Search Results

Search found 34094 results on 1364 pages for 'open authentication'.

Page 47/1364 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

• rhn_register through HTTP Proxy with Authentication

  - by kjloh

  Is there any limitation to the proxy authentication support of rhn_register? The proxy of the network I'm on sends the follow 407: HTTP/1.1 407 Proxy Authentication Required ( The ISA Server requires authorization to fulfill the request. Access to the Web Proxy filter is denied. ) Via: 1.1 VANESSA Proxy-Authenticate: Negotiate Proxy-Authenticate: Kerberos Proxy-Authenticate: NTLM It seems that rhn_register is not able to any of the authentication schemes above. Any advise?

  Read the article

• OpenBSD has open ports in default installation

  - by celil

  I have been considering replacing Ubuntu with OpenBSD to improve the security on my local server. I need to have ssh access to it, and I also need it to serve static web content - so the only ports I need open are 22 and 80. However, when I scan my server for open ports after installing OpenBSD 4.8, and enabling ssh and http at /etc/rc.conf httpd_flags="" sshd_flags="" I discovered that it had several other open ports: Port Scan has started… Port Scanning host: 192.168.56.102 Open TCP Port: 13 daytime Open TCP Port: 22 ssh Open TCP Port: 37 time Open TCP Port: 80 http Open TCP Port: 113 ident ssh (22) and http (80) should be open as I enabled httpd and sshd, but why are the other ports open, and should I worry about them creating additional security vulnerabilities? Should they be open in a default installation?

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 R2, IIS 7.5, Windows Authentication

  - by nick

  Ive a 7.5 IIS installed on my server with windows authentication enabled cause i need it for NTLM / SSO on intranet pages. when windows authentication is activated, iis cant authenticate himself on his own webserver.. thats the error i got in the iis log: 2011-11-24 08:47:10 10.50.2.91 POST /ldap.php - 80 - 10.50.2.91 SWIFT_LoginShare 401 2 5 0 so.. how can i make sure, using windows authentication, that iis authenticates himself? thx for your help

  Read the article

• Copying files between linux machines with strong authentication but without encryption

  - by Zizzencs

  I'm looking for a suitable program to copy files from one linux machine to another one. The program should be able to do authentication but it should not do encryption. The reason behind the latter is the lack of CPU power to do the encryption. I copy backups from ~70 machines to a single backup server simultaneously. The single server is an HP Proliant DL360 G7, with 10 Gbps ethernet connection and an FC storage backend that can do 4 Gbps. Through FTP I can write ~400MB/sec to the storage (that's about what I want) but through ssh with arcfour I can only do ~100MB/sec while having 100% CPU usage. That's why I want file transfers not to be encrypted. The alternatives that I found not really suitable: rcp: no authentication, forget it FTP: making the authentication "secure" (at least preventing plain-text password exchange) is possible but not really easy and I haven't found a method to force any FTP daemon to encrypt the control channel (for the authentication) and not to encrypt the data channel (for data transfers) SCP/SFTP: in farely recent ssh(d) implementations you can't turn off encryption. The best you can do is to use the arcfour cypher for the encryption but it sill uses too much CPU power for my needs. rsync over ssh: same problems as with SCP/SFTP. plain rsync: from the documentation of rsyncd: "The authentication protocol used in rsync is a 128 bit MD4 based challenge response system. This is fairly weak protection, though (with at least one brute-force hash-finding algorithm publicly available), so if you want really top-quality security, then I recommend that you run rsync over ssh." It's a no-go. Is there a protocol/program that can do exactly what I want? (A big plus would be if it could work on windows as well and/or if it would support rsync-stlye copying/synchronization (e.g. copy only the differences).)

  Read the article

• Still prompted for a password after adding SSH public key to a server

  - by Nathan Arthur

  I'm attempting to setup a git repository on my Dreamhost web server by following the "Setup: For the Impatient" instructions here. I'm having difficulty setting up public key access to the server. After successfully creating my public key, I ran the following command: cat ~/.ssh/[MY KEY].pub | ssh [USER]@[MACHINE] "mkdir ~/.ssh; cat >> ~/.ssh/authorized_keys" ...replacing the appropriate placeholders with the correct values. Everything seemed to go through fine. The server asked for my password, and, as far as I can tell, executed the command. There is indeed a ~/.ssh/authorized_keys file on the server. The problem: When I try to SSH into the server, it still asks for my password. My understanding is that it shouldn't be asking for my password anymore. What am I missing? EDIT: SSH -v Log: Macbook:~ michaeleckert$ ssh -v [USER]@[SERVER URL] OpenSSH_6.2p2, OSSLShim 0.9.8r 8 Dec 2011 debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh_config debug1: /etc/ssh_config line 20: Applying options for * debug1: /etc/ssh_config line 53: Applying options for * debug1: Connecting to [SERVER URL] [[SERVER IP]] port 22. debug1: Connection established. debug1: identity file /Users/michaeleckert/.ssh/id_rsa type -1 debug1: identity file /Users/michaeleckert/.ssh/id_rsa-cert type -1 debug1: identity file /Users/michaeleckert/.ssh/id_dsa type -1 debug1: identity file /Users/michaeleckert/.ssh/id_dsa-cert type -1 debug1: Enabling compatibility mode for protocol 2.0 debug1: Local version string SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_6.2 debug1: Remote protocol version 2.0, remote software version OpenSSH_5.5p1 Debian-6+squeeze3 debug1: match: OpenSSH_5.5p1 Debian-6+squeeze3 pat OpenSSH_5* debug1: SSH2_MSG_KEXINIT sent debug1: SSH2_MSG_KEXINIT received debug1: kex: server->client aes128-ctr hmac-md5 none debug1: kex: client->server aes128-ctr hmac-md5 none debug1: SSH2_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_REQUEST(1024<1024<8192) sent debug1: expecting SSH2_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_GROUP debug1: SSH2_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_INIT sent debug1: expecting SSH2_MSG_KEX_DH_GEX_REPLY debug1: Server host key: RSA [STRING OF NUMBERS AND LETTERS SEPARATED BY SEMI-COLONS] debug1: Host ‘[SERVER URL]' is known and matches the RSA host key. debug1: Found key in /Users/michaeleckert/.ssh/known_hosts:2 debug1: ssh_rsa_verify: signature correct debug1: SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS sent debug1: expecting SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS debug1: SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS received debug1: Roaming not allowed by server debug1: SSH2_MSG_SERVICE_REQUEST sent debug1: SSH2_MSG_SERVICE_ACCEPT received debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password debug1: Next authentication method: publickey debug1: Trying private key: /Users/michaeleckert/.ssh/id_rsa debug1: Trying private key: /Users/michaeleckert/.ssh/id_dsa debug1: Next authentication method: password [USER]@[SERVER URL]'s password: debug1: Authentication succeeded (password). Authenticated to [SERVER URL] ([[SERVER IP]]:22). debug1: channel 0: new [client-session] debug1: Requesting [email protected] debug1: Entering interactive session. debug1: Sending environment. debug1: Sending env LANG = en_US.UTF-8 Welcome to [SERVER URL] Any malicious and/or unauthorized activity is strictly forbidden. All activity may be logged by DreamHost Web Hosting. Last login: Sun Nov 3 12:04:21 2013 from [MY IP] [[SERVER NAME]]$

  Read the article

• rhn_register through HTTP Proxy with Authentication

  - by kjloh

  Is there any limitation to the proxy authentication support of rhn_register? The proxy of the network I'm on sends the follow 407: HTTP/1.1 407 Proxy Authentication Required ( The ISA Server requires authorization to fulfill the request. Access to the Web Proxy filter is denied. ) Via: 1.1 VANESSA Proxy-Authenticate: Negotiate Proxy-Authenticate: Kerberos Proxy-Authenticate: NTLM It seems that rhn_register is not able to any of the authentication schemes above. Any advise?

  Read the article

• Httpd and LDAP Authentication not working for sub-pages

  - by DavisTasar

  I just recently installed a Nagios implementation, and I'm trying to get LDAP authentication working for httpd on Red Hat. (nagios.conf for Apache config below, sanitized of course) ScriptAlias /nagios/cgi-bin "/usr/local/nagios/sbin" <Directory "/usr/local/nagios/sbin"> #SSLRequireSSL Options ExecCGI AllowOverride none AuthType Basic AuthName "LDAP Authentication" AuthLDAPURL "ldap://my.domain.controller:389/OU=Users,DC=my,DC=domain,DC=controller?sAMAccountName?sub?(objectClass=user)" NONE AuthzLDAPAuthoritative off AuthLDAPBindDN "CN=NagiosAdmin,DC=my,DC=domain,DC=controller" AuthLDAPBindPassword "myPassword" require valid-user </Directory> Alias /nagios "/usr/local/nagios/share" <Directory /usr/local/nagios/share> #SSLRequireSSL Options None AllowOverride none AuthBasicProvider ldap AuthType Basic AuthName "LDAP Authentication" AuthzLDAPAuthoritative off AuthLDAPURL "ldap://my.domain.controller:389/OU=Users,DC=my,DC=domain,DC=controller?sAMAccountName?sub?(objectClass=user)" NONE AuthLDAPBindDN "CN=NagiosAdmin,DC=my,DC=domain,DC=controller" AuthLDAPBindPassword "myPassword" require valid-user </Directory> Now, the initial authentication works, so when you first hit the page you can log in just fine. However, when you go anywhere else, it prompts you for authentication, fails (asking for a re-prompt), and gives this error message: [Mon Oct 21 14:46:23 2013] [error] [client 172.28.9.30] access to /nagios/cgi-bin/statusmap.cgi failed, reason: verification of user id '<myuseraccount>' not configured, referer: http://<nagiosserver>/nagios/side.php I'm almost certain its a simple flag or option, but I just can't find it, and I don't have a lot of experience working with Apache. Any assistance or help would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• How do I get Ubuntu One on Win7 to authenticate my login?

  - by Fred jones

  I just got a new computer running Windows 7 home premium, I used to have Ubuntu One working great on my Ubuntu desktop, but now, running win7, I know my login email address and password is correct, but it still says 'Authentication failed'. Googling the problem, looks like it may be because a device was removed from my list of devices, but the only device listed is my previous Ubuntu workstation, and nothing has been removed. I also checked the windows firewall and Ubuntu One is allowed on all interfaces on incoming and outgoing, and still authentication fails. Web login to my Ubuntu One account works fine.

  Read the article

• Are there Negative Impact of opensource on commercial environment?

  - by Lostsoul

  I know this is not a good fit for Stack Overflow but wasn't sure if it was good for this site also so let me know if its not and I'll delete it. I love programming for fun but my role in my company is not technical. I have always loved the hacker culture and have been trying to drive that openness within my company from day one. My company has a very broad range of products and there are a few that are not strategic to us so I wanted to open source them (so we can focus on what makes us unique and open source the products that every firm has). Our industry does not open source(we would be the first firm to try this) and the feedback I'm getting from my management team is either 1) we'll destroy the industry or 2) all competitive commercial firms will unite against us and we'll be wiped out either way. I disagreed on both points because I think transparency will only grow our industry and our firm (think of McDonalds/KFC sharing their recipe openly, people may copy you, competitors may target you, but customers also may feel more comfortable buying your product. The value add, I believe, is in the delivery and experience not in hoarding the recipe). It's a big battle in my firm right now between the IT people who have seen the positive effects of sharing and the business people who think we'll be giving up everything (they prefer we sell parts we want to opensource, but in their defense this is standard when divesting something). Our industry is very secretive and I don't want to put anyone(even my competitors employees) out of a job yet I don't want to protect inefficient people by not being open with everyone. Yet I've seen so many amazing technologies created in interesting ways just by giving people freedom to take apart code and put it back together. I'm interested in hearing people's thoughts(doesn't have to be to my specific situation, I'm looking for the general lessons). Its a very stressful decision(but one I feel I must make) because if we go the open source route then there will be no going back. So what are your thoughts? Does open sourcing apply generally or is it only really applicable to software? Is it overall good for people in the industry and outside? I'm actually more interested in the negativeness effects(although positive are welcomed as well) Update: Long story short, although code is involved this is not so much about code as it is more about the idea of open sourcing. We are a mid sized quant hedge fund. We have some unique strategies but also have the standard long/short, arbitrage, global macro, etc.. funds. We are keeping the unique funds we have but the other stuff that everyone else has we are considering open sourcing (We have put in years of work & millions of dollars into. Our funds is pretty popular and our performance is either in first or second quartile so I suspect there will be interest but I don't know to what extent). The goal is not to get a community to work for us or anything, the goal is to let anyone who wants to tinker with it do so and create anything they want (it will not be part of our product line although I may unofficially allocate some our of staff's time to assist any community that grows). Although the code base is quite large, the value in this is the industry knowledge and approaches we have acquired (there are many books on artificial intelligence and quant trading but they are often years behind what's really going on as most firms forbid their staff from discussing what they are doing). We are also considering after we move our clients out to let the software still run and output the resulting portfolios for free as well so people can at least see the results(as long as we have avail. infrastructure). I think our main choices are, we can continue to fight for market share in a products that are becoming commoditized, we can shut the funds/products down(and keep the code but no one outside of our firm will ever learn from it) or we can open source it and let people do what they want. By open sourcing it, my idea is that the talent pool in the industry will grow because right now most of our hires have the same background (CFA, MBA, similar school, same experience,etc.. because we can't spend time training people so the industry 'standardizes' most people and thus the firms themselves start to look/act similar) but this may allow us to identify talent that has never been in the industry before (if we put a GPU license then as people learn from what we did, we can learn from what they do as well and maybe apply it to other areas of our firm). I see a lot of benefits but not many negatives while my peers at the company see the opposite.

  Read the article

• Authentication error when trying to upgrade from 11.10 to 12.04

  - by mahmuodmasri

  I wrote : ~$ do-release-upgrade and the system says: Checking for a new ubuntu release Get:1 Upgrade tool signature [198 B] Get:2 Upgrade tool [1551 kB] Fetched 1551 kB in 6s (167 kB/s) extracting 'precise.tar.gz' authenticate 'precise.tar.gz' against 'precise.tar.gz.gpg' exception from gpg: GnuPG exited non-zero, with code 2 Debug information: gpg: Signature made Thu 11 Oct 2012 07:47:10 AM EET using DSA key ID 437D05B5 gpg: can't open `/etc/apt/trusted.gpg' gpg: keydb_search failed: file open error gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found Authentication failed Authenticating the upgrade failed. There may be a problem with the network or with the server. Please help me!

  Read the article

• Unable to sync custom authentication with RIA services in SL3 + RIA implementation

  - by Nair

  I am developing SL3 + RIA services with custom authentication. I followed the example in http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/RiaServices/Release/ProjectReleases.aspx?ReleaseId=2661 to implement custom authentication. Based on the implementation, you first do login request from client to service. This request is async process. Noe the client GUI will start to bind data to SL controls using RIA services, which requires the authentication to be successful (by adding [RequireAuthentication] attribute). The trouble is, since you requested login from the main process, while it is doing authentication, the page control takes over and starts to bind data using RIA services. But the problem is authentication is not completed yet thus which ever the first service method data binding hits will fail with 'Access denied'. Bottom line is GUI is will not wait for authentication to be completed to start the data binding. My question is how do you handle this situation? Thanks,

  Read the article

• Opinions on Dual-Salt authentication for low sensitivity user accounts?

  - by Heleon

  EDIT - Might be useful for someone in the future... Looking around the bcrypt class in php a little more, I think I understand what's going on, and why bcrypt is secure. In essence, I create a random blowfish salt, which contains the number of crypt rounds to perform during the encryption step, which is then hashed using the crypt() function in php. There is no need for me to store the salt I used in the database, because it's not directly needed to decrypt, and the only way to gain a password match to an email address (without knowing the salt values or number of rounds) would be to brute force plain text passwords against the hash stored in the database using the crypt() function to verify, which, if you've got a strong password, would just be more effort than it's worth for the user information i'm storing... I am currently working on a web project requiring user accounts. The application is CodeIgniter on the server side, so I am using Ion Auth as the authentication library. I have written an authentication system before, where I used 2 salts to secure the passwords. One was a server-wide salt which sat as an environment variable in the .htaccess file, and the other was a randomly generated salt which was created at user signup. This was the method I used in that authentication system for hashing the password: $chars = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123456789"; //create a random string to be used as the random salt for the password hash $size = strlen($chars); for($i = 0; $i < 22; $i++) { $str .= $chars[rand(0, $size - 1)]; } //create the random salt to be used for the crypt $r_blowfish_salt = "$2a$12$" . $str . "$"; //grab the website salt $salt = getenv('WEBSITE_SALT'); //combine the website salt, and the password $password_to_hash = $pwd . $salt; //crypt the password string using blowfish $password = crypt($password_to_hash, $r_blowfish_salt); I have no idea whether this has holes in it or not, but regardless, I moved over to Ion Auth for a more complete set of functions to use with CI. I noticed that Ion only uses a single salt as part of its hashing mechanism (although does recommend that encryption_key is set in order to secure the database session.) The information that will be stored in my database is things like name, email address, location by country, some notes (which will be recommended that they do not contain sensitive information), and a link to a Facebook, Twitter or Flickr account. Based on this, i'm not convinced it's necessary for me to have an SSL connection on the secure pages of my site. My question is, is there a particular reason why only 1 salt is being used as part as the Ion Auth library? Is it implied that I write my own additional salting in front of the functionality it provides, or am I missing something? Furthermore, is it even worth using 2 salts, or once an attacker has the random salt and the hashed password, are all bets off anyway? (I assume not, but worth checking if i'm worrying about nothing...)

  Read the article

• HTTP Basic authentication using Authlogic or authenticate_or_request_with_http_basic for API call?

  - by Gaius Parx

  I have a Rails 2.3.x app that implements the act_as_authentic in User model and a UserSession model as per Authlogic Github example. I am implementing an API to allow access from iPhone. Will be using HTTP Basic authentication via https (will not implement single access token). Each API call requires a username/password for the access. I am able to access the API by calling http://username:password@localhost:3000/books.xml for example. Authlogic will not persist if using the single access token. But I am using HTTP Basic which I think Authlogic will create session for the API calls, which is not used for my API methods. So for each API call I made, new session object is created. Thus appear to me that this would load up the server resource pretty quickly. Sounds like a bad idea. The alternative is to use the Rails authenticate_or_request_with_http_basic for API controllers. Example adding a before_filter: def require_http_auth_user authenticate_or_request_with_http_basic do |username, password| if @current_user = User.find_by_email(username) @current_user.valid_password?(password) else false end end end This will bypass the Authlogic UserSession and just use the User model. But this will involve using separate authentication codes in the app. Anyone has any comments and can share their experience? Thanks

  Read the article

• What is wrong with my Basic Authentication in my Browser?

  - by Pure.Krome

  Hi folks, i'm trying to goto the following url :- http://user1:pass1@localhost:1234/api/users?format=xml nothing to complex. Notice how i've got the username/password in the url? this, i believe, is for basic authentication. When I do that, the Request Headers are MISSING the 'Authorize' header. Er... that's not right :( I have anonymous authentication only setup on the site. I don't want to have anon off and basic turned on .. because not all of the site requires basic.. only a few action methods. So .. why is this not working? Is this something to do with the fact my code is not sending a 401 challenge or some crap? For What It's Worth, my site is ASP.NET MVC1 running on IIS7 (and the same thing happens when i run it on cassini). Update: If this is an illegal way of calling a resource using basic auth (ala security flaw) .. then is this possible to do, for an ASP.NET MVC website .. per action method (and not the entire site, per say)?

  Read the article

• Windows "forms" authentication - <deny users="?"> redirecting to foreign page!

  - by Erik5388

  Like the title states - I have a web.config file that looks like, <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <configuration> <system.web> <compilation debug="true" targetFramework="4.0" /> <authentication mode="Forms"> <forms name="login" protection="All" timeout="30" loginUrl="login" defaultUrl="~/"> <credentials passwordFormat="Clear"> <user name="admin" password="password" /> </credentials> </forms> </authentication> <authorization> <deny users="?" /> </authorization> </system.web> </configuration> I want to do exactly what it says it should do... I want to deny all users who try to enter the site. It works however, it redirects to a "Account/Login?ReturnUrl=%2flogin" url I have never heard of... Is there a place I can change this?

  Read the article

• Token based Authentication for WCF HTTP/REST Services: The Client

  - by Your DisplayName here!

  If you wondered how a client would have to look like to work with the authentication framework, it is pretty straightfoward: Request a token Put that token on the authorization header (along with a registered scheme) and make the service call e.g.: var oauth2 = new OAuth2Client(_oauth2Address); var swt = oauth2.RequestAccessToken( "username", "password", _baseAddress.AbsoluteUri);   var client = new HttpClient { BaseAddress = _baseAddress }; client.DefaultRequestHeaders.Authorization = new AuthenticationHeaderValue("Bearer", swt); var response = client.Get("identity"); response.EnsureSuccessStatusCode(); HTH

  Read the article

• Authentication issue with CUPS 5.3.1 on SMB Printer

  - by Julius

  I am trying to print to a samba printer via CUPS. I have configured the printer allright, but there seems to be a problem with authentication. The error message I get is Session setup failed: NT_STATUS_LOGON_FAILURE The GUI also tells me: Idle - Tree connect failed (NT_STATUS_ACCESS_DENIED) It used to work with previous versions of CUPS (1.4.3 and 1.4.6) under Ubuntu 11.04 I am doing this on a clean install of Ubuntu 12.04, CUPS version 1.5.3. I have tried changing some rights relating to apparmor, with no success as described here: http://www.compdigitec.com/labs/2010/01/16/fixing-usrlibcupsbackendsmb-failed-error-in-ubuntu/ I have been working with Ubuntu for years - but this is the kind of problem I need help with.

  Read the article

• cannot use sudo on ubuntu server passwordless authentication?

  - by Lucas Crijns

  Hello I'm new at the forum and I want to introduce myself: I'm Lucas Crijns and I'm a very happy user of ubuntu server. I was reading about passwordless authentication with ssh. So I made a key and published it to ubuntu server, it worked well and I could login with my private key. But then I locked the account to prevent hacking from my password. After I ran "passwd -l lucas", I was not longer able by my next login to use sudo. Because it was asking for a password and I locked it. I was thinking that sudo would also be without a password. My question is now: is it possible to use sudo? And how can I enable it without a valid password for sudo? Thank you for your help!

  Read the article

• Unwanted authentication request window at login after upgrade to Ubuntu 13.10

  - by UBod

  I recently upgraded to Ubuntu 13.10 (64bit) on my Dell Laptop. Since then, at each login, a dialog window entitled "Authentication request ... Please enter the password for account "[email protected]"." appears (I would rather post a screenshot if I could, but I am not entitled to do that because I do not have the necessary 10 reputation credits). I neither have any idea why my password (I checked it a hundred times) does not work ("Password was incorrect") nor why this dialog is displayed at all. As said, I never saw it before 13.10. I looked around in different forums and it seems (please correct me if I am wrong) that it stems from evolution server. I also deleted ~/.config/evolution/ entirely - without any effect. Further note that I am not using evolution at all and I would rather like to get rid of it completely, but I do not dare to remove evolution-server. Any ideas? Thanks in advance, Ulrich

  Read the article

• Forcing Nautilus to use Kerberos (Active Directory) authentication

  - by user14146

  Is there a way to get Nautilus or any other file manager that runs on Ubuntu 11.04 to use Kerberos for authentication? I'm using Likewise Open to join machines to the domain, and I can't type in passwords for every user on every computer that needs to mount a network share. I've been able to get Kerberos working with the command line smbclient, but oddly Kerberos does not seem to be Nautilus-integrated. I also checked the SSH config file, and it looks like you can enable GSSAPIAuthentication, but it only works for Kerberos v2, not the current version, which I think is v5.

  Read the article

• Web api authentication techniques

  - by Steve

  We have a asp.net MVC web service framework for serving out xml/json for peoples Get requests but are struggling to figure out the best way (fast, easy, trivial for users coding with javascript or OO languages) to authenticate users. It's not that our data is sensitive or anything, we just want users to register so we can have their email address to notify them of changes and track usage. In our previous attempt we had the username in the URI and would just make sure that username existed and increment db tables with usage. This was super basic but we'd notice people using demo as a username etc so we need it to be a little more sophisticated. What authentication techniques are available? What do the major players use/do.

  Read the article

• Configure Oracle Identity Manager AD/LDAP Authentication

  - by Arda Eralp

  Requirements (on AD side) LDAP connection user with the necessary rights in AD to do subtree searches on your users and groups container, respectively in the scope we configure below For LDAP in OIM to work, you need an AD Group called "oimusers", in which all users who shall be able to login to OIM need to be member. The group need to be named exactly "oimusers". Step 1: Login Weblogic Administration Console  Step 2: Create New Provider Authentication Provider Name: ADAuthenticationProvider Type: ActiveDirectoryAuthenticator Control Flag: SUFFICIENT   User scope configuration User Base DN: Container where your users are found Rest of the parameters stay default   Group scope configuration Group Base DN: Container where your groups are found Your "oimusers" group must be found in this container or in the subtree Rest of the parameters stay default  Step 3: Restart Admin Server Step 4: Check oimusers group Step 5: Re order providers Step 6: Restart Admin Server

  Read the article

• Empathy authentication error to XMPP server

  - by Shauna

  I recently installed Ubuntu 12.04 on a new machine and have been working on setting it up, but I've run into an interesting problem. I have a custom XMPP server for work (I don't control it, but we're using an in-house install). I can connect to it just fine via Pidgin, but due to some UI issues I'm having with Pidgin (and what appears to be better overall integration between Empathy and Ubuntu/Unity), I'd like to use Empathy instead. However, Empathy won't connect to my XMPP server, and I keep getting an authentication error and repeatedly prompted for my password. This happens even when importing the working account information from Pidgin (so I know things like the password are correct). Is there a way I can get Empathy working with my XMPP server?

  Read the article

• Security for LDAP authentication for Collabnet

  - by Robert May

  In a previous post, I wrote about how to get LDAP authentication working in Collabnet. By default, all LDAP users are put into the Users role on the server.  For most purposes, this is just fine, and I don’t have a way to change this.  The documentation gives hints that you can add them to other roles, but for now, I don’t have the need. However, adding permissions to different repositories is a different question. To add them, go to the repositories list, select Access Rules and then you can enter in their username, as it sits in Active Directory to the lists for the repositories or for the predefined groups that you have created.  To my knowledge, you cannot use the Active Directory groups in collabnet, which is a big problem.  Needing to micromanage users really limits the usefulness of the LDAP integration. Technorati Tags: subversion,collabnet

  Read the article

• Address Book Authentication

  - by Gus E

  I just upgraded to Ubuntu 14.04.1 and run Gnome Shell. I am consistently getting a pop up window prompting me for my Gmail address book authentication. The window pops up the moment I type something into gnome shell after hitting the super key. I'm assuming that Ubuntu wants to search my address book for people to include in the search. I have opened up the settings and deleted my account from the online accounts section and rebooted, nothing seems to stop the popup. Where is it getting my email address from? Most importantly, how to I stop this super annoying popup from appearing?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >