Search Results

Search found 3399 results on 136 pages for 'rule'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 44/136 | < Previous Page | 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >

  • Apache Tomcat Server Error

    - by Sam....
    I M trying to install Tomcat But Getting this Error Every Time ..whether it is binary or Exe install *SEVERE: Begin event threw exception java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.apache.catalina.core.AprLifecycleListener at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source) at org.apache.commons.digester.ObjectCreateRule.begin(ObjectCreateRule.java:204) at org.apache.commons.digester.Rule.begin(Rule.java:152) at org.apache.commons.digester.Digester.startElement(Digester.java:1286) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.parsers.AbstractSAXParser.startElement(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.parsers.AbstractXMLDocumentParser.emptyElement(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.XMLDocumentFragmentScannerImpl.scanStartElement(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.XMLDocumentFragmentScannerImpl$FragmentContentDriver.next(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.XMLDocumentScannerImpl.next(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.XMLDocumentFragmentScannerImpl.scanDocument(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.parsers.XML11Configuration.parse(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.parsers.XML11Configuration.parse(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.parsers.XMLParser.parse(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.parsers.AbstractSAXParser.parse(Unknown Source) at com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.jaxp.SAXParserImpl$JAXPSAXParser.parse(Unknown Source) at org.apache.commons.digester.Digester.parse(Digester.java:1572) at org.apache.catalina.startup.Catalina.start(Catalina.java:451) at org.apache.catalina.startup.Catalina.execute(Catalina.java:402) at org.apache.catalina.startup.Catalina.process(Catalina.java:180) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown Source) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown Source) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Unknown Source) at org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap.main(Bootstrap.java:202) * Can any one please solve this...need urgent rly

    Read the article

  • apache 2.4, mod_proxy_fcgi not honouring .htaccess, work around needed

    - by user229874
    I am using apache 2.4.7 with mod_proxy_fcgi for purpose of passing through php to php-fpm (this will be used for shared hosting environment). The htaccess works fine for non php files, but once it hit rewrite rule that proxies through the php requests, the htaccess is ignored. I know why it is happening. The question is: how do I work around it? The question how do I force apache to treat the request to php file as a request to local file, and then proxy it through? I have spent substantial time in researching on this problem, and following "answers" were given as solution: 1) "use apache configuration instead of .htaccess" it is valid solution, but not for shared hosting environment (I am not going to give access to apache configuration to shared hosting customers ;)). 2) "don't use .htaccess, as it has performance/security/other issues", well how else would shared hosting customers control access/url rewriting on their site? Besides if the .htaccess was not a requirement I would simply use nginx. 3) "put rewrite rule for proxy inside of " - this is incorrect, and it does not work. This behaviour appears to be not a bug but a "feature" as per https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54887

    Read the article

  • Remote Desktop *from* Windows 2008 R2 Server

    - by freefaller
    Summary: how do I create an RDC connection from a Windows 2008 server to another server? Our client will only allow us to connect to their server via a static IP address (which is fair enough), but unfortunately as we're a very small company we don't have one in the office. As a work around, we had the connection working through our old Windows 2003 server (dynamic-cloud from 1and1). .. however we have just rebuilt the server to run under Windows 2008 R2 (don't ask, but it was necessary), and now I simply cannot get the connection working. I have added an "Outbound Rule" to Windows Firewall with Advanced Security (TCP, All local ports, 3389 remote port - I have also tried the other way around). I have added a packet filter IP security rule with the same details. The 1and1 firewall rules (through their online control panel) allows for 3389 TCP and UDP. But it is simply not connecting (yes, the server is definitely on and able to accept connections) with the general error of... Remote Desktop can’t connect to the remote computer for one of these reasons: 1) Remote access to the server is not enabled 2) The remote computer is turned off 3) The remote computer is not available on the network Is there anything obvious I've missed - or something I can use to find out where the request is being blocked? The new server is using the exact same IP address as before, so I don't believe that would be an issue. Unless it's trying to use an IPv6 address rather than the old IPv4 address that it was before? I apologise that I am not a network person by trade, but I know more than anybody else in my office!!

    Read the article

  • Apache2 - Hosting two sites on the same domain with different ports

    - by user1026361
    I am hosting a staging site (test.mydomain.com) which currently work well on port 80 for two sites (test.mydomain.com and test.FRmydomain.com) I am working on a new backend and I would like to deploy a third site on this server for testing. My hope is that it will live at test.mydomain.com:4204. I've got some experience with apache and quickly added statements: Listen 4204 NameVirtualHost *:4204 and created a new config for my site. What I imagine are the relevant parts of my config: <VirtualHost *:4204 > ServerAdmin [email protected] ServerName test.mydomain.com:4204 However, the site is not publicly available, by name or ip. If i curl localhost:4204 from the server, I get the expected page content At this point, I'm a bit of a loss on how to go forwards. It seems like my config is correct but not available to be served. Am I better off defining a proxy definition so that, for instance: test.mydomain.com/4204 proxies to my localhost server or is there a way to make the site available via the internet? EDIT: I have added an iptable rule after further Googling with the command: iptables -I INPUT -p tcp --dport 4204 -j ACCEPT I can see apache listening on 4204 and the rule is definitely in place but cant reach the site

    Read the article

  • Squid with mikrotik router

    - by niren
    I tried to connect squid3 in my network to use high anonymity proxy. This is how my network is right now WAN LINK | ------------- ----------------------------- | Mikrotik Box | | Ubuntu Server with squid3 | ------------- ----------------------------- | / | / ---------------------- | Switch ( Cheap one ) | ---------------------- | | | Client1 Client2 Client3 etc. after this setup I changed squid.conf in Ubuntu server as http_port 8080 acl localhost src xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx(Ubuntu server IP) acl to_localhost dst xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx(Mikrotik router gateway) I assume that redirected http from Mikrotik router will be redirect again to Mikrotik router. uncomment access log /var/log/squid3/access.log add visible_hostname myname save squid.conf and restart squid3 server. Then I have added nat rule in Mikrotik router ip/firewall/nat 1. add chain=dstnat src_address=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx(ununtu server IP) dst-port=80 protocol=tcp action=accept 2. add chain=dstnat src_address=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx/28(LAN address) dst-port=80 protocol=tcp action=dst-nat to-address=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx(ununtu server IP) to-port=8080 now I can not able to access internet from client1 system, If I remove these two nat rule then I can access internet. what is wrong I have made?

    Read the article

  • nginx error page and internal directives not working as expected

    - by Romain
    I'd like to setup my nginx server to return a specific error page on HTTP 50x status codes, and I'd like this page to be unavailable by a direct request from users (e.g., http//mysite/internalerror). For that, I'm using nginx's internal directive, but I must be missing something, as when I put that directive on my /internalerror location, nginx returns a custom 404 error (which isn't even my own 404 error page) when a page crashes. So, to summarize, here's what seems to happen: GET /Home nginx passes the query to Python I'm simulating an application bug to get the 502 error code nginx tries to return /InternalError from its error_page rule because of the internal rule, it finally fails back to a custom 404 error code <-- why? the documentation says error_page directives are not concerned by internal: http://wiki.nginx.org/HttpCoreModule#internal Here's an extract from nginx.conf with a few comments to point things out: error_page 404 /NotFound; error_page 500 502 503 504 =500 /InternalError; # HTTP 500 Error page declaration location / { try_files /Maintenance.html $uri @pythonbackend; } location @pythonbackend { include uwsgi_params; uwsgi_pass unix:///tmp/uwsgi.sock; } location ~* \.(py|pyc)$ { # This internal location works OK and returns my own 404 error page internal; } location /__Maintenance.html { # This one also works fine internal; } location ~* /internalerror { # This one doesn't work and returns nginx's 404 error page when I trigger an error somewhere on my site internal; } Thanks very much for your help!!

    Read the article

  • Using public interfaces on a server connected through a GRE tunnel

    - by Evan
    I'm pretty new to networking so please forgive any terminology mistakes. I have 2 servers connected with a GRE tunnel. Server1 (10.0.0.1) ---- Server2 (10.0.0.2) I want to be able to bind to the public IPs on Server2 using Server1. To do this, I setup virtual interfaces with Server2's public IPs on Server1 and then used routing rules on Server1 to route the packets through the GRE tunnel. On Server1: ip rule add from [Server2's first public IP] table gre ip rule add from [Server2's second public IP] table gre ip route add default via 10.0.0.2 dev gre1 table gre This works great and I can see the packets arriving via GRE on Server2. I can see the packet exiting the tunnel on Server2's gre1 device as shown: From Server1: ping -I [Server2's public ip] google.com tcpdump from Server2's GRE tunnel device: 12:07:17.029160 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto ICMP (1), length 84) [Server2's public ip] > 74.125.225.38: ICMP echo request, id 6378, seq 50, length 64 This is exactly the packet I want. However, I'm not seeing it go out at all on eth0:0 (where Server2's public IP is bound to). I've tried to use routing rules to get packets coming from Server2's public IP (which would be coming out of dev gre1) to go through dev eth0 on the public default gateway and that doesn't work either. I'm at a loss, thank you to anyone who can help.

    Read the article

  • Nginx: Serve static files out of a given directory - one level too deep

    - by Joe J
    I'm pretty new to nginx configs. I'm having some difficulty with a pretty basic problem. I'd like to host some static files at /doc (index.html, some images, etc). The files are located in a directory called /sites/mysite/proj/doc/. The problem is, is that with the nginx config below, nginx tries to look for a directory called "/sites/mysite/proj/doc/doc". Perhaps this can be fixed by setting the root to /sites/mysite/proj/, but I don't want to potentially expose other (non-static) assets in the proj/ directory. And for various reasons, I can't really move the doc/ directory from where it is. I think there is a way to use a Rewrite rule to solve this situation, but I don't really understand all the parts, so having some difficulty formulating the rule. rewrite ^/doc/(.*)$ /$1 permanent; I've also included a working example of hosting files out of a /sites/mysite/htdocs/static/ directory. > vim locations.conf location /static { root /sites/mysite/htdocs/; access_log off; autoindex on; } location /doc { root /sites/mysite/proj/doc/; access_log on; autoindex on; } 2011/11/19 23:49:00 [error] 2314#0: *42 open() "/sites/mysite/proj/doc/doc" failed (2: No such file or directory), client: 100.100.100.100, server: , request: "GET /doc HTTP/1.1", host: "myhost.com" Does anyone have any ideas how I might go about serving this static content? Any help is much appreciated. Thanks, Joe

    Read the article

  • management network to a network port for additional ones munin and monit

    - by paolo
    management network to a network port for additional ones munin and monit I want to build a separate Netzwek for server management. I have several network cards a linux / debian / ubuntu with computer. Set both network cards sin in the /etc/network/interfaces. # The primary network interface #allow-hotplug eth0 #iface eth0 inet dhcp auto eth0 iface eth0 inet static address 10.0.0.240 netmast 255.255.255.0 network 10.0.0.0 brodacast 10.0.0.255 gateway 10.0.0.254 auto eth1 iface eth1 inet static address 10.0.10.240 netmast 255.255.255.0 network 10.0.10.0 brodacast 10.0.10.255 post-up ip route add 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0 src 10.0.0.240 table eth0-WAN post-up ip route add default via 10.0.0.254 table eth0-WAN post-up ip route add 10.0.10.0/24 dev eth1 src 10.0.10.240 table eth1-LAN post-up ip route add default via 10.0.10.200 table eth1-LAN post-up ip rule add from 10.0.0.240 table eth0-WAN post-up ip rule add from 10.0.10.240 table eth1-LAN still i adjusted / etc/iproute2/rt_tables and following routes set up in the /etc/network/interfaces I want to have both applications and the network interface separately as munin and monit only on eth1 and not have to eth0. it goes to the reboot but sometimes not always. # Traceroute-i eth1 10.0.10.200 not go what am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Outbound mail issue during Exchange 2003 migration

    - by user27574
    Dear all, I am having an outbound email issue during the Exch 03 migration. Basically, we are migrating Exch03 to new hardware, both servers are Server 03 based. Everything runs smooth while setting up and installing Exch 03 on the new box. Public folders are all replicated. My issues are shown below.... 1) After starting to move users' mailboxes to new Exch 03, they receive some undeliverable mail and bounced back mail from some vendors, then I move few users back to test around, they have no problem at all after moving back to old Exch 03. 2) Another issue is our company has Blackberry users, we don't have BES. Under each user's mailboxes, we have forward rule setup, so that both user inbox and BB can receive email. User who is moved to the new Exch 03 server, they can only send email to the BB user's inbox, mail cannot be forwarded to BB at all, smtp queue stacks up and keep trying until the time is expired. Since not all emails that the users send out from the new Exch have problem, I am not able to narrow down what is the issue here. Can anyone give me some ideas? Could this be MX record / Reversed DNS relate? Or firewall NAT rule setting? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Windows Firewall Software to Filter Transit Traffic

    - by soonts
    I need to test my networking code for Nintendo Wii under the conditions when some specific Internet server is not available. Wii is connected to my PC with crossover ethernet cable. PC has 2 NICs. PC is connected to hardware router with ethernet cable. The hardware router serves as NAT and has an internet connected to its uplink. I set the Wii to be in the same lan as PC by using Windows XP Network bridge. I can observe the WII network traffic using e.g. Wireshark sniffer. Is there a software firewall that can selectively filter out transit traffic? (e.g. block outgoing TCP connections to 123.45.67.89 to port 443) I tried Outpost Pro 2009 and Comodo. Outpost firewall blocks all transit traffic with it's implicit "block transit packet" rule. If the transit traffic is explicitly allowed by creating the system-wide low level rule, then it's allowed completely and no other filter can selectively block it. Comodo firewall only process rules when the packet has localhost's IP as either source or destination, allowing the rest of the traffic. Any ideas? Thanks in advance! P.S. Platform is Windows XP 32 bit, no other OSes is allowed, Windows ICS (Internet Connection Sharing) doesnt work since the Wii is unable to connect, becides I don't like the idea of adding one more level of NAT.

    Read the article

  • Enabling NAT forwarding using a second WAN interface and a second gateway on ubuntu

    - by nixnotwin
    I have 3 interfaces: eth0 192.168.0.50/24 eth1 10.0.0.200/24 eth2 225.228.123.211 The default gateway is 192.168.0.1 which I want to keep as it is in the changes I want to make. I want to masquerade eth1 10.0.0.200/24 and enable NAT forwarding to eth2. So I have done this: ip route add 225.228.123.208/29 dev eth2 src 225.228.123.211 table t1 ip route add default via 225.228.123.209 dev eth2 table t1 ip rule add from 225.228.123.211 table t1 ip rule add to 225.228.123.211 table t1 Now I can receive ping replies from any internet host if I did: ping -I eth2 8.8.8.8 To enable NAT forwarding I did this: sudo iptables -A FORWARD -o eth2 -i eth1 -s 10.0.0.0/24 -m conntrack --ctstate NEW -j ACCEPT sudo iptables -A FORWARD -m conntrack --ctstate ESTABLISHED,RELATED -j ACCEPT sudo iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o eth1 -j MASQUERADE But it isn't working. To test I used a client pc and put it on 10.0.0.0/24 network and gateway was set as 10.0.0.200. I want to have 192.168.0.1 as default gateway. And the traffic that comes in via eth1 10.0.0.200/24 should be forwarded to eth2 225.228.123.211. I have enabled forwarding on ubuntua also.

    Read the article

  • Creating Routes using the second NIC in the box

    - by Aditya Sehgal
    OS: Linux I need some advice on how to set up the routing table. I have a box with two physical NIC cards eth0 & eth1 with two associated IPs IP1 & IP2 (both of the same subnet). I need to setup a route which will force all messages from IP1 towards IP3 (of the same subnet) to go via IP2. I have a raw socket capture program listening on IP2 (This is not for malicious use). I have set up the routing table as Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface IP3 IP2 255.255.255.255 UGH 0 0 0 eth1 If I try to specify eth0 while adding the above rule, I get an error "SIOCADDRT: Network is unreachable". I understand from the manpage of route that if the GW specified is a local interface, then that would be use as the outgoing interface. After setting up this rule, if i do a traceroute (-i eth0), the packet goes first to the default gateway and then to IP3. How do I force the packet originating from eth0 towards IP3 to first come to IP2. I cannot make changes to the routing table of the gateway. Please suggest.

    Read the article

  • Using URL rewrite module for http to https redirect

    - by johnnyb10
    Following ruslany's suggestion on the URL Rewrite Tips page here, I'm trying to use URL Rewrite to redirect http:// requests for my site to https://. I've written and tested the rule using a test site I set up, and so now the final piece is to create a second site (http) to redirect to my https site. (I need to use a second site because I don't want to uncheck the "Require SSL encryption" checkbox on my existing site.) I'm an IIS newbie so my question is: how do I do this? Should I create a site with the same name and host header, only it will be bound to http? Will IIS let me create a site with the same name? I don't want to screw anything up with my existing site (which is a SharePoint site, currently used by external users). That site currently has http and https bound to it. So my assumption is that, using ISS (not SharePoint), I will create a new site (http only) with the same name and host header as my existing site, and add the URL Rewrite rule to the http site. And then I guess I should remove the http binding from my existing site? Does that seem correct? Any advice, gotchas, etc., would be appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • SNMP Access on Ubuntu

    - by javano
    I am trying to use SNMP to monitor a machine locally on its self and remotely. This is the snmpd.conf (Ubuntu 8.04.1): # sec.name source comunity com2sec readonly 1.2.3.4 nicenandtight com2sec readonly 5.6.7.8 reallysafe group MyROGroup v1 readonly group MyROGroup v2c readonly group MyROGroup usm readonly view all included .1 view system included .iso.org.dod.internet.mgmt.mib-2.system access MyROGroup "" any noauth exact all none none syslocation my house syscontact me <[email protected]> exec .1.3.6.1.4.1.2021.7890.1 distro /usr/bin/distro smuxpeer .1.3.6.1.4.1.674.10892.1 includeAllDisks 95% 1.2.3.4 is the local machines IP and everything is working locally. 5.6.7.8 is the remote machine and initially I am just trying to touch SNMPD with snmpwalk from the remote machine; snmpwalk -v 2c -c reallysafe 1.2.3.4 Timeout: No Response from 1.2.3.4 I have added to iptables as the very first rule; -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --dport 161 -j ACCEPT With such a loose iptables rule I can't see why I can't even touch the SNMPD on that Uubuntu Machine. There are more specific rules further down the table but as I couldn't connect I added the above. TCPDump shows the UDP packets coming in. What could be going wrong here?

    Read the article

  • Ping and crawling not working, site still resolving

    - by Andrew Alexander
    Ok, so we're trying to figure out why the site of one of our clients isn't being crawled by Google (we've ruled out robots.txt or meta tags) When we go to the site, either IP address or domain name, the site resolves, everything works. However, Google is getting a 302 redirect (which it apparently isn't following for crawling), and when we ping the address, it times out (note, the site is still resolving in the browser throughout all of this). The site is built in ASP.Net (I assume C#) and so my thoughts were that it was an errant redirect rule, or some other sort of server side issue. We also thought that it might be due to incorrect domain pointing (but if we try to ping the IP, it doesn't work, so that sorta rules that out). We're really not sure what is causing all of these errors, or even if they have one single source. Anyone have any ideas what could be going on? Do you need any more information? To boil it down in a TL; dr: * Site resolving in browser, both IP and domain name. No problems here. * Site not being crawled by Google (gets a 302 it doesn't seem to follow) - it is not due to robots.txt or meta tags * Ping is not working for the IP address. This is very odd, because again, the IP address seems to work fine in the browser. * Our thoughts are either redirect rule issue, domain pointing issue, or possibly some errant code - or some combination of the three

    Read the article

  • iptables to block non-VPN-traffic if not through tun0

    - by dacrow
    I have a dedicated Webserver running Debian 6 and some Apache, Tomcat, Asterisk and Mail-stuff. Now we needed to add VPN support for a special program. We installed OpenVPN and registered with a VPN provider. The connection works well and we have a virtual tun0 interface for tunneling. To archive the goal for only tunneling a single program through VPN, we start the program with sudo -u username -g groupname command and added a iptables rule to mark all traffic coming from groupname iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname -j MARK --set-mark 42 Afterwards we tell iptables to to some SNAT and tell ip route to use special routing table for marked traffic packets. Problem: if the VPN failes, there is a chance that the special to-be-tunneled program communicates over the normal eth0 interface. Desired solution: All marked traffic should not be allowed to go directly through eth0, it has to go through tun0 first. I tried the following commands which didn't work: iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname ! -o tun0 -j REJECT iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname -o eth0 -j REJECT It might be the problem, that the above iptable-rules didn't work due to the fact, that the packets are first marked, then put into tun0 and then transmitted by eth0 while they are still marked.. I don't know how to de-mark them after in tun0 or to tell iptables, that all marked packet may pass eth0, if they where in tun0 before or if they going to the gateway of my VPN provider. Does someone has any idea to a solution? Some config infos: iptables -nL -v --line-numbers -t mangle Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 11M packets, 9798M bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 591K 50M MARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 owner GID match 1005 MARK set 0x2a 2 82812 6938K CONNMARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 owner GID match 1005 CONNMARK save iptables -nL -v --line-numbers -t nat Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 393 packets, 23908 bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 15 1052 SNAT all -- * tun0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 mark match 0x2a to:VPN_IP ip rule add from all fwmark 42 lookup 42 ip route show table 42 default via VPN_IP dev tun0

    Read the article

  • Office 2003 Service Pack 3- Not able to install

    - by kabirrao
    I am trying to install Office 2003 SP3 on a windows 2003 EE server (used as a terminal server) which already have office 2003 SP2. I am getting an error that says "Update can not be applied". Below are the eventviewer entries for Application: _ Event Type: Warning Event Source: MsiInstaller Event Category: None Event ID: 1015 Date: 1-2-2010 Time: 5:51:22 User: Domain\domainadmin Computer: TER01 Description: Failed to connect to server. Error: 0x800401F0 For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. _ Event Type: Information Event Source: MsiInstaller Event Category: None Event ID: 11708 Date: 1-2-2010 Time: 5:52:23 User: Domain\domainadmin Computer: TER01 Description: Product: Microsoft Office Professional Edition 2003 -- Installation failed. For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. Data: 0000: 7b 39 30 31 31 30 34 30 {9011040 0008: 39 2d 36 30 30 30 2d 31 9-6000-1 0010: 31 44 33 2d 38 43 46 45 1D3-8CFE 0018: 2d 30 31 35 30 30 34 38 -0150048 0020: 33 38 33 43 39 7d 383C9} _ Event Type: Information Event Source: McLogEvent Event Category: None Event ID: 257 Date: 1-2-2010 Time: 5:52:23 User: NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM Computer: TER01 Description: Would be blocked by access protection rule (rule is in warn-only mode) (Common Standard Protection:Prevent common programs from running files from the Temp folder).

    Read the article

  • Using URL rewrite module for http to https redirect

    - by johnnyb10
    Following ruslany's suggestion on the URL Rewrite Tips page here, I'm trying to use URL Rewrite to redirect http:// requests for my site to https://. I've written and tested the rule using a test site I set up, and so now the final piece is to create a second site (http) to redirect to my https site. (I need to use a second site because I don't want to uncheck the "Require SSL encryption" checkbox on my existing site.) I'm an IIS newbie so my question is: how do I do this? Should I create a site with the same name and host header, only it will be bound to http? Will IIS let me create a site with the same name? I don't want to screw anything up with my existing site (which is a SharePoint site, currently used by external users). That site currently has http and https bound to it. So my assumption is that, using ISS (not SharePoint), I will create a new site (http only) with the same name and host header as my existing site, and add the URL Rewrite rule to the http site. And then I guess I should remove the http binding from my existing site? Does that seem correct? Any advice, gotchas, etc., would be appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • KeePass lost password and/or corruption due to Dropbox/KeePassX

    - by GummiV
    I started using Keepass about a month ago to hold my passwords and online accounts info. Everything was stored in a single .kdb file, only protected with a password. I'm using Windows 7. Now Keepass can't open my .kdb file with the error "Invalid/wrong key". I'm fairly confident I have the right password. Altough I might have mixed up a few letters I've tried about two dozen different combinations to minimize that possibility - but can't rule it out though. My guess is however that the .kdb file got corrupted, either due to Dropbox syncing (only using it on one computer though) or because I edited the file using KeePassX on Ubuntu (dual boot on the same computer, accessing a mounted Win7 NTFS partition), or possibly a combination of both. I have tried restoring older versions(even the original one) from Dropbox and trying out all possible passwords without any luck. (which does seem to rule out KeePassX as the culprit, since oldest copies are before I edited the file from Ubuntu) I have tried opening the file with the "Repair KeePass Database file" which always gives the "0xA Invalid/corrupt file structure" (the same error for when a wrong password is typed). I was wondering if there was any way for me to salvage my hard-gathered data. I know generally that brute force cracking is not feasible, but since I can remember probably more than half of the usernames/passwords, any maybe the fact that one of them does come up fairly often (my go-to pass for trivial stuff), that might simplify the brute force process to a doable time frame. Maybe the brute-force thing might incorporate the fact that I know the password length and what characters it's made from. (If we assume corruption, not a password-blackout on my part) I could do some programming if there are any libraries or routines that I could use. Other people seem to have had a similar probem http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?id=6199 http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?id=9139 http://www.keepassx.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1967&f=1 So hopefully this question will become a suitible resource for people when searching the web. Feel free to tell me if you think this should rather be a community wiki.

    Read the article

  • Port 5357 TCP on Windows 7 professional 64 bit?

    - by Registered
    Is there a reason this port is open, a quick Nmap scan and Nessus scan reveal it's open, why? Are there any ramifications if I close this port via the firewall rule set? Or does anyone here now more info about this port besides Google? WTF? 1)http://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/who-left-tunnel-door-open-windows-firewall-vista-0 I know the talk is about Vista, but I am pretty sure it's the same port on 7, also. 2)Port 5357 common errors:The port is vulnerable to info leak problems allowing it to be accessed remotely by malicious authors. (Web Services for Devices) I am blocking this crap, if I have issues will just re-enable. Damn windows. Inbound rule for Network Discovery to allow WSDAPI Events via Function Discovery. [TCP 5357] You just got blocked, until I break something, will see. Time to re-Nmap and re-Nessus. Nmap scan 0 open ports after closing Port 5357,Win7 still works for now, one more scan with Nessus just to make sure all is well.

    Read the article

  • plesk: how to configure reverse proxy rules properly?

    - by rvdb
    I'm trying to configure reverse proxy rules in vhost.conf. I have Apache-2.2.8 on Ubuntu-8.04, monitored by Plesk-10.4.4. What I'm trying to achieve is defining a reverse proxy rule that defers all traffic to -say- http://mydomain/tomcat/ to the Tomcat server running on port 8080. I have mod_rewrite and mod_proxy loaded in Apache. As far as I understand mod_proxy docs, entering following rules in /var/www/vhosts/mydomain/conf/vhost.conf should work: <Proxy *> Order deny,allow Allow from all </Proxy> ProxyRequests off RewriteRule ^/tomcat/(.*)$ http://mydomain:8080/$1 [P] Yet, I am getting a HTTP 500: internal server error when requesting above URL. (Note: I decided to use a rewrite rule in order to at least get some information logged.) I have made mod_rewrite log extensively, and find following entries in the logs [note: due to a limitation of max. 2 URLs in posts of new users, I have modified all following URLs so that they only contain 1 slash after http:. In case you're suspecting typos: this was done on purpose): 81.241.230.23 - - [19/Mar/2012:16:42:59 +0100] [mydomain/sid#b06ab8][rid#1024af8/initial] (2) init rewrite engine with requested uri /tomcat/testApp/ 81.241.230.23 - - [19/Mar/2012:16:42:59 +0100] [mydomain/sid#b06ab8][rid#1024af8/initial] (3) applying pattern '^/tomcat/(.*)$' to uri '/tomcat/testApp/' 81.241.230.23 - - [19/Mar/2012:16:42:59 +0100] [mydomain/sid#b06ab8][rid#1024af8/initial] (2) rewrite '/tomcat/testApp/' - 'http:/mydomain:8080/testApp/' 81.241.230.23 - - [19/Mar/2012:16:42:59 +0100] [mydomain/sid#b06ab8][rid#1024af8/initial] (2) forcing proxy-throughput with http:/mydomain:8080/testApp/ 81.241.230.23 - - [19/Mar/2012:16:42:59 +0100] [mydomain/sid#b06ab8][rid#1024af8/initial] (1) go-ahead with proxy request proxy:http:/mydomain:8080/testApp/ [OK] This suggests that the rewrite and proxy part is processed ok; still the proxied request produces a 500 error. Yet: Addressing the testApp directly via http:/mydomain:8080/testApp does work. The same setup does work on my local computer. Is there something else (Plesk-related, perhaps?) I should configure? Many thanks for any pointers! Ron

    Read the article

  • iptables to block VPN-traffic if not through tun0

    - by dacrow
    I have a dedicated Webserver running Debian 6 and some Apache, Tomcat, Asterisk and Mail-stuff. Now we needed to add VPN support for a special program. We installed OpenVPN and registered with a VPN provider. The connection works well and we have a virtual tun0 interface for tunneling. To archive the goal for only tunneling a single program through VPN, we start the program with sudo -u username -g groupname command and added a iptables rule to mark all traffic coming from groupname iptables -t mangle -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname -j MARK --set-mark 42 Afterwards we tell iptables to to some SNAT and tell ip route to use special routing table for marked traffic packets. Problem: if the VPN failes, there is a chance that the special to-be-tunneled program communicates over the normal eth0 interface. Desired solution: All marked traffic should not be allowed to go directly through eth0, it has to go through tun0 first. I tried the following commands which didn't work: iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname ! -o tun0 -j REJECT iptables -A OUTPUT -m owner --gid-owner groupname -o eth0 -j REJECT It might be the problem, that the above iptable-rules didn't work due to the fact, that the packets are first marked, then put into tun0 and then transmitted by eth0 while they are still marked.. I don't know how to de-mark them after in tun0 or to tell iptables, that all marked packet may pass eth0, if they where in tun0 before or if they going to the gateway of my VPN provider. Does someone has any idea to a solution? Some config infos: iptables -nL -v --line-numbers -t mangle Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 11M packets, 9798M bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 591K 50M MARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 owner GID match 1005 MARK set 0x2a 2 82812 6938K CONNMARK all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 owner GID match 1005 CONNMARK save iptables -nL -v --line-numbers -t nat Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 393 packets, 23908 bytes) num pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination 1 15 1052 SNAT all -- * tun0 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 mark match 0x2a to:VPN_IP ip rule add from all fwmark 42 lookup 42 ip route show table 42 default via VPN_IP dev tun0

    Read the article

  • Apache can't get viewed from outside of my LAN

    - by Javier Martinez
    I fixed it in PORTS TRIGGER menu of my router. Thanks you anyway I have a weird problem related with (i think) my cable-router and my configured vhosts in Apache2. The point is I can't access from outside of my LAN to any of my configured vhosts if I set the http port of Apache to 80 and i add a NAT rule for it. Otherwise, if I set my Apache port to 81 (or any else) with its respective NAT rule on my router it works. My router is an ARRIS TG952S and I am using Apache/2.2.22 (Debian) ports.conf NameVirtualHost *:80 Listen 80 vhost1.mydomain.net.conf <VirtualHost *:80> ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost ServerName vhost1.mydomain.net ServerAlias vhost1.mydomain.net www.vhost1.mydomain.net vhost2.mydomain.net.conf <VirtualHost *:80> ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost ServerName vhost2.mydomain.net ServerAlias vhost2.mydomain.net www.vhost2.mydomain.net DNS records (using FreeDNS) are: mydomain.net --> pointing to another server vhost1.mydomain.net --> pointing to my server vhost2.mydomain.net --> pointing to my server iptables -L -n Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination fail2ban-apache-noscript tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 multiport dports 80,443 fail2ban-apache tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 multiport dports 80,443 fail2ban-ssh tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 multiport dports 22 Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain fail2ban-apache (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain fail2ban-apache-noscript (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain fail2ban-ssh (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Thanks you

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 ignores any change made to firewall

    - by Maurice Courtois
    I have been trying for the last 2 hours to make my Windows Server 2008 answer ping. I have tried almost every single solution I have found on the web, so far nothing work. My current setup: 2 NIC (1x Internet connection, 1x Local network) Server act as VPN server. So I set the corresponding NIC as either Public or Private. I also enable the rule for "File and Printer Sharing (Echo Request...)" for all Nic and from any IPs. I always been able to ping from the local network or the local ip while connected to the VPN. I also tried to create a specific rule for ICMP ping and disabling the firewall for all but the public nic. Regardless of all this, I still can't ping that server from Internet. Any idea suggestion what could cause this? I have the impression that when you set the server as VPN (I switch the box on when setting it up to block everything else than VPN connection) that changing anything to the firewall setting thought mmc is pointless !?!?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

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