Search Results

Search found 5154 results on 207 pages for 'bob cross'.

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 46/207 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

  • change owner/uid of mount point upon mount

    - by Shiplu
    The scenario is like this. Bob has a computer. It crashed. Now he only has the hdd. The hdd is in ext3 format. He go to his office and told the sys admin John to mount this hdd and put the mount point in his home directory. John used the following fstab entries. # Bobs harddisk /media/TAPE4/Bobs-hdd.img /home/bob/myhdd/windows ntfs ro,loop,offset=32256 0 0 /media/TAPE4/Bobs-hdd.img /home/bob/myhdd/linux ext3 ro,loop,offset=14048810496 0 0 /media/TAPE4/Bobs-hdd.img /home/bob/myhdd/extra ntfs ro,loop,offset=28015335936 0 0 Bob was happy. He could access his old extra and windows. Specially the Documents and Settings in windows was helpful for him. But he found a problem. He is a web developer and all his websites are in linux/home/bob/public_html directory. When he tried to access that public_html directory he got permission_denied. He executed ls -lh he saw this. drwxr-xr-x 2 john john 4.0K Nov 9 2011 Desktop drwxr-xr-x 3 john john 4.0K Aug 12 2011 Documents drwxr-xr-x 3 john john 4.0K Aug 21 2011 public_html He contacted John thinking he might be mistakenly did this. But John couldn't find a way why this happend? Then one thing came into his mind file system hardly store username. They store uids. So he executed ls -ln drwxr-xr-x 2 1000 1000 4096 Nov 9 2011 Desktop drwxr-xr-x 3 1000 1000 4096 Aug 12 2011 Documents drwxr-xr-x 3 1000 1000 4096 Aug 21 2011 public_html John thinks 1000 is the first uid on a linux system. As he is the admin of the current system. He created his account first. so Johns uid was 1000. Bob also setup his private system and crated his account first. So Bobs uid was 1000 too. So thats an expected behavior. But problem remains. How can Bob access those websites in public_html?

    Read the article

  • Attempting to extract a pattern within a string

    - by Brian
    I'm attempting to extract a given pattern within a text file, however, the results are not 100% what I want. Here's my code: import java.util.regex.Matcher; import java.util.regex.Pattern; public class ParseText1 { public static void main(String[] args) { String content = "<p>Yada yada yada <code> foo ddd</code>yada yada ...\n" + "more here <2004-08-24> bar<Bob Joe> etc etc\n" + "more here again <2004-09-24> bar<Bob Joe> <Fred Kej> etc etc\n" + "more here again <2004-08-24> bar<Bob Joe><Fred Kej> etc etc\n" + "and still more <2004-08-21><2004-08-21> baz <John Doe> and now <code>the end</code> </p>\n"; Pattern p = Pattern .compile("<[1234567890]{4}-[1234567890]{2}-[1234567890]{2}>.*?<[^%0-9/]*>", Pattern.MULTILINE); Matcher m = p.matcher(content); // print all the matches that we find while (m.find()) { System.out.println(m.group()); } } } The output I'm getting is: <2004-08-24> bar<Bob Joe> <2004-09-24> bar<Bob Joe> <Fred Kej> <2004-08-24> bar<Bob Joe><Fred Kej> <2004-08-21><2004-08-21> baz <John Doe> and now <code> The output I want is: <2004-08-24> bar<Bob Joe> <2004-08-24> bar<Bob Joe> <2004-08-24> bar<Bob Joe> <2004-08-21> baz <John Doe> In short, the sequence of "date", "text (or blank)", and "name" must be extracted. Everything else should be avoided. For example the tag "Fred Kej" did not have any "date" tag before it, therefore, it should be flagged as invalid. Also, as a side question, is there a way to store or track the text snippets that were skipped/rejected as were the valid texts. Thanks, Brian

    Read the article

  • DataContractJsonSerializer produces list of hashes instead of hash

    - by Jacques
    I would expect a Dictionary object of the form: Dictionary<string,string> dict = new Dictionary<string,string>() {["blah", "bob"], ["blahagain", "bob"]}; to serialize into JSON in the form of: { "blah": "bob", "blahagain": "bob" } NOT [ { "key": "blah", "value": "bob" }, { "key": "blahagain", "value": "bob"}] What is the reason for what appears to be a monstrosity of a generic attempt at serializing collections? The DataContractJsonSerializer uses the ISerializable interface to produce this thing. It seems to me as though somebody has taken the XML output from ISerializable and mangled this thing out of it. Is there a way to override the default serialization used by .Net here? Could I just derive from Dictionary and override the Serialization methods? Posting to hear of any caveats or suggestions people might have.

    Read the article

  • struct assignment operator on arrays

    - by Django fan
    Suppose I defined a structure like this: struct person { char name [10]; int age; }; and declared two person variables: person Bob; person John; where Bob.name = "Bob", Bob.age = 30 and John.name = "John",John.age = 25. and I called Bob = John; struct person would do a Memberwise assignment and assign Johns's member values to Bob's. But arrays can't assign to arrays, so how does the assignment of the "name" array work?

    Read the article

  • Algorithm to retrieve every possible combination of sublists of a two lists

    - by sgmoore
    Suppose I have two lists, how do I iterate through every possible combination of every sublist, such that each item appears once and only once. I guess an example could be if you have employees and jobs and you want split them into teams, where each employee can only be in one team and each job can only be in one team. Eg List<string> employees = new List<string>() { "Adam", "Bob"} ; List<string> jobs = new List<string>() { "1", "2", "3"}; I want Adam : 1 Bob : 2 , 3 Adam : 1 , 2 Bob : 3 Adam : 1 , 3 Bob : 2 Adam : 2 Bob : 1 , 3 Adam : 2 , 3 Bob : 1 Adam : 3 Bob : 1 , 2 Adam, Bob : 1, 2, 3 I tried using the answer to this stackoverflow question to generate a list of every possible combination of employees and every possible combination of jobs and then select one item from each from each list, but that's about as far as I got. I don't know the maximum size of the lists, but it would be certainly be less than 100 and there may be other limiting factors (such as each team can have no more than 5 employees) Update Not sure whether this can be tidied up more and/or simplified, but this is what I have ended up with so far. It uses the Group algorithm supplied by Yorye (see his answer below), but I removed the orderby which I don't need and caused problems if the keys are not comparable. var employees = new List<string>() { "Adam", "Bob" } ; var jobs = new List<string>() { "1", "2", "3" }; int c= 0; foreach (int noOfTeams in Enumerable.Range(1, employees.Count)) { var hs = new HashSet<string>(); foreach( var grouping in Group(Enumerable.Range(1, noOfTeams).ToList(), employees)) { // Generate a unique key for each group to detect duplicates. var key = string.Join(":" , grouping.Select(sub => string.Join(",", sub))); if (!hs.Add(key)) continue; List<List<string>> teams = (from r in grouping select r.ToList()).ToList(); foreach (var group in Group(teams, jobs)) { foreach (var sub in group) { Console.WriteLine(String.Join(", " , sub.Key ) + " : " + string.Join(", ", sub)); } Console.WriteLine(); c++; } } } Console.WriteLine(String.Format("{0:n0} combinations for {1} employees and {2} jobs" , c , employees.Count, jobs.Count)); Since I'm not worried about the order of the results, this seems to give me what I need.

    Read the article

  • Are there cross-platform tools to write XSS attacks directly to the database?

    - by Joachim Sauer
    I've recently found this blog entry on a tool that writes XSS attacks directly to the database. It looks like a terribly good way to scan an application for weaknesses in my applications. I've tried to run it on Mono, since my development platform is Linux. Unfortunately it crashes with a System.ArgumentNullException deep inside Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary and I seem to be unable to find sufficient information about the software (it seems to be a single-shot project, with no homepage and no further development). Is anyone aware of a similar tool? Preferably it should be: cross-platform (Java, Python, .NET/Mono, even cross-platform C is ok) open source (I really like being able to audit my security tools) able to talk to a wide range of DB products (the big ones are most important: MySQL, Oracle, SQL Server, ...)

    Read the article

  • Parsing names with pyparsing

    - by johnthexiii
    I have a file of names and ages, john 25 bob 30 john bob 35 Here is what I have so far from pyparsing import * data = ''' john 25 bob 30 john bob 35 ''' name = Word(alphas + Optional(' ') + alphas) rowData = Group(name + Suppress(White(" ")) + Word(nums)) table = ZeroOrMore(rowData) print table.parseString(data) the output I am expecting is [['john', 25], ['bob', 30], ['john bob', 35]] Here is the stacktrace Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Users\mccauley\Desktop\client.py", line 11, in <module> eventType = Word(alphas + Optional(' ') + alphas) File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\pyparsing.py", line 1657, in __init__ self.name = _ustr(self) File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\pyparsing.py", line 122, in _ustr return str(obj) File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\pyparsing.py", line 1743, in __str__ self.strRepr = "W:(%s)" % charsAsStr(self.initCharsOrig) File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\pyparsing.py", line 1735, in charsAsStr if len(s)>4: TypeError: object of type 'And' has no len()

    Read the article

  • What are the different methods for injecting cross-cutting concerns?

    - by Stacy Vicknair
    What are the different methods for injecting cross-cutting concerns into a class so that I can minimize the coupling of the classes involved while keeping the code testable (TDD or otherwise)? For example, consider if I have a class that requires both logging functionality and centralized exception management. Should I use DIP and inject both required concerns via an interface into the class that requires them? Should I use a service locater that I pass to each class that will require some cross cutting functionality? Is there a different solution altogether? Am I asking the wrong question entirely?

    Read the article

  • What are cross-platform free/Open source Framework to create Touch based web apps/site using HTML/CSS/JS available?

    - by Jitendra Vyas
    What are cross-platform and cross browser and license free/Open source framework to create Touch/Multitouch based Web apps/site using HTML/CSS/JS, for mobile devices, specially for latest versions of Android, Blackberry, Windows 7, iphone and ipad available? For desktop websites I'm a jQuery lover. I know Sencha but it's not free I think. I know jQtouch but it's only for iPhone and I also know jquery mobile but I'm not cofirm, is it as powerful as Sencha? It's not necessarily for me to go with jquery mobile, if there are another better framework available than this I want to make compatible with Android, Blackberry, Windows 7 also. not only for iphone and ipad.

    Read the article

  • Are AJAX calls to a sub-domain considered Cross Site Scripting?

    - by AaronPresley
    I have Server A (www.example.com) sending information to Server B. I can only have HTML / JS on Server A (and have to do the "crunching" on Server B) so I'm trying to send form data via AJAX (trying to avoid a form post to Server B - don't ask). Obviously doing an AJAX call cross-domain is considered XSS and a big no-no, but if I were to put Server B in a subdomain (sub.example.com), would that be considered okay? How are cross-domain errors detected? Does the browser look up DNS records? IP address? Thanks in advance for you help.

    Read the article

  • Core Animation cross-dissolve between one string (or image) and another when changing bound value?

    - by danwood
    I have an NSTextView and an NSImageView that is bound to a NSString and an NSImage in my code. I would like to have the displayed string and image cross-dissolve when I change the string and image in code. Any way to do this? Do I need to stop using bindings? (And if I do, is there any trick to getting the string and the image to cross-dissolve when I change the value, or do I have to do something weird like fade it out and fade a new one back in?)

    Read the article

  • simple network between xp & 7 with cross cable problem...

    - by LostLord
    hi my dear friends : i have a simple network between xp & 7 windowses with cross cable (2 pc home)... ===================================================================== the one with 7 is mother and have 2 lan device (onboard + pci) A. onboard is like this when u go to tcp/ip v4 properties:(4 adsl internet) obtain an ip... preferred dns server : 81.91.129.67 alternate dns server : 4.2.2.4 shared...no permission 4 change so every thing is ok for internet on windows 7. B. the other lan pci card that is connected to pc with xp is like this : 192.168.2.11 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0 empty empry computer name : cougar workgroup : nethome homeNetwork is disabled (i think that is 4 2 pc's with 7 os not xp) every thing is off in network options except file & printer sharing in public area ===================================================================== pc with xp os is like this : 192.168.2.12 255.255.255.0 192.168.2.11 (mean gateway) 4.2.2.4 8.8.8.8 computer name : tiger workgroup : nethome ===================================================================== at last my little net is ok... mean both have internet , both can see each other by their ip (\\192.168.2.11 or \\192.168.2.12) my problem is when in pc with xp type \\cougar it shows an error about network path! but in pc with 7 \\tiger works perfec. what is the problem in system with xp ? in few days ago this network was ok (search by computer name) when both os were xp , so there is no problem with my cable or devices. another problem is i can not find tiger in my network list in 7 pc \ why? is something wrong with my network? thanks 4 future advance best regards

    Read the article

  • Configuring Fed Authentication Methods in OIF / IdP

    - by Damien Carru
    In this article, I will provide examples on how to configure OIF/IdP to map OAM Authentication Schemes to Federation Authentication Methods, based on the concepts introduced in my previous entry. I will show examples for the three protocols supported by OIF: SAML 2.0 SSO SAML 1.1 SSO OpenID 2.0 Enjoy the reading! Configuration As I mentioned in my previous article, 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. WLST Commands The two OIF WLST commands that can be used to define mapping Federation Authentication Methods to OAM Authentication Schemes are: addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() to define a mapping on an SP Partner Profile, taking as parameters: The name of the SP Partner Profile The Federation Authentication Method The OAM Authentication Scheme name addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() to define a mapping on an SP Partner , taking as parameters: The name of the SP Partner The Federation Authentication Method The OAM Authentication Scheme name Note: I will discuss in a subsequent article the other parameters of those commands. In the next sections, I will show examples on how to use those methods: For SAML 2.0, I will configure the SP Partner Profile, that will apply all the mappings to SP Partners referencing this profile, unless they override mapping definition For SAML 1.1, I will configure the SP Partner. For OpenID 2.0, I will configure the SP/RP Partner SAML 2.0 Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP and is integrated with a remote SAML 2.0 SP partner identified by AcmeSP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Use BasicScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map BasicSessionScheme  to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password Federation Authentication Method Use OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. Also the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <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> BasicScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner Profile to BasicScheme instead of LDAPScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner Profile referenced by AcmeSP (which is saml20-sp-partner-profile in this case: getFedPartnerProfile("AcmeSP", "sp") ): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "BasicScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will now be challenged via HTTP Basic Authentication defined in the BasicScheme for AcmeSP. Also, as noted earlier, the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via HTTP Basic Authentication, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <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> Mapping BasicScheme To change the Federation Authentication Method mapping for the BasicScheme to urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password instead of urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport for the saml20-sp-partner-profile SAML 2.0 SP Partner Profile (the profile to which my AcmeSP Partner is bound to), I will execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:Password", "BasicScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via HTTP Basic Authentication, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the AuthnContextClassRef was changed from PasswordProtectedTransport to Password): <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:Password                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner Profile to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme instead of BasicScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner Profile referenced by AcmeSP (which is saml20-sp-partner-profile in this case: getFedPartnerProfile("AcmeSP", "sp") ): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerProfileDefaultScheme("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will now be challenged via FORM defined in the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme for AcmeSP. Contrarily to LDAPScheme and BasicScheme, the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme is not mapped by default to any Federation Authentication Methods. As such, OIF/IdP will not be able to find a Federation Authentication Method and will set the method in the SAML Assertion to the OAM Authentication Scheme name. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthnContextClassRef set to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme): <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> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme                </saml:AuthnContextClassRef>            </saml:AuthnContext>        </saml:AuthnStatement>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme To add the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport mapping, I will execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerProfileAuthnMethod("saml20-sp-partner-profile", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to PasswordProtectedTransport): <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> SAML 1.1 Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP and is integrated with a remote SAML 1.1 SP partner identified by AcmeSP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Use OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map LDAPScheme to  the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:ac:classes:PasswordProtectedTransport Federation Authentication Method LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. Also the default Federation Authentication Method mappings configuration maps only the urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password to LDAPScheme (also marked as the default scheme used for authentication), FAAuthScheme, BasicScheme and BasicFAScheme. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to: <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:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <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> OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme as Authentication Scheme For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for the SP Partner to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme instead of LDAPScheme. I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for the SP Partner: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerDefaultScheme("AcmeSP", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() The user will be challenged via FORM defined in the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme for AcmeSP. Contrarily to LDAPScheme, the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme is not mapped by default to any Federation Authentication Methods (in the SP Partner Profile). As such, OIF/IdP will not be able to find a Federation Authentication Method and will set the method in the SAML Assertion to the OAM Authentication Scheme name. After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthenticationMethod set to OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme): <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="OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <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> Mapping OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme To map the OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password for this SP Partner only, I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeSP", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password", "OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from OAMLDAPPluginAuthnScheme to password): <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:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <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> LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme I will now show that by defining a Federation Authentication Mapping at the Partner level, this now ignores all mappings defined at the SP Partner Profile level. For this test, I will switch the default Authentication Scheme for this SP Partner back to LDAPScheme, and the Assertion issued by OIF/IdP will not be able to map this LDAPScheme to a Federation Authentication Method anymore, since A Federation Authentication Method mapping is defined at the SP Partner level and thus the mappings defined at the SP Partner Profile are ignored The LDAPScheme is not listed in the mapping at the Partner level I will use the OIF WLST setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command and specify which scheme to be used as the default for this SP Partner: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the setSPPartnerDefaultScheme() command:setSPPartnerDefaultScheme("AcmeSP", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an Assertion similar to (see the AuthenticationMethod set to LDAPScheme): <samlp:Response ...>    <samlp:Status>        <samlp:StatusCode Value="samlp:Success"/>    </samlp:Status>    <saml:Assertion Issuer="https://idp.com/oam/fed" ...>        <saml:Conditions ...>            <saml:AudienceRestriction>                <saml:Audience>https://acme.com/sp/ssov11</saml:Audience>            </saml:AudienceRestriction>        </saml:Conditions>        <saml:AuthnStatement AuthenticationInstant="2014-03-21T20:53:55Z" AuthenticationMethod="LDAPScheme">            <saml:Subject>                <saml:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <saml:SubjectConfirmation>                   <saml:ConfirmationMethod>                       urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:cm:bearer                   </saml:ConfirmationMethod>                </saml:SubjectConfirmation>            </saml:Subject>        </saml:AuthnStatement>        <dsig:Signature>            ...        </dsig:Signature>    </saml:Assertion></samlp:Response> Mapping LDAPScheme at Partner Level To fix this issue, we will need to add the LDAPScheme  to the Federation Authentication Method urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password mapping for this SP Partner only. I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method: Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeSP", "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:1.0:am:password", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from LDAPScheme to password): <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:NameIdentifier ...>[email protected]</saml:NameIdentifier>                <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> OpenID 2.0 In the OpenID 2.0 flows, the RP must request use of PAPE, in order for OIF/IdP/OP to include PAPE information. For OpenID 2.0, the configuration will involve mapping a list of OpenID 2.0 policies to a list of Authentication Schemes. The WLST command will take a list of policies, delimited by the ',' character, instead of SAML 2.0 or SAML 1.1 where a single Federation Authentication Method had to be specified. Test Setup In this setup, OIF is acting as an IdP/OP and is integrated with a remote OpenID 2.0 SP/RP partner identified by AcmeRP. In this test, I will perform Federation SSO with OIF/IdP configured to: Use LDAPScheme as the Authentication Scheme Map LDAPScheme to  the http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant and http://openid-policies/password-protected policies Federation Authentication Methods (the second one is a custom for this use case) LDAPScheme as Authentication Scheme Using the OOTB settings regarding user authentication in OAM, the user will be challenged via a FORM based login page based on the LDAPScheme. No Federation Authentication Method is defined OOTB for OpenID 2.0, so if the IdP/OP issue an SSO response with a PAPE Response element, it will specify the scheme name instead of Federation Authentication Methods After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would issue an SSO Response similar to: 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=LDAPScheme&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 Mapping LDAPScheme To map the LDAP Scheme to the http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant and http://openid-policies/password-protected policies Federation Authentication Methods, I will execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() method (the policies will be comma separated): Enter the WLST environment by executing:$IAM_ORACLE_HOME/common/bin/wlst.sh Connect to the WLS Admin server:connect() Navigate to the Domain Runtime branch:domainRuntime() Execute the addSPPartnerAuthnMethod() command:addSPPartnerAuthnMethod("AcmeRP", "http://schemas.openid.net/pape/policies/2007/06/phishing-resistant,http://openid-policies/password-protected", "LDAPScheme") Exit the WLST environment:exit() After authentication via FORM, OIF/IdP would now issue an Assertion similar to (see that the method was changed from LDAPScheme to the two policies): 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+http%3A%2F%2Fopenid-policies%2Fpassword-protected&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 cover how OIF/IdP can be configured so that an SP can request a specific Federation Authentication Method to challenge the user during Federation SSO.Cheers,Damien Carru

    Read the article

  • os x 10.4 server enable mail for account via terminal

    - by Chris
    Hello- I have an account on an OS X 10.4 server that I don't have physical access to (must use SSH). For arguments sake, let's call the account 'Bob'. Bob's account exists and appears to be fully functional, however he does not have email. How do I enable, via terminal, email for Bob's account, such that he can receive email at [email protected]? I already have the mail server all set up with several working accounts in it, I just need to add Bob. I have searched all over Google for over six hours now, but can't seem to find an answer that fits my situation. Any help is appreciated. P.S. - I am not adverse to just deleting the account and starting over, if that would make things easier...

    Read the article

  • MySQL: creating a user that can connect from multiple hosts

    - by DrStalker
    I'm using MySQL and I need to create an account that can connect from either the localhost of from another server, 10.1.1.1. So I am doing: CREATE USER 'bob'@'localhost' IDENTIFIED BY 'password123'; CREATE USER 'bob'@'10.1.1.1 IDENTIFIED BY 'password123'; GRANT SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE on MyDatabse.* to 'bob'@'localhost', 'bob'@'10.1.1.1; This works fine, but is there any more elegant way to create a user account that is linked to multiple IPs or does it need to be done this way? My main worry is that in the future permissions will be updated form 'bob' account and not the other.

    Read the article

  • How do developers verify that software requirement changes in one system do not violate a requirement of downstream software systems?

    - by Peter Smith
    In my work, I do requirements gathering, analysis and design of business solutions in addition to coding. There are multiple software systems and packages, and developers are expected to work on any of them, instead of being assigned to make changes to only 1 system or just a few systems. How developers ensure they have captured all of the necessary requirements and resolved any conflicting requirements? An example of this type of scenario: Bob the developer is asked to modify the problem ticket system for a hypothetical utility repair business. They contract with a local utility company to provide this service. The old system provides a mechanism for an external customer to create a ticket indicating a problem with utility service at a particular address. There is a scheduling system and an invoicing system that is dependent on this data. Bob's new project is to modify the ticket placement system to allow for multiple addresses to entered by a landlord or other end customer with multiple properties. The invoicing system bills per ticket, but should be modified to bill per address. What practices would help Bob discover that the invoicing system needs to be changed as well? How might Bob discover what other systems in his company might need to be changed in order to support the new changes\business model? Let's say there is a documented specification for each system involved, but there are many systems and Bob is not familiar with all of them. End of example. We're often in this scenario, and we do have design reviews but management places ultimate responsibility for any defects (business process or software process) on the developer who is doing the design and the work. Some organizations seem to be better at this than others. How do they manage to detect and solve conflicting or incomplete requirements across software systems? We currently have a lot of tribal knowledge and just a few developers who understand the entire business and software chain. This seems highly ineffective and leads to problems at the requirements level.

    Read the article

  • Hibernate a user account when switching to different account in Windows 7 Home Premium (64bit)

    - by Sukotto
    Is there any way to have Windows 7 hibernate Bob's account when switched to Mary's account and vice versa? I.e.: Bob is logged in Bob clicks Start shutdown switch user Bob's session is saved to disk Mary logs in Mary's session is restored as it was when Bob's turn started Both are heavy users (30+ chrome tabs open, multiple documents, multiple spreadsheets, music playing, etc) I would like to set up the system so that each gets the full use of the computer while still having all their open apps the way they left them. I suppose I could try setting up a VM for each, but I'd rather not add anything else to the mix here if I don't have to. This is Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit running on a Lenovo G550 laptop

    Read the article

  • How can I switch user in a shell and use the existing gnome display session?

    - by z7sg
    If I switch user in a terminal. su bob I can't open gedit because bob doesn't own the display. If I execute xhost + before switching to bob I can open the display for some applications but not all. I get the following output when trying to execute gedit: (crashreporter:4415): GnomeUI-WARNING *: While connecting to session manager: None of the authentication protocols specified are supported. * GLib-GIO:ERROR:/build/buildd/glib2.0-2.28.6/./gio/gdbusconnection.c:2279:initable_init: assertion failed: (connection-initialization_error == NULL)

    Read the article

  • The how of a collision engine

    - by JXPheonix
    This is a very, very broad question - what is the general algorithm of how a collision engine works? No code in specific, but rather, just a general idea of how a collision engine does what it does, constantly refreshing the points of an object and comparing it to other objects? (see, I have the general gist of it here.) A collision engine is basically an engine used in games (generally) so that your player (call him Bob), whenever bob moves into a wall, Bob stops, Bob does not walk through the wall. They also generally handle the gravity in a game and environmental things like that.

    Read the article

  • The how of a collision engine

    - by JXPheonix
    This is a very, very broad question - what is the general algorithm of how a collision engine works? No code in specific, but rather, just a general idea of how a collision engine does what it does, constantly refreshing the points of an object and comparing it to other objects? (see, I have the general gist of it here.) A collision engine is basically an engine used in games (generally) so that your player (call him Bob), whenever bob moves into a wall, Bob stops, Bob does not walk through the wall. They also generally handle the gravity in a game and environmental things like that.

    Read the article

  • USB drive errors after airport scan

    - by bobobobo
    Well, I just got a new PNY usb drive and it passed through an airport scanner yesterday. For some reason, I wrote to it and then tried to read from it today, and it gave me a corrupted error! chkdsk reports errors like: Bad links in lost chain at cluster 1179 corrected. Lost chain cross-linked at cluster 1200. Orphan truncated. Lost chain cross-linked at cluster 1228. Orphan truncated. Lost chain cross-linked at cluster 1236. Orphan truncated. Lost chain cross-linked at cluster 1237. Orphan truncated. Lost chain cross-linked at cluster 1244. Orphan truncated. Lost chain cross-linked at cluster 1250. Orphan truncated. Lost chain cross-linked at cluster 1266. Orphan truncated. Lost chain cross-linked at cluster 1278. Orphan truncated. etc. What is this from? Could it possibly be from the airport scanner, or is it likely a defective USB chip? How can I check the chip to see if I should just return/throw it away or continue to use it?

    Read the article

  • Firefox and Chrome do not support cross-domian ajax by default?

    - by Ethan
    The following code works as expected in IE8 and Safari4, but not work in Firefox3.6 and Chrome. All browsers are on Windows. <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> <link href="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jqueryui/1.8/themes/smoothness/jquery-ui.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.4.2/jquery.min.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jqueryui/1.8.1/jquery-ui.min.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> $(function() { $('#tabs').tabs(); }); </script> </head> <body> <div id="tabs"> <ul> <li><a href="http://www.google.com/">Google</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.msn.com/">MSN</a></li> </ul> </div> </body> </html> Seems that Firefox and Chrome do not support cross-domian ajax by default, right? Is there any easy way to turn on cross-domian ajax in Firefox and Chrome?

    Read the article

  • Is it still true, to make cross broswer layouts for desktop browsers using table+css is easier then

    - by metal-gear-solid
    My one of web designer friend still making sites with table but he use css very nicely and I also use css nicely but with <div> and i face cross browser problem in layout more than my friend. and i given some reason to my friend about cons of <table>. read my whole discussion with friend? I - you site will be problematic with screen reader My friend - OK, but i never got any call from any client regarding this. I - you will devote more time to make any changes in layout, if changes comes from client My friend - I don't think so, but if it is then show me how can i save time with <div>? I - your sites will not work well with search engine. My friend - it's not true. I've made many site and no problem with any site or client regarding this I - layout is old way, non w3c and non standard way. My friend - what is old and what is new, Who is W3C i don't know, What is standard? Whatever i make works in all browsers, it's enough for me and my client will not pay for standard and W3C guidelines rules I - Your site will not work in mobile browsers My friend - No problem for me, my client don't care about mobile phone I - Your sites are not accessible? My Friend - What do u mean not accessible? Whatever i make works in all browsers. my any client never asked about accessibility I - You will not get more work in future, with table? My friend - OK, no problem when clients will not accept site with table then i will learn about div based layouts in future. My questions? Is it still true, to make cross browser layouts for desktop browsers using table+css is easier then div+css? What is the benefit for developer to use DIV+CSS layout in place of <table> layouts if client would not mind if i use ?

    Read the article

  • How to exploit Diffie-hellman to perform a man in the middle attack

    - by jfisk
    Im doing a project where Alice and Bob send each other messages using the Diffie-Hellman key-exchange. What is throwing me for a loop is how to incorporate the certificate they are using in this so i can obtain their secret messages. From what I understand about MIM attakcs, the MIM acts as an imposter as seen on this diagram: Below are the details for my project. I understand that they both have g and p agreed upon before communicating, but how would I be able to implement this with they both having a certificate to verify their signatures? Alice prepares ?signA(NA, Bob), pkA, certA? where signA is the digital signature algorithm used by Alice, “Bob” is Bob’s name, pkA is the public-key of Alice which equals gx mod p encoded according to X.509 for a fixed g, p as specified in the Diffie-Hellman key- exchange and certA is the certificate of Alice that contains Alice’s public-key that verifies the signature; Finally, NA is a nonce (random string) that is 8 bytes long. Bob checks Alice's signature, and response with ?signB{NA,NB,Alice},pkB,certB?. Alice gets the message she checks her nonce NA and calculates the joint key based on pkA, pkB according to the Diffie-Hellman key exchange. Then Alice submits the message ?signA{NA,NB,Bob},EK(MA),certA? to Bob and Bobrespondswith?SignB{NA,NB,Alice},EK(MB),certB?. where MA and MB are their corresponding secret messages.

    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 | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >