Search Results

Search found 13940 results on 558 pages for 'pci security'.

Page 44/558 | < Previous Page | 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >

  • How can i add Active Directory security groups to a SharePoint site to control permissions, rather than individual user accounts

    - by user574811
    SharePoint does integrate active directory accounts, of course, but how about security groups? Have a few sites where I'm fairly confident access is going through an existing Active Directory (AD) security groups (i.e. only an AD security group has been granted permissions through the 'People and Groups') In another situation, where I created the AD group and granted it permissions to a site, the customers were not able to access immediately. Eventually had to fast-track it and add the individuals to the People and Groups to keep the project going, but hoping not to have to maintain it that way. Any specific requirements of the security group in AD? Universal, Global, or domain local? Is there any time delay between modifying group members in AD and having that take effect in SharePoint?

    Read the article

  • ubuntu/apt-get update said "Failed to Fetch http:// .... 404 not found"

    - by lindenb
    Hi all, I'm trying to run apt-get update on ubuntu 9.10 I've configured my proxy server and I can access the internet without any problem: /etc/apt# wget "http://www.google.com" Resolving (...) Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 292 [text/html] Saving to: `index.html' 100%[=================================================================================================================================>] 292 --.-K/s in 0s 2010-04-02 17:20:33 (29.8 MB/s) - `index.html' saved [292/292] But when I tried to use apt-get I got the following message: Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic Release.gpg Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic Release.gpg Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic Release Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates Release.gpg Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security Release.gpg Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic Release Err http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/main Sources 404 Not Found Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates Release Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security Release Err http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Packages Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/multiverse Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/multiverse Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/multiverse Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/karmic/main/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/karmic/restricted/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/restricted/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/restricted/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/main/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/universe/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/universe/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/restricted/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/restricted/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/main/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/universe/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/universe/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/restricted/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/restricted/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/main/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/universe/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/universe/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found apt.conf However I can 'see' those files with firefox. more /etc/apt/apt.conf Acquire::http::proxy "http://www.myproxyname.fr:3128"; I also tried with port '80', or with a blank /etc/apt/apt.conf source.list grep -v "#" /etc/apt/sources.list deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic main restricted multiverse deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic-updates main restricted multiverse deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic universe deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic-updates universe deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic-security main restricted multiverse deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic-security universe does anyone knows how to fix this ? Thanks Pierre

    Read the article

  • Problem Disabling Roaming Profiles on Grouped Users

    - by user43207
    I'm having some serious issues getting a group of users to stop using roaming profiles. As expected, I have roaming profiles enabled accross the domain. - But am doing GPO filtering, limiting the scope. I originally had it set to authenticated users for Roaming, but as the domain has branched out to multiple locations, I've limited the scope to only people that are near the central office. The GPO that I have linked filtered to a group I have created that include users that I don't want to have roaming profiles. This GPO is sitting at the root of the domain, with the "Forced" setting enabled, so it should override any setting below it. *On a side note, it is the ONLY GPO that I have set to "Forced" right now. I know the GPO is working, since I can see the original registy settings on a user that logged in under roaming profiles - and then that same user logging in after I made the Group Policy changes, the registry reflects a local profile. But unfortunately, even after making those settings - the user is given a roaming profile on one of the servers. A gpresult of that same user account (after the updated gpo) is listed in the code block below. You can see right at the top of that output, that it is infact dealing with a roaming profile. - And sure enough, on the server that's hosting the file share for roaming profiles, it creates a folder for the user once they log in. For testing purposes, I've deleted all copies of the user's profile, roaming and local. But the problem is still here. - So I'm aparently missing something in the group policy settings on a wider scale. Would anybody be able to point me in the direction of what I'm missing here? *gpresult /r*** Microsoft (R) Windows (R) Operating System Group Policy Result tool v2.0 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. 1981-2001 Created On 5/15/2010 at 8:59:00 AM RSOP data for ** on * : Logging Mode OS Configuration: Member Workstation OS Version: 6.1.7600 Site Name: N/A Roaming Profile: \\profiles$** Local Profile: C:\Users*** Connected over a slow link?: No USER SETTINGS CN=*****,OU=*****,OU=*****,OU=*****,DC=*****,DC=***** Last time Group Policy was applied: 5/15/2010 at 8:52:02 AM Group Policy was applied from: *****.*****.com Group Policy slow link threshold: 500 kbps Domain Name: USSLINDSTROM Domain Type: Windows 2000 Applied Group Policy Objects ----------------------------- ForceLocalProfilesOnly InternetExplorer_***** GlobalPasswordPolicy The following GPOs were not applied because they were filtered out ------------------------------------------------------------------- DAgentFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSAdmin_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) NetlogonFirewallExceptions Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) NetLogon_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleManualInstall Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleDaily_0300 Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleThu_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) AlternateSSLFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) SNMPFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleSun_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) SQLServerFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleTue_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleSat_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) DisableUAC Filtering: Denied (Security) ICMPFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) AdminShareFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) GPRefreshInterval Filtering: Denied (Security) ServeRAIDFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleFri_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) BlockFirewallExceptions(8400-8410) Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleWed_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) Local Group Policy Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) WSUS_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) LogonAsService_Idaho Filtering: Denied (Security) ReportServerFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleMon_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) TFSFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) Default Domain Policy Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) DenyServerSideRoamingProfiles Filtering: Denied (Security) ShareConnectionsRemainAlive Filtering: Denied (Security) The user is a part of the following security groups --------------------------------------------------- Domain Users Everyone BUILTIN\Users BUILTIN\Administrators NT AUTHORITY\INTERACTIVE CONSOLE LOGON NT AUTHORITY\Authenticated Users This Organization LOCAL *****Users VPNAccess_***** NetAdmin_***** SiteAdmin_***** WSAdmin_***** VPNAccess_***** LocalProfileOnly_***** NetworkAdmin_***** LocalProfileOnly_***** VPNAccess_***** NetAdmin_***** Domain Admins WSAdmin_***** WSAdmin_***** ***** ***** Schema Admins ***** Enterprise Admins Denied RODC Password Replication Group High Mandatory Level

    Read the article

  • Disabling weak ciphers on Windows 2003

    - by Kev
    For PCI-DSS compliance you have to disable weak ciphers. PCI-DSS permits a minimum cipher size of 128 bits. However for the highest score (0 I believe) you should only accept 168 bit ciphers but you can still be compliant if you permit 128 bit ciphers. The trouble is that when we disable all but 168 bit encryption it seems to disable both inbound and out bound secure channels. For example we'd like to lock down inbound IIS HTTPS to 168 bit ciphers but permit outbound 128 bit SSL connections to payment gateways/services from service applications running on the server (not all payment gateways support 168 bit only we just found out today). Is it possible to have cipher asymmetry on Windows 2003? I am told it is all or nothing.

    Read the article

  • Anyone know where I can download a copy of Sun Java System Active Server Pages 4.0.3 for Solaris

    - by ewengcameron
    I've contacted Sun regarding this and they have told me that the download is no longer available as Active Server Pages 4.0.3 is now End Of Life. We need to upgrade our server to 4.0.3 to acheive PCI-DSS compliance. Anyone know of a site where I can download older copies of Sun files? Sun offer 4.0.1 and 4.0.2 to download but not 4.0.3 which is going to cause problems come October when Visa stops accepting transactions from non PCI compliant servers. If Sun kept their naming system consistent across versions, the file would be called "sjsasp403-sol-sparc.tar". I know the real solution is to upgrade every site on the server to use a different server language, i.e. PHP, and in the long term, this is our goal but we have over 100 sites requiring upgrading and its not a viable solution to get this done before October.

    Read the article

  • Linux Defualt Startup Display PCI to fix black boot screen

    - by Jonathan
    You heard it all before black screen on boot after perfectly fine install of most linux ubnuntu mint etc distributions (the netbook works fine) It has an Intel N10 integrated graphics chipset. I have actually found that if I plug in an external display then remove it the default screen turns on and my laptop works fine drivers all great - I have tried the screen cycle button fn f7 but doesn't work when no display is plugged in. It also works out all the correct resolutions and no modification of the grub bootloader or creating any xorg configs. So I think my monitor is forcing to a display that doesn't exist. Do you know if there is anyway I can force it to choose a different screen at boot so I can get a login screen? I can use nomodeset on grub but xrandr cant add the damned 1024 600 60 resolution that I need! Ideas guys?

    Read the article

  • graphic error on console

    - by Christian Elsner
    I have Linux on an embedded system. There is no graphic system, but I still have graphic errors. For example, if I type: ifconfig eth2 hw ether 00:0e:8c:d0:59:d2 I see: ifconfig eth hw ether 00:0e:8:2:2 If I type Enter, it accepts the command I typed, so it's just a matter of displaying. Everything is fine, when I log in via SSH. Anyone any ideas, what could be the cause or where to look at? Output of lspci: 00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation 3100 Chipset Memory I/O Controller Hub 00:00.1 Unassigned class [ff00]: Intel Corporation 3100 DRAM Controller Error Reporting Registers 00:01.0 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 3100 Chipset Enhanced DMA Controller 00:02.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 3100 Chipset PCI Express Port A 00:03.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 3100 Chipset PCI Express Port A1 00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 631xESB/632xESB/3100 Chipset PCI Express Root Port 1 (rev 01) 00:1c.1 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 631xESB/632xESB/3100 Chipset PCI Express Root Port 2 (rev 01) 00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 631xESB/632xESB/3100 Chipset UHCI USB Controller #1 (rev 01) 00:1d.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 631xESB/632xESB/3100 Chipset UHCI USB Controller #2 (rev 01) 00:1d.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 631xESB/632xESB/3100 Chipset EHCI USB2 Controller (rev 01) 00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 PCI Bridge (rev c9) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation 631xESB/632xESB/3100 Chipset LPC Interface Controller (rev 01) 00:1f.2 IDE interface: Intel Corporation 631xESB/632xESB/3100 Chipset SATA IDE Controller (rev 01) 00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corporation 631xESB/632xESB/3100 Chipset SMBus Controller (rev 01) 02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82574L Gigabit Network Connection 03:01.0 Network controller: Siemens Nixdorf AG Device 4003 (rev 02) 03:01.1 Unassigned class [ff00]: Siemens Nixdorf AG Device 4003 (rev 02) 03:02.0 Ethernet controller: Siemens Nixdorf AG Device 4047 (rev 01) 03:03.0 Ethernet controller: National Semiconductor Corporation DP83815 (MacPhyter) Ethernet Controller 03:04.0 Unassigned class [ff00]: Siemens Nixdorf AG Device 4057 (rev 01) 04:00.0 PCI bridge: Texas Instruments XIO2000(A)/XIO2200(A) PCI Express-to-PCI Bridge (rev 03) 05:00.0 Ethernet controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] 79c970 [PCnet32 LANCE] (rev 44) 06:00.0 PCI bridge: Texas Instruments XIO2000(A)/XIO2200(A) PCI Express-to-PCI Bridge (rev 03) 07:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Silicon Motion, Inc. SM720 Lynx3DM (rev c1) 07:01.0 USB Controller: NEC Corporation USB (rev 43) 07:01.1 USB Controller: NEC Corporation USB (rev 43) 07:01.2 USB Controller: NEC Corporation USB 2.0 (rev 04) The whole thing is running on an Intel Core 2 Duo U2500

    Read the article

  • Asus PCE-N53 11n N600 PCI-E Adapter on 3.x kernel

    - by CITguy
    Problem ASUS PCE-N53 wireless NIC doesn't work for latest versions of the linux kernel. How do I get it working on my system? (Note: I'm posting the answer I've found for others to use.) Installing Driver for Linux 3.x Kernel ASUS provides Linux drivers from their website, but it mentions that the driver supports "Linux Kernel 2.6.x", so it won't work without a some modifications to the driver code. Fortunately, an archlinux forum mentions similar problems and one user was able to create a patch for kernel 3.8.x that seems to work with kernel 3.11.x. Here's how I got it working: Prerequisites Ubuntu: sudo apt-get install build-essential Arch: sudo pacman -S base-devel Steps: 1. Download the driver from the ASUS website The download can be found under "Support Drivers & Tools". 2. Unzip the contents of the downloaded file cd into the new directory 3. Patch The arch forum mentions a 3.8 patch file that needs to be downloaded. Download rt5592sta_fix_64bit_3.8.patch to the current directory. tar -xvf {driver_source.tar.gz} cd into the directory created in previous step patch -p1 < ../rt5592sta_fix_64bit_3.8.patch 4. Compile NOTE: You will need to use sudo for it to compile properly. sudo make sudo make install sudo modprobe rt5592sta 5. Enjoy If all is well, you should now have a working card.

    Read the article

  • good PCI-e Wireless card for Windows7?

    - by benwebdev
    Hi I've just build a 64bit Windows 7 PC but am unhappy with the piddly performance of the linksys USB wireless dingle I've used. Can anyone suggest a good PCIe alternative that will be stronger for connection and maybe faster. I dont see why my desktop should show a weaker performance on wireless than my laptop when its sat next to it or even my Palm Pre for that matter. any thoughts? UK based max around £60ish. thanks, Ben

    Read the article

  • Blackberry Security Wipe

    - by GavinR
    What does a Blackberry "Security Wipe" (Options Security Options Security Wipe "emails, Contacts, etc") do? a) If I have an Enterprise Activation with my employer will a security wipe remove this? b) Will my phone still ring when my number is called or do I have to re-activate with my carrier?

    Read the article

  • Can't upgrade ubuntu 9.xx to 12.04

    - by andrej spyk
    I can't upgrade old Ubuntu 9.10 to new, if I check for upgrade it says: Could not download all repository indexes *Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch http://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch tp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch htp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch http://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found Some index files failed to download, they have been ignored, or old ones used instead.* How I can upgrade if I can't burn new CD?

    Read the article

  • HP Pavilion tx2000 - Wifi adapter no longer works after moving from 12.04 to a 12.10 clean install

    - by Marek L.
    I have a HP Pavilion tx2000 that I have been running Ubuntu 12.04 on for a couple of months without any problems (wifi worked great) until yesterday when my hard drive failed. I replaced the hard drive and decided to install Ubuntu 12.10. Unlike 12.04, the wifi did not work after the installation finished and all the updates where installed (over Ethernet). The network drop down in the top right didn't even show a wireless option. I Googled about for a bit and found some solutions that seemed like they might work. Unfortunately they did not. Here is what I tried: sudo apt-get remove bcmwl-kernel-source sudo apt-get install b43-fwcutter sudo apt-get install firmware-b43-lpphy-installer Restart the computer. And the wifi still didn't work. At which point I panicked a bit and tried to undo the previous commands by running: sudo apt-get remove b43-fwcutter firmware-b43-lpphy-installer sudo apt-get install bcmwl-kernel-source Restart the computer. The wifi still doesn't work. This is where I stopped because I have no idea what I am doing and don't want to mess something up. The network drop down still doesn't show a wireless option and the hardware wifi switch on the laptop is amber (it turns blue when the wifi is on). Using the hardware switch does not change the color. Output from: sudo lspci ... 08:00.0 Network controller: Broadcom Corporation BCM4322 802.11a/b/g/n Wireless LAN Controller (rev 01) ... Output from: sudo lshw -class network *-network UNCLAIMED description: Network controller product: BCM4322 802.11a/b/g/n Wireless LAN Controller vendor: Broadcom Corporation physical id: 0 bus info: pci@0000:08:00.0 version: 01 width: 64 bits clock: 33MHz capabilities: pm msi pciexpress bus_master cap_list configuration: latency=0 resources: memory:d1100000-d1103fff ... Output from: sudo rfkill list all 0: hp-wifi: Wireless LAN Soft blocked: no Hard blocked: yes UPDATE: After writing up this question tried the following command: sudo rfkill unblock all At first it didn't do anything but after running it about four times, sudo rfkill list all now returns: 0: hp-wifi: Wireless LAN Soft blocked: no Hard blocked: no But the network menu still does not have a wireless option and the hardware switch still glows amber. Pushing the hardware switch turns the hard block back on and I have to run sudo rfkill unblock all multiple times again to turn it off. Any help is appreciated! Update 2: Full output from sudo lspci -nn: 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] RS780 Host Bridge [1022:9600] 00:01.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] RS780/RS880 PCI to PCI bridge (int gfx) [1022:9602] 00:04.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] RS780/RS880 PCI to PCI bridge (PCIE port 0) [1022:9604] 00:05.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] RS780/RS880 PCI to PCI bridge (PCIE port 1) [1022:9605] 00:06.0 PCI bridge [0604]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] RS780 PCI to PCI bridge (PCIE port 2) [1022:9606] 00:11.0 SATA controller [0106]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 SATA Controller [AHCI mode] [1002:4391] 00:12.0 USB controller [0c03]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 USB OHCI0 Controller [1002:4397] 00:12.1 USB controller [0c03]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0 USB OHCI1 Controller [1002:4398] 00:12.2 USB controller [0c03]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 USB EHCI Controller [1002:4396] 00:13.0 USB controller [0c03]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 USB OHCI0 Controller [1002:4397] 00:13.1 USB controller [0c03]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0 USB OHCI1 Controller [1002:4398] 00:13.2 USB controller [0c03]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 USB EHCI Controller [1002:4396] 00:14.0 SMBus [0c05]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SBx00 SMBus Controller [1002:4385] (rev 3a) 00:14.1 IDE interface [0101]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 IDE Controller [1002:439c] 00:14.2 Audio device [0403]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SBx00 Azalia (Intel HDA) [1002:4383] 00:14.3 ISA bridge [0601]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 LPC host controller [1002:439d] 00:14.4 PCI bridge [0604]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SBx00 PCI to PCI Bridge [1002:4384] 00:14.5 USB controller [0c03]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI SB7x0/SB8x0/SB9x0 USB OHCI2 Controller [1002:4399] 00:18.0 Host bridge [0600]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Family 11h Processor HyperTransport Configuration [1022:1300] (rev 40) 00:18.1 Host bridge [0600]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Family 11h Processor Address Map [1022:1301] 00:18.2 Host bridge [0600]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Family 11h Processor DRAM Controller [1022:1302] 00:18.3 Host bridge [0600]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Family 11h Processor Miscellaneous Control [1022:1303] 00:18.4 Host bridge [0600]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Family 11h Processor Link Control [1022:1304] 01:05.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI RS780M/RS780MN [Mobility Radeon HD 3200 Graphics] [1002:9612] 08:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Broadcom Corporation BCM4322 802.11a/b/g/n Wireless LAN Controller [14e4:432b] (rev 01) 09:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller [10ec:8168] (rev 02)

    Read the article

  • Is Windows Server 2008R2 NAP solution for NAC (endpoint security) valuable enough to be worth the hassles?

    - by Warren P
    I'm learning about Windows Server 2008 R2's NAP features. I understand what network access control (NAC) is and what role NAP plays in that, but I would like to know what limitations and problems it has, that people wish they knew before they rolled it out. Secondly, I'd like to know if anyone has had success rolling it out in a mid-size (multi-city corporate network with around 15 servers, 200 desktops) environment with most (99%) Windows XP SP3 and newer Windows clients (Vista, and Win7). Did it work with your anti-virus? (I'm guessing NAP works well with the big name anti-virus products, but we're using Trend micro.). Let's assume that the servers are all Windows Server 2008 R2. Our VPNs are cisco stuff, and have their own NAC features. Has NAP actually benefitted your organization, and was it wise to roll it out, or is it yet another in the long list of things that Windows Server 2008 R2 does, but that if you do move your servers up to it, you're probably not going to want to use. In what particular ways might the built-in NAP solution be the best one, and in what particular ways might no solution at all (the status quo pre-NAP) or a third-party endpoint security or NAC solution be considered a better fit? I found an article where a panel of security experts in 2007 say NAC is maybe "not worth it". Are things better now in 2010 with Win Server 2008 R2?

    Read the article

  • Is encryption really needed for having network security? [closed]

    - by Cawas
    I welcome better key-wording here, both on tags and title. I'm trying to conceive a free, open and secure network environment that would work anywhere, from big enterprises to small home networks of just 1 machine. I think since wireless Access Points are the most, if not only, true weak point of a Local Area Network (let's not consider every other security aspect of having internet) there would be basically two points to consider here: Having an open AP for anyone to use the internet through Leaving the whole LAN also open for guests to be able to easily read (only) files on it, and even a place to drop files on Considering these two aspects, once everything is done properly... What's the most secure option between having that, or having just an encrypted password-protected wifi? Of course "both" would seem "more secure". But it shouldn't actually be anything substantial. I've always had the feeling using any kind of the so called "wireless security" methods is actually a bad design. I'm talking mostly about encrypting and pass-phrasing (which are actually two different concepts), since I won't even consider hiding SSID and mac filtering. I understand it's a natural way of thinking. With cable networking nobody can access the network unless they have access to the physical cable, so you're "secure" in the physical way. In a way, encrypting is for wireless what building walls is for the cables. And giving pass-phrases would be adding a door with a key. So, what do you think?

    Read the article

  • How to disable irritating Office File Validation security alert?

    - by Rabarberski
    I have Microsoft Office 2007 running on Windows 7. Yesterday I updated Office to the latest service pack, i.e. SP3. This morning, when opening an MS Word document (.doc format, and a document I created myself some months ago) I was greeted with a new dialog box saying: Security Alert - Office File Validation WARNING: Office File Validation detected a problem while trying to open this file. Opening this is probably dangerous, and may allow a malicious user to take over your computer. Contact the sender and ask them to re-save and re-send the file. For more security, verify in person or via the phone that they sent the file. Including two links to some microsoft blabla webpage. Obviously the document is safe as I created it myself some months ago. How to disable this irritating dialog box? (On a sidenote, a rethorical question: Will Microsoft never learn? I consider myself a power user in Word, but I have no clue what could be wrong with my document so that it is considered dangerous. Let alone more basic users of Word. Sigh....)

    Read the article

  • SharePoint extranet security concerns, am I right to be worried?

    - by LukeR
    We are currently running MOSS 2007 internally, and have been doing so for about 12 months with no major issues. There has now been a request from management to provide access from the internet for small groups (initially) which are comprised of members from other Community Organisations like ours. Committees and the like. My first reaction was not joy when presented with this request, however I'd like to make sure the apprehension is warranted. I have read a few docs on TechNet about security hardening with regard to SharePoint, but I'm interested to know what others have done. I've spoken with another organisation who has already implemented something similar, and they have essentially port-forwarded from the internet to their internal production MOSS server. I don't really like the sound of this. Is it adviseable/necessary to run a DMZ type configuration, with a separate web front-end on a contained network segment? Does that even offer me any greater security than their setup? Some of the configurations from a TechNet doc aren't really feasible, given our current network budget. I've already made my concerns known to management, but it appears it will go ahead in some form or another. I'm tempted to run a completely isolated, seperate install just for these types of users. Should I even be concerned about it? Any thoughts, comments would be most welcomed at this point.

    Read the article

  • Security implications of adding www-data to /etc/sudoers to run php-cgi as a different user

    - by BMiner
    What I really want to do is allow the 'www-data' user to have the ability to launch php-cgi as another user. I just want to make sure that I fully understand the security implications. The server should support a shared hosting environment where various (possibly untrusted) users have chroot'ed FTP access to the server to store their HTML and PHP files. Then, since PHP scripts can be malicious and read/write others' files, I'd like to ensure that each users' PHP scripts run with the same user permissions for that user (instead of running as www-data). Long story short, I have added the following line to my /etc/sudoers file, and I wanted to run it past the community as a sanity check: www-data ALL = (%www-data) NOPASSWD: /usr/bin/php-cgi This line should only allow www-data to run a command like this (without a password prompt): sudo -u some_user /usr/bin/php-cgi ...where some_user is a user in the group www-data. What are the security implications of this? This should then allow me to modify my Lighttpd configuration like this: fastcgi.server += ( ".php" => (( "bin-path" => "sudo -u some_user /usr/bin/php-cgi", "socket" => "/tmp/php.socket", "max-procs" => 1, "bin-environment" => ( "PHP_FCGI_CHILDREN" => "4", "PHP_FCGI_MAX_REQUESTS" => "10000" ), "bin-copy-environment" => ( "PATH", "SHELL", "USER" ), "broken-scriptfilename" => "enable" )) ) ...allowing me to spawn new FastCGI server instances for each user.

    Read the article

  • Using Plesk for webhosting on Ubuntu - Security risk or reasonably safe?

    - by user66952
    Sorry for this newb-question I'm pretty clueless about Plesk, only have limited debian (without Plesk) experience. If the question is too dumb just telling me how to ask a smarter one or what kind of info I should read first to improve the question would be appreciated as well. I want to offer a program for download on my website hosted on an Ubuntu 8.04.4 VPS using Plesk 9.3.0 for web-hosting. I have limited the ssh-access to the server via key only. When setting up the webhosting with Plesk it created an FTP-login & user is that a potential security risk that could bypass the key-only access? I think Plesk itself (even without the ftp-user-account) through it's web-interface could be a risk is that correct or are my concerns exaggerated? Would you say this solution makes a difference if I'm just using it for the next two weeks and then change servers to a system where I know more about security. 3.In other words is one less likely to get hacked within the first two weeks of having a new site up and running than in week 14&15? (due to occurring in less search results in the beginning perhaps, or for whatever reason... )

    Read the article

  • CIFS - Default security mechanism requested (Mounted Share)

    - by André Faria
    The following message appear every time I reboot/boot my ubuntu 12.04.1 CIFS VFS: default security mechanism requested. The default security mechanism will be upgraded from nbtlm to ntlmv2 in kernel realese 3.3 I'am searching for a solution, if there is one for this message, I really don't understand it. Following my fstab //192.168.0.10/D$/ /mnt/winshare/ cifs user,file_mode=0777,dir_mode=0777,rw,gid=1000,credentials=/root/creds 0 0 I can use my mounted folder with no problem, I just want to know why this message is appearing and if have something that I can do to fix this problem or hide this warning. Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >