xml, with no joy: <Client> <IdleFrequency>-1</IdleFrequency> <Access> <StreamReadAccess>*</StreamReadAccess> <StreamWriteAccess>*</StreamWriteAccess> <StreamAudioSampleAccess>*</StreamAudioSampleAccess> <StreamVideoSampleAccess>*</StreamVideoSampleAccess> <SharedObjectReadAccess>*</SharedObjectReadAccess> <SharedObjectWriteAccess>*</SharedObjectWriteAccess> </Access> </Client> Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How do I allow remote access to mysql using xampp?

    - by sprugman
    I'm using xampp and navicat to manage mysql on two dev machines (laptop & desktop). The laptop is my main machine, while the desktop acts as a local dev server for the group. Connecting to mysql via localhost in navicat is working fine on the laptop. Is there a way (other than the http tunneling method) to allow access to the desktop from the laptop via navicat?

    Read the article

  • How do I get the Windows 7 Firewall to prompt me whether to allow or deny a new connection?

    - by Epaga
    In Vista and before, new programs attempting an ingoing or outgoing connection would cause a Windows prompt whether to allow or deny the program as a rule. In Windows 7 I seem to have to manually enter rules. Is there any way to get Windows 7 to ask me on its own? Edit : The options MrStatic points to in his answer are already turned on. No prompts, hence my question. See this forum entry for another guy with the same problem

    Read the article

  • How can I force all internet traffic over a PPTP VPN but still allow local lan access?

    - by user126715
    I have a server running Linux Mint 12 that I want to keep connected to a PPTP VPN all the time. The VPN server is pretty reliable, but it drops on occasion so I just want to make it so all internet activity is disabled if the VPN connection is broken. I'd also like to figure out a way to restart it automatically, but that's not as big of an issue since this happens pretty rarely. I also want to always be able to connect to the box from my lan, regardless of whether the VPN is up or not. Here's what my ifconfig looks like with the VPN connected properly: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:22:15:21:59:9a inet addr:192.168.0.171 Bcast:192.168.0.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::222:15ff:fe21:599a/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:37389 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:29028 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:37781384 (37.7 MB) TX bytes:19281394 (19.2 MB) Interrupt:41 Base address:0x8000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:1446 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1446 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:472178 (472.1 KB) TX bytes:472178 (472.1 KB) tun0 Link encap:UNSPEC HWaddr 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 inet addr:10.10.11.10 P-t-P:10.10.11.9 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:14 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:23 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:1368 (1.3 KB) TX bytes:1812 (1.8 KB) Here's an iptables script I found elsewhere that seemed to be for the problem I'm trying to solve, but it wound up blocking all access, but I'm not sure what I need to change: #!/bin/bash #Set variables IPT=/sbin/iptables VPN=`ifconfig|perl -nE'/dr:(\S+)/&&say$1'|grep 10.` LAN=192.168.0.0/24 #Flush rules $IPT -F $IPT -X #Default policies and define chains $IPT -P OUTPUT DROP $IPT -P INPUT DROP $IPT -P FORWARD DROP #Allow input from LAN and tun0 ONLY $IPT -A INPUT -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -i tun0 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -s $LAN -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT $IPT -A INPUT -j DROP #Allow output from lo and tun0 ONLY $IPT -A OUTPUT -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -o lo -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -o tun0 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -d $VPN -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT $IPT -A OUTPUT -j DROP exit 0 Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • How to block bittorrent but allow web surfing using ISA Server?

    - by nray
    Given a public WiFi hotspot behind an ISA Sever and a single Internet address, which rules or content filters would be useful to achieve this configuration? Allow anonymous users to surf the web, chat over IM, and connect to their diffrent workplace VPNs Restrict Bittorrent and other P2P clients from attracting the attention of MediaSentry and others.

    Read the article

  • ifdown em1 Users cannot control this device. Allow users to control em1 device

    - by Eric Leschinski
    I want to allow users to control the em1 device in Linux: When I run this command: ifdown em1 em1 is the embedded ethernet card 1, I want the user to be able to turn off the ethernet card. On Fedora 17, I get this error message: Users cannot control this device I want a certain user to be able to run a certain command on Linux without giving rights to other users. What is the best way to do that?

    Read the article

  • Is there an open source solution that I can host on a web server that will allow users to anonymously upload a file to me?

    - by mjn12
    I'm looking for some kind of web application I can host on my Linux web server that will allow users to upload files of arbitrary size to me from their browser without requiring them to log in. Ideally this application would allow me to generate a link to my website that allowed for a one-time use upload. It might contain a unique, random key that was only good for that session. I could email them the link, they click it and are taken to a page where they can upload their file to me. I'm mainly targeting friends and family that need to send me files that are too large for email. I don't want to require them to install anything (dropbox), sign up and log in, etc. I'm definitely not teaching them to use FTP. This wouldn't be a difficult project for me to roll on my own but I'd like to take something off the shelf if it is possible. Does anything like this exist that my google-foo isn't turning up?

    Read the article

  • IIS 7 - allow http for part of site, https for rest?

    - by Martin Clarke
    In IIS 7, is there a way to set two urls on the same site to allow http and https, and the rest to be https only? - http://mysite/url1 or https://mysite/url1 is accepted and stays on that protocol. - http://mysite/url2 or https://mysite/url2 is accepted and stays on that protocol. - any other item, i.e. http://mysite/whatever redirects to https://mysite/whatever - https://mysite/whatever is accepted. Edited because first question wasn't clear enough.

    Read the article

  • Windows XP Firewall : Allow all incoming traffic from local subnet.

    - by Martin
    I have some Windows XP machines that are using the standard Firewall to control traffic. I have a need to allow all incoming traffic on all ports from the local subnet (255.255.255.0). I have looked at the settings and it would appear that I can indeed set scope for a rule, but a rule is applied only against an application or a single port. Is there a method to do this?

    Read the article

  • How to allow only specific directories to use htaccess?

    - by DisgruntledGoat
    Currently in apache2.conf I have AllowOverride all set for /var/www which simply allows htaccess for all the sites on the server (which is Ubuntu, 9.04). However, I'd rather only allow overrides in each site root directory and nothing else. In other words, /var/www/site1, /var/www/site2, etc. can have a htaccess, but all other directories including /var/www and /var/www/site1/content cannot. Is there a way to do this without having to write a rule for every site on the server?

    Read the article

  • How to limit Access-Control-Allow-Origin to a specific path?

    - by coderama
    I have a website that servies ads via javascript. So, I basically allow the user to include my script.... : <script src="http://www.example.com/ads.js" ></script> <script> MYADDS.insertAdvert(); </script> The problem is, I kept getting: "No Access-Control-Allow-Origin" Errors. That was until I added this to my htaccess file: <IfModule mod_headers.c> Header set Access-Control-Allow-Origin "*" </IfModule> Problem is, this opens up my entire site and is probably a security risk. So, seeing as the ads.js file actually only does an ajax request to: http://www.example.com/place/where/my/adds/are/fed/from How can I make the above htaccess rule only apply to that path? Keep in mind, it's not an actualy directory, so I can't put the htaccess file in that folder. It's actually a "virtual path". The site is built using Laravel and therefore does the typical laravel path rewriting. Here's teh full htaccess file: <IfModule mod_rewrite.c> <IfModule mod_negotiation.c> Options -MultiViews </IfModule> RewriteEngine On # Redirect Trailing Slashes... RewriteRule ^(.*)/$ /$1 [L,R=301] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule ^(.*)$ index.php/$1 [L] </IfModule> Any ideas how to do this?

    Read the article

  • "FOR UPDATE" v/s "LOCK IN SHARE MODE" : Allow concurrent threads to read updated "state" value of locked row

    - by shadesco
    I have the following scenario: User X logs in to the application from location lc1: call it Ulc1 User X (has been hacked, or some friend of his knows his login credential, or he just logs in from a different browser on his machine,etc.. u got the point) logs in at the same time from location lc2: call it Ulc2 I am using a main servlet which : - gets a connection from database pooling - sets autocommit to false - executes a command that goes through app layers: if all successful, set autocommit to true in a "finally" statement, and closes connection. Else if an exception happens, rollback(). In my database (mysql/innoDb) i have a "history" table, with row columns: id(primary key) |username | date | topic | locked The column "locked" has by default value "false" and it serves as a flag that marks if a specific row is locked or not. Each row is specific to a user (as u can see from the username column) So back to the scenario: --Ulc1 sends the command to update his history from the db for date "D" and topic "T". --Ulc2 sends the same command to update history from the db for the same date "D" and same topic "T" at the exact same time. I want to implement an mysql/innoDB locking system that will enable whichever thread arriving to do the following check: Is column "locked" for this row true or not? if true, return a message to the user that " he is already updating the same data from another location" if not true (ie not locked) : flag it as locked and update then reset locked to false once finished. Which of these two mysql locking techniques, will actually allow the 2nd arriving thread from reading the "updated" value of the locked column to decide wt action to take?Should i use "FOR UPDATE" or "LOCK IN SHARE MODE"? This scenario explains what i want to accomplish: - Ulc1 thread arrives first: column "locked" is false, set it to true and continue updating process - Ulc2 thread arrives while Ulc1's transaction is still in process, and even though the row is locked through innoDb functionalities, it doesn't have to wait but in fact reads the "new" value of column locked which is "true", and so doesn't in fact have to wait till Ulc1 transaction commits to read the value of the "locked" column(anyway by that time the value of this column will already have been reset to false). I am not very experienced with the 2 types of locking mechanisms, what i understand so far is that LOCK IN SHARE MODE allow other transaction to read the locked row while FOR UPDATE doesn't even allow reading. But does this read gets on the updated value? or the 2nd arriving thread has to wait the first thread to commit to then read the value? Any recommendations about which locking mechanism to use for this scenario is appreciated. Also if there's a better way to "check" if the row has been locked (other than using a true/false column flag) please let me know about it. thank you SOLUTION (Jdbc pseudocode example based on @Darhazer's answer) Table : [ id(primary key) |username | date | topic | locked ] connection.setautocommit(false); //transaction-1 PreparedStatement ps1 = "Select locked from tableName for update where id="key" and locked=false); ps1.executeQuery(); //transaction 2 PreparedStatement ps2 = "Update tableName set locked=true where id="key"; ps2.executeUpdate(); connection.setautocommit(true);// here we allow other transactions threads to see the new value connection.setautocommit(false); //transaction 3 PreparedStatement ps3 = "Update tableName set aField="Sthg" where id="key" And date="D" and topic="T"; ps3.executeUpdate(); // reset locked to false PreparedStatement ps4 = "Update tableName set locked=false where id="key"; ps4.executeUpdate(); //commit connection.setautocommit(true);

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to add AD LDS users to an AD Domain Group or allow them domain security rights?

    - by Tom
    I have a web application in which our outside customers need access to run transactions (stored procs on Sql Server) on our domain. We have looked into LDS to keep these users separate from our domain. The problem we are having is allowing the LDS users the AD security rights to access these stored procs. For administration purposes we would like to use an AD group for each transaction (stored proc) which has access to execute. Is there a way to add LDS users to this AD group or allow them the security rights to do this? We have setup LDS and can authenicate an AD user thru to runs these transactions. LDS is running on Server 08 R2. AD is also Server 08 R2. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to fix? => Your system administrator does not allow the user of saved credentials to log on to the remote computer

    - by Pure.Krome
    At our office, any of our Windows 7 Clients get this error message when we try and RDP to a remote W2K8 Server outside of the office :- Your system administrator does not allow the user of saved credentials to log on to the remote computer XXX because its identity is not fully verified. Please enter new credentials A quick google search leads to some posts they all suggest I edit group policy, etc. I'm under the impression, that the common fix for this, is to follow those instructions -per Windows7 machine-. Ack :( Is there anyway I can do something via our office Active Directory .. which auto updates all Windows 7 clients in the office LAN?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >