Search Results

Search found 2650 results on 106 pages for 'tutor procedures policies'.

Page 41/106 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

• I need a program to store the database script for oracle

  - by Hakan Kara

  We are developing a project that has 3 enviroments (development, test, production) So there are 3 databases (actually more than 3, because we have 5 customers so we have more than 10 databases) and they must be synchronised. There are 30 coders working for this project. Everone adds, deletes, and changes procedures, table columns etc. We need a program to store our database scripts like visual studio's team foundation server. See the change history of script file. Everyone must access that program and be able to put their scripts. Recover previous versions of script file. Execute these scripts over a selected database. Compare databases by procedures (not only by name, by content of procedure), functions, table columns, packages etc. I am searching a program like that. Which one do you suggest me?

  Read the article

• Documenting a policy based design

  - by academicRobot

  I'm re-working some prototype code into a policy based design in C++, and I'm wondering what the best practice is for documenting the design. My current plan is to document: Policy hierarchy Overview of each policy Description of each type/value/function in each policy I was thinking of putting this into a doxygen module, but this looks like it will be a bit awkward since formatting will have to be done by hand without code to base the doc on (that is, documenting the policies rather than the implementation of the policies). So my questions are: Are there other aspects of the design that should be documented? Are there any tricks to doing this efficiently in doxygen? Is there a tool other than doxygen thats better suited to this? What are some examples of well documented policy based design? This is my first serious attempt at policy based design. I think I have a working grasp of the principles, but whatever naivety I expose in this question is fair game for an answer too.

  Read the article

• how to debug MySql stored procs without breaking control flow from application

  - by M.Taha Masood

  Is there a way to do the following: I have a MySQL DB , and there are many stored procs written in it as well. I use MySQL client library in C to connect to this DB and amongst other things , call the stored procedures. Is there a way to set breakpoints in the stored procedures such that when the call is made from C program ( using mySql client library ) into the stored proc , then control flow is halted in the C program and we can step into the stored proc called to whatever level of nesting and insspecting variables etc ( like any decent C debugged provides )? Is there ANY way to do the above ? Through some third party tool or the like if not through plain MySql . Help is appreciated. thanks

  Read the article

• How do I unwrap PLSQL?

  - by R van Rijn

  How do I unwrap PLSQL functions/procedures written in Oracle?

  Read the article

• Entity framework and database logic.

  - by Xavier Devian

  Hi all, i have a question that's being around for several years. As all you know entity framework is an ORM tool that tries to model the database to an object oriented access model. All the samples I've seen are quering directly to the database tables. So, which is the role of the views in the database now?. The views were used to model the database in a more friendly way, that is, several physical tables, one logic table. This was great for example in hidding the complex relational model on stored procedures as queryng the views inside them was much easier than reproducing the query joins over and over on each stored procedure. So the question is, why is entity framework so good if stored procedures can not take benefit of it?

  Read the article

• "lock request time out period exceeded" Error When Trying to See DB Hierarchies

  - by Lloyd Banks

  I have a DB that I can run basic queries (albeit much slower than normal) off of. When I try to see the hierarchy trees for tables, views, or procedures in SSMS Object Explorer, I get the "lock request time out period exceeded". My Report Server reports that run off of objects in this DB are no longer completing. Jobs associated with procedures stored on this DB also do not run. I tried using sp_who2 to find and kill all connections on the DB. This has not solved the problem. What is going on here? How can I resolve this?

  Read the article

• Run SSIS Package from T-SQL

  - by Dr. Zim

  I noticed you can use the following stored procedures (in order) to schedule a SSIS package: msdb.dbo.sp_add_category @class=N'JOB', @type=N'LOCAL', @name=N'[Uncategorized (Local)]' msdb.dbo.sp_add_job ... msdb.dbo.sp_add_jobstep ... msdb.dbo.sp_update_job ... msdb.dbo.sp_add_jobschedule ... msdb.dbo.sp_add_jobserver ... (You can see an example by right clicking a scheduled job and selecting "Script Job as- Create To".) AND you can use sp_start_job to execute the job immediately, effectively running SSIS packages on demand. Question: does anyone know of any msdb.dbo.[...] stored procedures that simply allow you to run SSIS packages on the fly without using sp_cmdshell directly, or some easier approach?

  Read the article

• Database permissions and ORMs

  - by Jonn

  I've been using .NET's Entity Framework a lot lately and have absolutely no wish to go back to using Stored Procedures. Been shocked though that the company I'm building this project for had a policy where applications were only given accounts that only had permissions to access stored procedures! Apparently, they believe that there's a security risk involved in allowing applications to access the tables/views directly. I don't get this. My first question is, can someone enlighten me as to what kind of security risk applications having direct access to the database may pose? AND If that's the case, are there any other ORM solutions that can provide a workaround to this (I can't think of any logical possibility atm) that would allow me to circumvent the restrictions on the user account to be assigned to me? OR is my understanding that I'd need direct permissions for the tables and views wrong?

  Read the article

• How to generate multiple Alter Scripts in SSMS

  - by dannyRods

  I'm using sql server management studio 2008 to try and generate an alter script for each of my stored procedures in order to save the scripts for each revision. I can easily generate an alter script for each individual procedure, but I'm not trying to go through a hundred stored procedures manually. I know that SSMS has an automated generate scripts function under task, but the only options are create, drop and create, and drop. I cant seem to figure out how to enable alter. I've already searched through many SO articles, as well as a little digging in msdn, and I've come up with nothing. I'm hoping that the fine people of stackoverflow will be up to the challenge. Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• How to undo SQL changes using installer

  - by Sunil Agarwal

  I have installer to install procedures, scripts, views, etc in SQL server 2005/2008. Now I want to add a condition in the installer like if there is any error while installing, I want to undo all the changes done in SQL server. I tried to store the procedures, views, etc which I am changing while installing and reverting them back if I get any error. But am not able to do it the way I want. Can someone guide me if he had done the same thing? To specify I am using WIX installer. Also if someone has tried SMO, it will be of great help.

  Read the article

• Standard procedure for confirming email for a web app

  - by Woho87

  Hi! I have created a web app that is almost finished. I need it to confirm new emails. I just want to know if the these are the right procedures for that, because I'm not familiar with this. I create a new table called "confirmEmails" with only one column with uniqueId. A unique Id is created with PHP: uniqueid() which is created directly after a user hit the submit button. And the php script stores it on the table. An email is sent together with a link www.domain.com/confirmEmail.php?uniqueId=kushfpuhrufhufhfhuhfheriufhehu. I have an another php script called confirmEmail.php that gets the value if uniqueId through the link with $_GET['uniqueId'];(maybe I shall use post instead her). And now it stores the new email in table called user Is it right procedures? Pls give me some feedback!

  Read the article

• Experiences teaching or learning map/reduce/etc before recursion?

  - by Jay

  As far as I can see, the usual (and best in my opinion) order for teaching iterting constructs in functional programming with Scheme is to first teach recursion and maybe later get into things like map, reduce and all SRFI-1 procedures. This is probably, I guess, because with recursion the student has everything that's necessary for iterating (and even re-write all of SRFI-1 if he/she wants to do so). Now I was wondering if the opposite approach has ever been tried: use several procedures from SRFI-1 and only when they are not enough (for example, to approximate a function) use recursion. My guess is that the result would not be good, but I'd like to know about any past experiences with this approach.

  Read the article

• Best .NET Solution for Frequently Changed Database

  - by sestocker

  I am currently architecting a small CRUD applicaton. Their database is a huge mess and will be changing frequently over the course of the next 6 months to a year. What would you recommend for my data layer: 1) ORM (if so, which one?) 2) Linq2Sql 3) Stored Procedures 4) Parametrized Queries I really need a solution that will be dynamic enough (both fast and easy) where I can replace tables and add/delete columns frequently. Note: I do not have much experience with ORM (only a little SubSonic) and generally tend to use stored procedures so maybe that would be the way to go. I would love to learn Ling2Sql or NHibernate if either would allow for the situation I've described above.

  Read the article

• Why does my CLR function keep disappearing

  - by user208080

  Hi there. I am a rookie to SQL and here is my questions. I have some CLR sql functions and procedures. When I deploy the 1st one, everything is fine. But after the 2nd one deployed, the first one will disappear. Anyone can help me out? Thanks a lot Actually, I simply create a new SQL project in VS, adding a new function or stored procedure, click deploy, and I can see the new function in my SQL instance. Then I close that project and open a new one, repeat the above steps, OK, the 2nd function is there i my instance but the 1st one disappeared or be replaced and no longer queryable for use. Thank you for your reply. All these clr functions and procedures are in the same instance of the database.

  Read the article

• How to change data structure in mysql using mysqldump without deleting files

  - by Don Quixote

  Essentially what I'm trying to do is sync a production server with a sandbox server, but only the table structures and stored procedures. The procedures aren't any problem since they can be overriden, but the problem is the tables. I want to sync and alter their structures on the production server using mysqldump (or any other way that you can propose) without altering any existing data. If it helps, I only want to add more columns, not remove any existing ones. Also, I am using mysqlyog. Is there any way to do this?

  Read the article

• mysql stored routine vs. mysql-alternative?

  - by user522962

  We are using a mysql database w/ about 150,000 records (names) total. Our searches on the 'names' field is done through an autocomplete function in php. We have the table indexed but still feel that the searching is a bit sluggish (a few full seconds vs. something like Google Finance w/ near-instant response). We came up w/ 2 possibilities, but wanted to get more insight: Can we create a bunch (many thousands or more) of stored procedures to speed up searches, or will creating that many stored procedures bog-down the db? Is there a faster alternative to mysql for "select" statements (speed on inserting & updating rows isn't too important so we can sacrifice that, if necessary). I've vaguely heard of BigTable & others that don't support JOIN statements....we need JOIN statements for some of our other queries we do. thx

  Read the article

• Is there a tool that will show diagrams of my SQL database in real-time?

  - by Rising Star

  I've created some diagrams of SQL tables using the "Reverse Engineer" feature of Microsoft Office Visio. I like being able to visualize my relational databases in this manner. However, what I get is just a static document that I can print, e-mail to colleagues, and click widgets on. Earlier this year, I saw at a demo that the new version of Visual Studio 2010 has a new feature called the "Architect Explorer", which allows developers to view relationships among .net classes on the fly. It has many features for filtering the data that the developer is interested in. It would be really awesome if I could visually browse my tables and stored procedures and see what is related to what by primary key, foreign key, and referenced in stored procedures. I realize that I'm talking about two entirely different technologies and it's not a perfect analogy, but is there some similar tool that would allow me to visualize tables in my SQL database?

  Read the article

• Annotation retention policy: what real benefit is there in declaring `SOURCE` or `CLASS`?

  - by watery

  I know there are three retention policies for Java annotations: CLASS: Annotations are to be recorded in the class file by the compiler but need not be retained by the VM at run time. RUNTIME: Annotations are to be recorded in the class file by the compiler and retained by the VM at run time, so they may be read reflectively. SOURCE: Annotations are to be discarded by the compiler. And although I understand their usage scenarios, I don't get why it is such an important thing to specify the retention policy that retention policies exist at all. I mean, why aren't all the annotations just kept at runtime? Do they generate so much bytecode / occupy so much memory that stripping those undeclared as RUNTIME does make that much difference?

  Read the article

• Which route should i take for web hosting?

  - by Undermine2k

  Hi I am setting up a small website sort of like an online portfolio. I made the mistake of signing up for shared-web hosting before asking if they supported stored procedures which took me half the day to figure out they didn't. Basically i'm looking for a site that offers me PHP5.4+/ Mysql 5.5 + with support for triggers/stored procedures/ and if possible MyphpAdmin 3.5.1. I also have a domain name I already registered and which I would like to use. What is my best option to look for hosting provider which offers this functionality or to setup a VPS?

  Read the article

• I need help with iPhone memory management and am willing to pay

  - by Sam

  I am looking for a Los Angeles based iPhone developer that would be willing to help tutor me on memory management and run down some code. Will pay for your time. Thanks, Sam

  Read the article

• SQL SERVER – Plan Recompilation and Reduce Recompilation – Performance Tuning

  - by pinaldave

  Recompilation process is same as compilation and degrades server performance. In SQL Server 2000 and earlier versions, this was a serious issue but in SQL server 2005, the severity of this issue has been significantly reduced by introducing a new feature called Statement-level recompilation. When SQL Server 2005 recompiles stored procedures, only the statement that [...]

  Read the article

• Fed Authentication Methods in OIF / IdP

  - by Damien Carru

  This article is a continuation of my previous entry where I explained how OIF/IdP leverages OAM to authenticate users at runtime: OIF/IdP internally forwards the user to OAM and indicates which Authentication Scheme should be used to challenge the user if needed OAM determine if the user should be challenged (user already authenticated, session timed out or not, session authentication level equal or higher than the level of the authentication scheme specified by OIF/IdP…) After identifying the user, OAM internally forwards the user back to OIF/IdP OIF/IdP can resume its operation In this article, I will discuss how OIF/IdP can be configured to map Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes: When processing an Authn Request, where the SP requests a specific Federation Authentication Method with which the user should be challenged When sending an Assertion, where OIF/IdP sets the Federation Authentication Method in the Assertion Enjoy the reading! Overview The various Federation protocols support mechanisms allowing the partners to exchange information on: How the user should be challenged, when the SP/RP makes a request How the user was challenged, when the IdP/OP issues an SSO response When a remote SP partner redirects the user to OIF/IdP for Federation SSO, the message might contain data requesting how the user should be challenged by the IdP: this is treated as the Requested Federation Authentication Method. OIF/IdP will need to map that Requested Federation Authentication Method to a local Authentication Scheme, and then invoke OAM for user authentication/challenge with the mapped Authentication Scheme. OAM would authenticate the user if necessary with the scheme specified by OIF/IdP. Similarly, when an IdP issues an SSO response, most of the time it will need to include an identifier representing how the user was challenged: this is treated as the Federation Authentication Method. When OIF/IdP issues an Assertion, it will evaluate the Authentication Scheme with which OAM identified the user: If the Authentication Scheme can be mapped to a Federation Authentication Method, then OIF/IdP will use the result of that mapping in the outgoing SSO response: AuthenticationStatement in the SAML Assertion OpenID Response, if PAPE is enabled If the Authentication Scheme cannot be mapped, then OIF/IdP will set the Federation Authentication Method as the Authentication Scheme name in the outgoing SSO response: AuthenticationStatement in the SAML Assertion OpenID Response, if PAPE is enabled Mappings In OIF/IdP, the mapping between Federation Authentication Methods and Authentication Schemes has the following rules: One Federation Authentication Method can be mapped to several Authentication Schemes In a Federation Authentication Method <-> Authentication Schemes mapping, a single Authentication Scheme is marked as the default scheme that will be used to authenticate a user, if the SP/RP partner requests the user to be authenticated via a specific Federation Authentication Method An Authentication Scheme can be mapped to a single Federation Authentication Method Let’s examine the following example and the various use cases, based on the SAML 2.0 protocol: Mappings defined as: urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport mapped to LDAPScheme, marked as the default scheme used for authentication BasicScheme urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:X509 mapped to X509Scheme, marked as the default scheme used for authentication Use cases: SP sends an AuthnRequest specifying urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:X509 as the RequestedAuthnContext: OIF/IdP will authenticate the use with X509Scheme since it is the default scheme mapped for that method. SP sends an AuthnRequest specifying urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport as the RequestedAuthnContext: OIF/IdP will authenticate the use with LDAPScheme since it is the default scheme mapped for that method, not the BasicScheme SP did not request any specific methods, and user was authenticated with BasisScheme: OIF/IdP will issue an Assertion with urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport as the FederationAuthenticationMethod SP did not request any specific methods, and user was authenticated with LDAPScheme: OIF/IdP will issue an Assertion with urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport as the FederationAuthenticationMethod SP did not request any specific methods, and user was authenticated with BasisSessionlessScheme: OIF/IdP will issue an Assertion with BasisSessionlessScheme as the FederationAuthenticationMethod, since that scheme could not be mapped to any Federation Authentication Method (in this case, the administrator would need to correct that and create a mapping) Configuration Mapping Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes is protocol dependent, since the methods are defined in the various protocols (SAML 2.0, SAML 1.1, OpenID 2.0). As such, the WLST commands to set those mappings will involve: Either the SP Partner Profile and affect all Partners referencing that profile, which do not override the Federation Authentication Method to OAM Authentication Scheme mappings Or the SP Partner entry, which will only affect the SP Partner It is important to note that if an SP Partner is configured to define one or more Federation Authentication Method to OAM Authentication Scheme mappings, then all the mappings defined in the SP Partner Profile will be ignored. Authentication Schemes As discussed in the previous article, during Federation SSO, OIF/IdP will internally forward the user to OAM for authentication/verification and specify which Authentication Scheme to use. OAM will determine if a user needs to be challenged: If the user is not authenticated yet If the user is authenticated but the session timed out If the user is authenticated, but the authentication scheme level of the original authentication is lower than the level of the authentication scheme requested by OIF/IdP So even though an SP requests a specific Federation Authentication Method to be used to challenge the user, if that method is mapped to an Authentication Scheme and that at runtime OAM deems that the user does not need to be challenged with that scheme (because the user is already authenticated, session did not time out, and the session authn level is equal or higher than the one for the specified Authentication Scheme), the flow won’t result in a challenge operation. Protocols SAML 2.0 The SAML 2.0 specifications define the following Federation Authentication Methods for SAML 2.0 flows: urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:unspecified urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:InternetProtocol urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Telephony urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:MobileOneFactorUnregistered urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PersonalTelephony urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PreviousSession urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:MobileOneFactorContract urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Smartcard urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:InternetProtocolPassword urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:X509 urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:TLSClient urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PGP urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:SPKI urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:XMLDSig urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:SoftwarePKI urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Kerberos urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:SecureRemotePassword urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:NomadTelephony urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:AuthenticatedTelephony urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:MobileTwoFactorUnregistered urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:MobileTwoFactorContract urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:SmartcardPKI urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:TimeSyncToken Out of the box, OIF/IdP has the following mappings for the SAML 2.0 protocol: Only urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport is defined This Federation Authentication Method is mapped to: LDAPScheme, marked as the default scheme used for authentication FAAuthScheme BasicScheme BasicFAScheme This mapping is defined in the saml20-sp-partner-profile SP Partner Profile which is the default OOTB SP Partner Profile for SAML 2.0 An example of an AuthnRequest message sent by an SP to an IdP with the SP requesting a specific Federation Authentication Method to be used to challenge the user would be: <samlp:AuthnRequest xmlns:samlp="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:protocol" Destination="https://idp.com/oamfed/idp/samlv20" ID="id-8bWn-A9o4aoMl3Nhx1DuPOOjawc-" IssueInstant="2014-03-21T20:51:11Z" Version="2.0">  <saml:Issuer ...>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Issuer>  <samlp:NameIDPolicy AllowCreate="false" Format="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.1:nameid-format:unspecified"/>  <samlp:RequestedAuthnContext Comparison="minimum">    <saml:AuthnContextClassRef xmlns:saml="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion">      urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>  </samlp:RequestedAuthnContext></samlp:AuthnRequest> An example of an Assertion issued by an IdP would be: <samlp:Response ...>    <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:status:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion ...>        <saml:Issuer ...>https://idp.com/oam/fed</saml:Issuer>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>        <saml:Subject>            <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>            <saml:SubjectConfirmation Method="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:cm:bearer">                <saml:SubjectConfirmationData .../>            </saml:SubjectConfirmation>        </saml:Subject>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthnInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" SessionIndex="id-6i-Dm0yB-HekG6cejktwcKIFMzYE8Yrmqwfd0azz" SessionNotOnOrAfter="2014-03-21T21:53:55Z">            <saml:AuthnContext>                <saml:AuthnContextClassRef>                    urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> An administrator would be able to specify a mapping between a SAML 2.0 Federation Authentication Method and one or more OAM Authentication Schemes SAML 1.1 The SAML 1.1 specifications define the following Federation Authentication Methods for SAML 1.1 flows: urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:unspecified urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:HardwareToken urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:X509-PKI urn:ietf:rfc:2246 urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:PGP urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:SPKI urn:ietf:rfc:3075 urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:XKMS urn:ietf:rfc:1510 urn:ietf:rfc:2945 Out of the box, OIF/IdP has the following mappings for the SAML 1.1 protocol: Only urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password is defined This Federation Authentication Method is mapped to: LDAPScheme, marked as the default scheme used for authentication FAAuthScheme BasicScheme BasicFAScheme This mapping is defined in the saml11-sp-partner-profile SP Partner Profile which is the default OOTB SP Partner Profile for SAML 1.1 An example of an Assertion issued by an IdP would be: <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameID ...>[email protected]</saml:NameID>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Note: SAML 1.1 does not define an AuthnRequest message. An administrator would be able to specify a mapping between a SAML 1.1 Federation Authentication Method and one or more OAM Authentication Schemes OpenID 2.0 The OpenID 2.0 PAPE specifications define the following Federation Authentication Methods for OpenID 2.0 flows: http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/multi-factor http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/multi-factor-physical Out of the box, OIF/IdP does not define any mappings for the OpenID 2.0 Federation Authentication Methods. For OpenID 2.0, the configuration will involve mapping a list of OpenID 2.0 policies to a list of Authentication Schemes. An example of an OpenID 2.0 Request message sent by an SP/RP to an IdP/OP would be: https://idp.com/openid?openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0&openid.mode=checkid_setup&openid.claimed_id=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0%2Fidentifier_select&openid.identity=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0%2Fidentifier_select&openid.assoc_handle=id-6a5S6zhAKaRwQNUnjTKROREdAGSjWodG1el4xyz3&openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid%3Frefid%3Did-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.realm=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid&openid.ns.ax=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0&openid.ax.mode=fetch_request&openid.ax.type.attr0=http%3A%2F%2Faxschema.org%2Fcontact%2Femail&openid.ax.if_available=attr0&openid.ns.pape=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fextensions%2Fpape%2F1.0&openid.pape.max_auth_age=0 An example of an Open ID 2.0 SSO Response issued by an IdP/OP would be: https://acme.com/openid?refid=id-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.ns=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fauth%2F2.0&openid.mode=id_res&openid.op_endpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid&openid.claimed_id=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.identity=https%3A%2F%2Fidp.com%2Fopenid%3Fid%3Did-38iCmmlAVEXPsFjnFVKArfn5RIiF75D5doorhEgqqPM%3D&openid.return_to=https%3A%2F%2Facme.com%2Fopenid%3Frefid%3Did-9PKVXZmRxAeDYcgLqPm36ClzOMA-&openid.response_nonce=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A06Zid-YPa2kTNNFftZkgBb460jxJGblk2g--iNwPpDI7M1&openid.assoc_handle=id-6a5S6zhAKaRwQNUnjTKROREdAGSjWodG1el4xyz3&openid.ns.ax=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fsrv%2Fax%2F1.0&openid.ax.mode=fetch_response&openid.ax.type.attr0=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fcount&openid.ax.value.attr0=1&openid.ax.type.attr1=http%3A%2F%2Fopenid.net%2Fschema%2FnamePerson%2Ffriendly&openid.ax.value.attr1=My+name+is+Bobby+Smith&openid.ax.type.attr2=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fax%2Fapi%2Fuser_id&openid.ax.value.attr2=bob&openid.ax.type.attr3=http%3A%2F%2Faxschema.org%2Fcontact%2Femail&openid.ax.value.attr3=bob%40oracle.com&openid.ax.type.attr4=http%3A%2F%2Fsession%2Fipaddress&openid.ax.value.attr4=10.145.120.253&openid.ns.pape=http%3A%2F%2Fspecs.openid.net%2Fextensions%2Fpape%2F1.0&openid.pape.auth_time=2014-03-24T19%3A20%3A05Z&openid.pape.auth_policies=http%3A%2F%2Fschemas.openid.net%2Fpape%2Fpolicies%2F2007%2F06%2Fphishing-resistant&openid.signed=op_endpoint%2Cclaimed_id%2Cidentity%2Creturn_to%2Cresponse_nonce%2Cassoc_handle%2Cns.ax%2Cax.mode%2Cax.type.attr0%2Cax.value.attr0%2Cax.type.attr1%2Cax.value.attr1%2Cax.type.attr2%2Cax.value.attr2%2Cax.type.attr3%2Cax.value.attr3%2Cax.type.attr4%2Cax.value.attr4%2Cns.pape%2Cpape.auth_time%2Cpape.auth_policies&openid.sig=mYMgbGYSs22l8e%2FDom9NRPw15u8%3D In the next article, I will provide examples on how to configure OIF/IdP for the various protocols, to map OAM Authentication Schemes to Federation Authentication Methods.Cheers,Damien Carru

  Read the article

• The penultimate audit trigger framework

  - by Piotr Rodak

  So, it’s time to see what I came up with after some time of playing with COLUMNS_UPDATED() and bitmasks. The first part of this miniseries describes the mechanics of the encoding which columns are updated within DML operation. The task I was faced with was to prepare an audit framework that will be fairly easy to use. The audited tables were to be the ones directly modified by user applications, not the ones heavily used by batch or ETL processes. The framework consists of several tables and procedures...(read more)

  Read the article

• Odd Profiler Results with EF4

  - by AjarnMark

  I have been doing some testing of using the Microsoft Entity Framework 4 with stored procedures and ran across some really odd results in SQL Server Profiler. The application that is running which uses Entity Framework 4 is a simple Web Application written in C#, and the Entity Data Model is actually contained in a referenced class library of its own.  I’ll write more about my experiences with this later.  For now the question is, why does SQL Profiler think that the stored procedure is running in Master, and not in my application database? While analyzing the effects of using custom helper methods on my EDM classes to call the stored procedure, I decided to run Profiler while I stepped through the code so that I had a clear understanding of exactly when and what calls were made to the SQL Server.  I ran Profiler switching back and forth between the TSQL and TSQL_SP templates.  However, to reduce the amount of results rows I needed to wade through, I set a filter on DatabaseID to be equal to my application’s database.  Each time I ran this, the only thing that I saw was an Audit:Login to the database, but no procedure or T-SQL statements executed, yet I was definitely getting results back to my web page.  I tried other Profiler templates, still filtering on DatabaseID (tangent: I found, at least back in SQL 2000 Profiler, that filtering on DatabaseID was more reliable than filtering on DatabaseName.  Even though I’m now running SQL 2008, that habit sticks with me).  Still no results other than the Login.  Very weird! Finally, I decided to run Profiler with no filtering and discovered that that lines which represent my stored procedure and its T-SQL commands are all marked with DatabaseID = 1, which is Master.  Why in the world would that be?  My procedure is definitely in the application database, and not in Master, and there is nothing funny about the call to the procedure evident in Profiler (i.e. it is not called as MyAppDB.dbo.MyProcName, but rather just dbo.MyProcName).  There must be something funny with the way the Entity Framework is wrapping this call, and I don’t like it…I don’t like it one bit.  My primary PROD server contains 40+ databases on it, and when I need to profile something, I expect to be able to filter based on DatabaseID (for the record, I displayed DatabaseName in my results, too, and it also shows Master). I find the same pattern of everything except the Login showing up as being in Master when I run my version that uses standard LINQ to Entities instead of stored procedures, so that suggests it is not my code, but rather something funny with SQL Server 2008 Profiler or the Entity Framework. If you have any ideas about why this might be so, please comment below.

  Read the article

• First-Global-Teach for the Oracle Imaging and Process Management 11g: Administration: San Francisco

  - by stephen.schleifer

  First-Global-Teach for the Oracle Imaging and Process Management 11g: Administration: San Francisco | June 23-25 This course enables participants to use Oracle Imaging and Process Management (I/PM) 11g to access, track, and annotate documents. In addition, they also get an overview of the product architecture of Oracle I/PM running on Oracle WebLogic Server.The course also delves into administration tasks such as security permissions, configuration such as creating BPEL connections, and procedures for creating applications, searches, and input mappings. Customer and partners can register by looking up the course (#D61575GC10) on http://education.oracle.com

  Read the article

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