Search Results

Search found 15798 results on 632 pages for 'authentication required'.

Page 477/632 | < Previous Page | 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484  | Next Page >

  • How do I create Twitter style URL's for my app - Using existing application or app redesign - Ruby o

    - by bgadoci
    I have developed a blog application of sorts that I am trying to allow other users to take advantage of (for free and mostly for family). I wondering if the authentication I have set up will allow for such a thing. Here is the scenario. Currently the application allows for users to sign up for an account and when they do so they can create blog posts and organize those posts via tags. The application displays no data publicly (another words, you have to login to see anything). To gain access you have to create an account and even after you do, you cannot see anyone else's information as the applications filters using the current_user method and displays in the /posts/index.html.erb page. This would be great if a user only wanted to blog and share it with themselves, not really what I am looking for. My question has two parts (hopefully I won't make anyone mad by not putting these into two questions) Is it possible for a particular users data to live at www.myapplication.com/user without moving everything to the /user/show.html.erb file? Is it possible to make some of that information (living at the URL) public but still require login for create and destroy actions. Essentially, exactly like twitter. I am just curious if I can get from where I am (using the current_user methods across controllers to display in /posts/index.html.erb) to where I want to be. My fear is that I have to redesign the app such that the user data lives in the /user/show.html.erb page. Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Unknown error when submit a REST request to Liferay json API

    - by r.rodriguez
    I'm writing an script in Python to automatically update the structures in my Liferay portal and I want to do it via the json REST API. I make a request to get an structure (method getStructure), and it worked. But when I try to do an structure update in the portal it shows me the following error: ValueError: Content-Length should be specified for iterable data of type class 'dict' {'serviceContext': "{'prueba'}", 'serviceClassName': 'com.liferay.portlet.journal.service.JournalStructureServiceUtil', 'name': 'FOO', 'xsd': '... THE XSD OBTAINED VIA JSON ...', 'serviceParameters': '[groupId,structureId,parentStructureId,name,description,xsd,serviceContext]', 'description': 'FOO Structure', 'serviceMethodName': 'updateStructure', 'groupId': '10133'} What I'm doing is the next: urllib.request.Request(url = URL, data = data_update, headers = headers) URL is http://localhost:8080/tunnel-web/secure/json The headers are configured with basic authentication (it works, it is tested with the getStructure method). Data is: data_update = { "serviceClassName" : "com.liferay.portlet.journal.service.JournalStructureServiceUtil", "serviceMethodName" : "updateStructure", "serviceParameters" : "[groupId,structureId,parentStructureId,name,description,xsd,serviceContext]", "groupId" : 10133, "name" : FOO, "description" : FOO Structure, "xsd" : ... THE XSD OBTAINED VIA JSON ..., "serviceContext" : "{}" } Does anybody know the solution? Have I to specify the length for the dictionary and how? Or this is a bug?

    Read the article

  • Sharepoint BDC Error: The title property of entity tblStaff is set to an invalid value

    - by Christopher Rathermel
    I am just starting to create our Business Data Catalog(s) for our practice management system and I am running into an issue w/ our staff table. Background: I am using Business Data Catalog Definition Editor to create my ADF. I am using the RevertToSelf Authentication Mode. I have tried a few other tables and they seem to work just fine thus far.. only issue is w/ the staff table. If I removed all the columns for the staff entity except the ID and a few columns for the name it actually works. So it has a problem w/ one of my columns in tblStaff. I receive this error even when I set up an ADF w/ just this one entity. So w/ no associations.. When attempting to view the record: http://servername/ssp/admin/Content/tblstaff.aspx?StaffID={0} w/ {0} replaced w/ an actual staff ID I get the following error: The title property of entity tblStaff is set to an invalid value. Things I have tried: I noticed that I do have a column in my staff table called "Title" and removed it from ADF w/ no luck... Same error.. I tried to use bdc meta man to create my ADF and I got the same error... Any ideas? Chris

    Read the article

  • Gravatar XML-RPC request problem in Objective-C

    - by Erik
    Hi all, I'm trying to incorporate some Gravatar functionality using its XML-RPC API in an iPhone app I'm writing. I grabbed the Cocoa XML-RPC Framework by Eric Czarny (http://github.com/eczarny/xmlrpc) and it works well when I tested it with some of the Wordpress methods. However, when I try to use the Gravatar API, I always receive a response of "Error code: -9 Authentication error". I think I'm constructing the request correctly, but I've been wracking my brain and can't seem to figure it out. Maybe someone has some experience with this API or can see what I'm doing wrong. Here's the call: <?xml version="1.0"> <methodCall> <methodName>grav.addresses</methodName> <params> <param><value><string>PASSWORD_HERE</string></value></param> </params> </methodCall> Again, the Cocoa XML-RPC Framework worked like a dream with Wordpress, but it's choking on the Gravatar API for some reason. Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • Getting svn: E170000: Unrecognized URL scheme for my custom Svn Gradle plugin

    - by Ip Doh
    I wrote a custom gradle plugin using groovy to do basic svn tasks like, Checkout, Clean, Tag etc. The groovy class calls the svn command line client to do these operations, It works fine when i run it on my windows system but the same plugin gives the following error when i run it on a linux system (Centos). svn: E170000: Unrecognized URL scheme for '%22https://source.mycompany.net/svn/MyProject/trunk%22' Am able to make the same calls to the command line client through the command prompt or shell script without any issues. So what is the difference with Here is my code sample String command =String.format("svn co -r %d --non-interactive --trust-server-cert -- username %s --password %s --depth infinity \"%s\" \"%s\"", getRevision(), getUserName(), getUserPassword(), getSrcUrl(), getDir()); Process svnProcess = Runtime.getRuntime().exec(command); BufferedReader stdInput = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(svnProcess.getInputStream())); BufferedReader stdError = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(svnProcess.getErrorStream())); String statusOutputLine ="" while ((statusOutputLine = stdInput.readLine()) != null) { logger.quiet(" " + statusOutputLine); } while (( statusOutputLine = stdError.readLine()) != null) { logger.error(statusOutputLine) throw new Exception(statusOutputLine) } logger.quiet("Successfully Checked out the work space") i do have neon installed on the system -bash-4.1$ svn --version svn, version 1.6.11 (r934486) compiled Jun 25 2011, 11:30:15 Copyright (C) 2000-2009 CollabNet. Subversion is open source software, see http://subversion.tigris.org/ This product includes software developed by CollabNet (http://www.Collab.Net/). The following repository access (RA) modules are available: ra_neon : Module for accessing a repository via WebDAV protocol using Neon. handles 'http' scheme handles 'https' scheme ra_svn : Module for accessing a repository using the svn network protocol. with Cyrus SASL authentication handles 'svn' scheme ra_local : Module for accessing a repository on local disk. handles 'file' scheme

    Read the article

  • Distributed development systems

    - by Nathan Adams
    I am interested in a system that allows for distributed development with an authentication piece. What do I mean by that? Ok so lets take SVN, SVN keeps track of revisions and doesn't care who submits, as long as you have the right to submit you can submit, really, to any part in the repository. Where does my system come into play? Being able to granulate access control and give a stackoverflow like feel to the environment. In the system I am describing we have 4 users Bob, Alice, Dan, Joe. Bob is a project managed, Alice and Dan are programmers under Bob and Joe is a random programmer on the internet who wants to help. Ideally in this system, Bob can commit any changes and won't require approval. Alice and Dan can commit to their branches, or a branch, but a commit to the trunk would need approval by Bob. This is where Joe comes in, wants to help, however, you just don't want to give him the keys to the kingdom just yet so to speak, so in my system you would setup a "low user" account. Any commits that Joe makes would need to be approved by Dan, Alice or both. However, in the system, Joe can build up "Karma" where after so many approved commits it would only need approval by one of the programmers, and then eventually no approval would be necessary. Does that make sense and do you know if a system like that exists? Or am I just crazy to even think such a system/environment would be possible?

    Read the article

  • Unable to initialize provider. Missing or incorrect schema. for MySql.Web connector

    - by Jreeter
    Hey guys and gals running into a little issue here.. I'm trying to use MySql Connector 6.2.2.0 for membership and role providers.. The issue I'm having is: Unable to initialize provider. Missing or incorrect schema. <authentication mode="Forms"/> <roleManager defaultProvider="MySqlRoleProvider" enabled="true" cacheRolesInCookie="true" cookieName=".ASPROLES" cookieTimeout="30" cookiePath="/" cookieRequireSSL="false" cookieSlidingExpiration="true" cookieProtection="All" > <providers> <clear /> <add name="MySqlRoleProvider" type="MySql.Web.Security.MySQLRoleProvider, MySql.Web, Version=6.2.2.0,Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=c5687fc88969c44d" connectionStringName="mySQL" applicationName="capcafe" writeExceptionsToEventLog="true" /> </providers> </roleManager> <membership defaultProvider="MySqlMembershipProvider"> <providers> <add connectionStringName="mySQL" applicationName="capcafe" minRequiredPasswordLength="5" requiresQuestionAndAnswer="false" requiresUniqueEmail="false" minRequiredNonalphanumericCharacters="0" name="MySqlMembershipProvider" type="MySql.Web.Security.MySQLMembershipProvider, MySql.Web, Version=6.2.2.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=c5687fc88969c44d" /> </providers> </membership> Here is the line it doesn't seem to like: Line 57: type="MySql.Web.Security.MySQLRoleProvider, MySql.Web, Version=6.2.2.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=c5687fc88969c44d" I have both MySql.Web and MySql.Data referenced and in my bin! Any help resolving this issue will be very much appreciated

    Read the article

  • Where are the real risks in network security?

    - by Barry Brown
    Anytime a username/password authentication is used, the common wisdom is to protect the transport of that data using encryption (SSL, HTTPS, etc). But that leaves the end points potentially vulnerable. Realistically, which is at greater risk of intrusion? Transport layer: Compromised via wireless packet sniffing, malicious wiretapping, etc. Transport devices: Risks include ISPs and Internet backbone operators sniffing data. End-user device: Vulnerable to spyware, key loggers, shoulder surfing, and so forth. Remote server: Many uncontrollable vulnerabilities including malicious operators, break-ins resulting in stolen data, physically heisting servers, backups kept in insecure places, and much more. My gut reaction is that although the transport layer is relatively easy to protect via SSL, the risks in the other areas are much, much greater, especially at the end points. For example, at home my computer connects directly to my router; from there it goes straight to my ISPs routers and onto the Internet. I would estimate the risks at the transport level (both software and hardware) at low to non-existant. But what security does the server I'm connected to have? Have they been hacked into? Is the operator collecting usernames and passwords, knowing that most people use the same information at other websites? Likewise, has my computer been compromised by malware? Those seem like much greater risks. What do you think?

    Read the article

  • T4MVC not generating an action

    - by Maslow
    I suspected there was some hidden magic somewhere that stopped what looks like actual method calls all over the place in T4MVC. Then I had a view fail to compile, and the stackTrace went into my actual method. [Authorize] public string Apply(string shortName) { if (shortName.IsNullOrEmpty()) return "Failed alliance name was not transmitted"; if (Request.IsAuthenticated == false || User == null || User.Identity == null) return "Apply authentication failed"; Models.Persistence.AlliancePersistance.Apply(User.Identity.Name, shortName); return "Applied"; } So this method isn't generating in the template after all. <%=Ajax.ActionLink("Apply", "Apply", new RouteValueDictionary() { { "shortName", item.Shortname } }, new AjaxOptions() { UpdateTargetId = "masterstatus" })%> <%=Html.ActionLink("Apply",MVC.Alliance.Apply(item.Shortname),new AjaxOptions() { UpdateTargetId = "masterstatus" }) %> The second method threw an exception on compile because the method Apply in my controller has an [Authorize] attribute so that if someone that isn't logged on clicks this, they get redirected to login, then right back to this page. There they can click on apply again, this time being logged in. And yes I realize one is Ajax.ActionLink while the other is Html.ActionLink I did try them both with the T4MVC version.

    Read the article

  • Using Active Directory to authenticate users in a WWW facing website

    - by Basiclife
    Hi, I'm looking at starting a new web app which needs to be secure (if for no other reason than that we'll need PCI accreditation at some point). From previous experience working with PCI (on a domain), the preferred method is to use integrated windows authentication which is then passed all the way through the app to the database. This allows for better auditing as well as object-level permissions (ie an end user can't read the credit card table). There are advantages in that even if someone compromises the webserver, they won't be able to glean any additional information from the database. Also, the webserver isn't storing any database credentials (beyond perhaps a simple anonymous user with very few permissions) So, now I'm looking at the new web app which will be on the public internet. One suggestion is to have a Active Directory server and create windows accounts on the AD for each user of the site. These users will then be placed into the appropriate NT groups to decide which DB permissions they should have (and which pages they can access). ASP already provides the AD membership provider and role provider so this should be fairly simple to implement. There are a number of questions around this - Scalability, reliability, etc... and I was wondering if there is anyone out there with experience of this approach or, even better, some good reasons why to do it / not to do it. Any input appreciated Regards Basiclife

    Read the article

  • Asp.net MVC error with custom HttpModule

    - by Robert Koritnik
    I have a custom authentication HttpModule that is pretty strait forward. But I want it to run only for managed requests (and not for static ones). Asp.net MVC automatically adds configuration section for IIS7 web server: <system.webServer> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false" /> <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true"> <remove name="ScriptModule" /> <remove name="UrlRoutingModule" /> <add name="ScriptModule" preCondition="managedHandler" type="System.Web.Handlers.ScriptModule,..." /> <add name="UrlRoutingModule" type="System.Web.Routing.UrlRoutingModule,..." /> </modules> <handlers> ... </handlers> </system.webServer> When I add my own module I also set its preCondition="managedHandler", but since there's runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true" on parent <module> element my preCondition is ignored by design (as I read on MSDN). When I try to set though: <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="false"> I get this error: [image no longer valid] What else (which other module) do I have to set in web.config to make it work with this setting: <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="false">

    Read the article

  • Why use Django on Google App Engine?

    - by Travis Bradshaw
    When researching Google App Engine (GAE), it's clear that using Django is wildly popular for developing in Python on GAE. I've been scouring the web to find information on the costs and benefits of using Django, to find out why it's so popular. While I've been able to find a wide variety of sources on how to run Django on GAE and the various methods of doing so, I haven't found any comparative analysis on why Django is preferable to using the webapp framework provided by Google. To be clear, it's immediately apparent why using Django on GAE is useful for developers with an existing skillset in Django (a majority of Python web developers, no doubt) or existing code in Django (where using GAE is more of a porting exercise). My team, however, is evaluating GAE for use on an all-new project and our existing experience is with TurboGears, not Django. It's been quite difficult to determine why Django is beneficial to a development team when the BigTable libraries have replaced Django's ORM, sessions and authentication are necessarily changed, and Django's templating (if desirable) is available without using the entire Django stack. Finally, it's clear that using Django does have the advantage of providing an "exit strategy" if we later wanted to move away from GAE and need a platform to target for the exodus. I'd be extremely appreciative for help in pointing out why using Django is better than using webapp on GAE. I'm also completely inexperienced with Django, so elaboration on smaller features and/or conveniences that work on GAE are also valuable to me. Thanks in advance for your time!

    Read the article

  • Global.asax Event: Application_OnPostAuthenticateRequest

    - by Hemant Kothiyal
    Hi, I am using Application_OnPostAuthenticateRequest event in global.asax to get roles and permissions of authenticated user also i have made my custom principal class to get user detail and roles and permission. To get some information which remain same for that user. following are the code void Application_OnPostAuthenticateRequest(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Get a reference to the current User IPrincipal objIPrincipal = HttpContext.Current.User; // If we are dealing with an authenticated forms authentication request if ((objIPrincipal.Identity.IsAuthenticated) && (objIPrincipal.Identity.AuthenticationType == "Forms")) { CustomPrincipal objCustomPrincipal = new CustomPrincipal(); objCustomPrincipal = objCustomPrincipal.GetCustomPrincipalObject(objIPrincipal.Identity.Name); HttpContext.Current.User = objCustomPrincipal; CustomIdentity ci = (CustomIdentity)objCustomPrincipal.Identity; HttpContext.Current.Cache["CountryID"] = FatchMasterInfo.GetCountryID(ci.CultureId); HttpContext.Current.Cache["WeatherLocationID"] = FatchMasterInfo.GetWeatherLocationId(ci.UserId); Thread.CurrentPrincipal = objCustomPrincipal; } } My question is as following This event fires every time for every request. Hence for each request the code execute? My approach is right or not? Is it right to add HttpContext.Current.Cache in this event or we should move it on session start

    Read the article

  • Autologin for web application

    - by Maulin
    We want to AutoLogin feature to allow user directly login using link into our Web Application. What is the best way achieve this? We have following approches in our mind. 1) Store user credentials(username/password) in cookie. Send cookie for authentication. e.g. http: //www.mysite.com/AutoLogin (here username/password will be passed in cookie) OR Pass user credentials in link URL. http: //www.mysite.com/AutoLogin?userid=<&password=< 2) Generate randon token and store user random token and user IP on server side database. When user login using link, validate token and user IP on server. e.g. http: //www.mysite.com/AutoLogin?token=< The problem with 1st approach is if hacker copies link/cookie from user machine to another machine he can login. The problem with 2nd approach is the user ip will be same for all users of same organization behind proxy. Which one is better from above from security perspective? If there is better solution which is other than mentioned above, please let us know.

    Read the article

  • REST API error return good practices

    - by Remus Rusanu
    I'm looking for guidance on good practices when it comes to return errors from a REST API. I'm working on a new API so I can take it any direction right now. My content type is XML at the moment, but I plan to support JSON in future. I am now adding some error cases, like for instance a client attempts to add a new resource but has exceeded his storage quota. I am already handling certain error cases with HTTP status codes (401 for authentication, 403 for authorization and 404 for plain bad request URIs). I looked over the blessed HTTP error codes but none of the 400-417 range seems right to report application specific errors. So at first I was tempted to return my application error with 200 OK and a specific XML payload (ie. Pay us more and you'll get the storage you need!) but I stopped to think about it and it seems to soapy (/shrug in horror). Besides it feels like I'm splitting the error responses into distinct cases, as some are http status code driven and other are content driven. So what is the SO crowd recommendation? Good practices (please explain why!) and also, from a client pov, what kind of error handling in the REST API makes life easier for the client code?

    Read the article

  • Override ActiveRecord#save, Method Alias? Trying to mixin functionality into save method...

    - by viatropos
    Here's the situation: I have a User model, and two modules for authentication: Oauth and Openid. Both of them override ActiveRecord#save, and have a fair share of implementation logic. Given that I can tell when the user is trying to login via Oauth vs. Openid, but that both of them have overridden save, how do "finally" override save such that I can conditionally call one of the modules' implementations of it? Here is the base structure of what I'm describing: module UsesOauth def self.included(base) base.class_eval do def save puts "Saving with Oauth!" end def save_with_oauth save end end end end module UsesOpenid def self.included(base) base.class_eval do def save puts "Saving with OpenID!" end def save_with_openid save end end end end module Sequencer def save if using_oauth? save_with_oauth elsif using_openid? save_with_openid else super end end end class User < ActiveRecord::Base include UsesOauth include UsesOpenid include Sequencer end I was thinking about using alias_method like so, but that got too complicated, because I might have 1 or 2 more similar modules. I also tried using those save_with_oauth methods (shown above), which almost works. The only thing that's missing is that I also need to call ActiveRecord::Base#save (the super method), so something like this: def save_with_oauth # do this and that super.save # the rest end But I'm not allowed to do that in ruby. Any ideas for a clever solution to this?

    Read the article

  • Simple imeplementation of admin/staff panel?

    - by Michael Mao
    Hi all: A new project requires a simple panel(page) for admin and staff members that : Preferably will not use SSL or any digital ceritification stuff, a simple login from via http will just be fine. has basic authentication which allows only admin to login as admin, and any staff member as of the group "staff". Ideally, the "credentials(username-hashedpassword pair)" will be stored in MySQL. is simple to configure if there is a package, or the strategy is simple to code. somewhere (PHP session?) somehow (include a script at the beginning of each page to check user group before doing anything?), it will detect any invalid user attempt to access protected page and redirect him/her to the login form. while still keeps high quality in security, something I worry about the most. Frankly I am having little knowledge about Internet security, and how modern CMS such as WordPress/Joomla do with their implementation in this. I only have one thing in my mind that I need to use a salt to hash the password (SHA1?) to make sure any hacker gets the username and password pair across the net cannot use that to log into the system. And that is what the client wants to make sure. But I really not sure where to start, any ideas? Thanks a lot in advance.

    Read the article

  • GoDaddy Subdomain Hosting Issue/Question with Disk Access (C#/ASP.NET 3.5)

    - by Vogel
    This isn't a very complicated scenario really, but as I start to type out the problem I'm realizing how convoluted it can become textually. Let me try and be very clear: First, the set up... I have a C#/ASP.NET web application that is publicly facing on my main domain (www), let's call it www.mysite.com. Nothing fancy, just a front-end that connects to SQL to display records. Then, I have a second C#/ASP.NET web application that is secured using forms authentication running on a subdomain, let's call it admin.mysite.com. This is a very light-weight CMS system to administer the public site. Now, the problem... Both of these sites run fine for basic tasks, however, my problem arises when I try to gain access to the file system for uploading. GoDaddy requires subdomains to run as a virtual directories under the main application in IIS (so the subdomains actually resolve/re-direct to www.mysite.com/admin when you type in admin.mysite.com), but because of this I am unable to write to my website root from the subfolder. Let me explain a little more... The CMS system (running as a virtual directory) gives the admin the ability to upload photos for display on the main site, the target folder of which is www.mysite.com/images - when attempting disk access from the root app, I am able to write to the virtual directory, but cannot do the opposite -- that is, write to the root from the virtual directory, getting security violations. If I can only upload to the /admin/ virtual directory, the entire point is moot because it's a secured folder that the public can't see! The only solution I can think of is to upload the files to the /admin/ virtual directory, then call a URL in the root that moves files from /admin/ back to the root, but that is entirely ghetto. I hope this post makes sense. Anyone else experience anything like this? The bottom line is that it seems virtual directories ONLY have access to themselves, and not their parent directories, no matter what credentials are used. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • EF + UnitOfWork + SharePoint RunWithElevatedPrivileges

    - by Lorenzo
    In our SharePoint application we have used the UnitOfWork + Repository patterns together with Entity Framework. To avoid the usage of the passthrough authentication we have developed a piece of code that impersonate a single user before creating the ObjectContext instance in a similar way that is described in "Impersonating user with Entity Framework" on this site. The only difference between our code and the referred question is that, to do the impersonation, we are using RunWithElevatedPrivileges to impersonate the Application Pool identity as in the following sample. SPSecurity.RunWithElevatedPrivileges(delegate() { using (SPSite site = new SPSite(url)) { _context = new MyDataContext(ConfigSingleton.GetInstance().ConnectionString); } }); We have done this way because we expected that creating the ObjectContext after impersonation and, due to the fact that Repositories are receiving the impersonated ObjectContext would solve our requirement. Unfortunately it's not so easy. In fact we experienced that, even if the ObjectContext is created before and under impersonation circumstances, the real connection is made just before executing the query, and so does not use impersonation, which break our requirement. I have checked the ObjectContext class to see if there was any event through which we can inject the impersonation but unfortunately found nothing. Any help?

    Read the article

  • JavaEE : "Access to default session denied" when sending mail using smtp.gmail.com

    - by Harry Pham
    I am trying to write email authentication feature for my website and I encounter some issues. I got java.lang.SecurityException: Access to default session denied, when I try to do Session.getDefaultInstance. Here are my codes: private static final String SMTP_HOST_NAME = "smtp.gmail.com"; private static final String SMTP_PORT = "465"; private static final String emailSubjectTxt = "Email Confirmation"; private static final String emailFromAddress = "[email protected]"; private static final String SSL_FACTORY = "javax.net.ssl.SSLSocketFactory"; ... String sendTo = "[email protected]"; boolean debug = true; Properties props = new Properties(); props.put("mail.smtp.host", SMTP_HOST_NAME); props.put("mail.smtp.auth", "true"); props.put("mail.debug", "true"); props.put("mail.smtp.port", SMTP_PORT); props.put("mail.smtp.socketFactory.port", SMTP_PORT); props.put("mail.smtp.socketFactory.class", SSL_FACTORY); props.put("mail.smtp.socketFactory.fallback", "false"); //It dies at the next line Session session = Session.getDefaultInstance(props, new javax.mail.Authenticator() { @Override protected PasswordAuthentication getPasswordAuthentication() { return new PasswordAuthentication("myUserName", "myPassword"); } }); session.setDebug(debug); //Set the FROM address Message msg = new MimeMessage(session); InternetAddress addressFrom = new InternetAddress(emailFromAddress); msg.setFrom(addressFrom); //Set the TO address InternetAddress[] addressTo = new InternetAddress[1]; addressTo[0] = new InternetAddress(sendTo); msg.setRecipients(Message.RecipientType.TO, addressTo); //Construct the content of the email confirmation String message = "Test Content" // Setting the Subject and Content Type msg.setSubject(emailSubjectTxt); msg.setContent(message, "text/plain"); Transport.send(msg);

    Read the article

  • asp.net mvc and portal like functionality

    - by richard-heesbeen
    fHi, I need to build an site with some portal like functionality where an param in the request will indentify the portal. like so http:/domain/controller/action/portal Now my problem is if an portal doesn't exists there must be an redirect to an other site/page and an user can login in to one portal but if the user comes to an other portal the user must be redirected back to the login page for that portal. I have something working now, but i feel like there must be an central place in the pipeline to handle this. My current solution uses an custom action filter which checks the portal param and sees if the portal exists and checks if the user logged on in that portal (the portal the user logged on for is in the authentication cookie). I make my own IIndentiy and IPrincipal in the application_postauthentication event. I have 2 problems with my current approach: 1: It's not really enforced, i have to add the attributes to all controllers and/or actions. 2: The isauthenticated on an user isn't really working, i would like that to work. But for that i need to have access to the params of the route when i create my IPrincipal/IIndenty and i can't seem to find an correct place to do that. Hope someone can give me some pointers, Richard.

    Read the article

  • how to retrive pK using spring security

    - by aditya
    i implement this method of the UserDetailService interface, public UserDetails loadUserByUsername(final String username) throws UsernameNotFoundException, DataAccessException { final EmailCredential userDetails = persistentEmailCredential .getUniqueEmailCredential(username); if (userDetails == null) { throw new UsernameNotFoundException(username + "is not registered"); } final HashSet<GrantedAuthority> authorities = new HashSet<GrantedAuthority>(); authorities.add(new GrantedAuthorityImpl("ROLE_USER")); for (UserRole role:userDetails.getAccount().getRoles()) { authorities.add(new GrantedAuthorityImpl(role.getRole())); } return new User(userDetails.getEmailAddress(), userDetails .getPassword(), true, true, true, true, authorities); } in the security context i do some thing like this <!-- Login Info --> <form-login default-target-url='/dashboard.htm' login-page="/login.htm" authentication-failure-url="/login.htm?authfailed=true" always-use-default-target='false' /> <logout logout-success-url="/login.htm" invalidate-session="true" /> <remember-me user-service-ref="emailAccountService" key="fuellingsport" /> <session-management> <concurrency-control max-sessions="1" /> </session-management> </http> now i want to pop out the Pk of the logged in user, how can i show it in my jsp pages, any idea thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • How to safely let users submit custom themes/plugins for a Rails app

    - by Brian Armstrong
    In my rails app I'd like to let users submit custom "themes" to display data in various ways. I think they can get the data in the view using API calls and I can create an authentication mechanism for this. Also an authenticated API to save data. So this is probably safe. But i'm struggling with the best way to let users upload/submit their own code for the theme. I want this to work sort of like Wordpress themes/plugins where people can upload the thing. But there are some security risks. For example, if I take the uploaded "theme" a user submits and put it in it's own directory somewhere inside the rails app, what are the risks of this? If the user inserts any rails executable code in their theme, even though it's the view they have full access at that point to all the models, everyone's data, etc. Even from other users. So that is not good. I need some way to let the uploaded themes exist in a sandbox of the rails app, but I haven't seen a good way to do this. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • WMI Query Script as a Job

    - by Kenneth
    I have two scripts. One calls the other with a list of servers as parameters. The second query is designed to execute a WMI query. When I run it manually, it does this perfectly. When I try to run it as a job it hangs forever and I have to remove it. For the sake of space here is the relevant part of the calling script: ProcessServers.ps1 Start-Job -FilePath .\GetServerDetailsLight.ps1 -ArgumentList $sqlsrv,$destdb,$server,$instance GetServerDetailsLight.ps1 param($sqlsrv,$destdb,$server,$instance) $password = get-content C:\SQLPS\auth.txt | convertto-securestring $credentials = new-object -typename System.Management.Automation.PSCredential -argumentlist "DOMAIN\MYUSER",$password [System.Reflection.Assembly]::LoadWithPartialName('Microsoft.SqlServer.SMO') $box_id = 0; if ($sqlsrv.length -eq 0) { write-output "No data passed" break } function getinfo { param( [string]$svr, [string]$inst ) "Entered GetInfo with: $svr,$inst" $cs = get-wmiobject win32_operatingsystem -computername $svr -credential $credentials -authentication 6 -Verbose -Debug | select Name, Model, Manufacturer, Description, DNSHostName, Domain, DomainRole, PartOfDomain, NumberOfProcessors, SystemType, TotalPhysicalMemory, UserName, Workgroup write-output "WMI Results: $cs" } getinfo $server $instance write-output "Complete" Executed as a job it will show as 'running' forever: PS C:\sqlps> Start-Job -FilePath .\GetServerDetailsLight.ps1 -ArgumentList DBSERVER,LOGDB,SERVER01,SERVER01 Id Name State HasMoreData Location Command -- ---- ----- ----------- -------- ------- 21 Job21 Running True localhost param($sqlsrv,$destdb,... GAC Version Location --- ------- -------- True v2.0.50727 C:\WINDOWS\assembly\GAC_MSIL\Microsoft.SqlServer.Smo\10.0.0.0__89845dcd8080cc91\Microsoft.SqlServer.Smo.dll getinfo MSDCHR01 MSDCHR01 Entered GetInfo with: SERVER01,SERVER01 The last output I ever get is the 'Entered GetInfo with: SERVER01,SERVER01'. If I run it manually like so: PS C:\sqlps> .\GetServerDetailsLight.ps1 DBSERVER LOGDB SERVER01 SERVER01 The WMI query executes just as expected. I am trying to determine why this is, or at least a useful way to trap errors from within jobs. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to do a javascript redirection to a ClickOnce deployment URL?

    - by jerem
    I have a ClickOnce application used to view some documents on a website. When connected, the user sees a list of documents as links to http://server/myapp.application?document=docname. It worked fine until I had to integrate the website authentication/security system into my application. The website uses a ticketing system to grant access to its users. A ticket is generated by a web application and needs to be added to the deployment URL querystring, then I have to check at application startup that the ticket given in querystring was right by making another request to the web application. So the deployment URL becomes something like: h ttp://server/myapp.application?document=docname&ticket=ticketnumber. The problem is the ticket is valid only 10 seconds, so I have to get it only after the user has clicked a link. My first try was to have some javascript do the request to get the ticket, generate the proper deployment URL and then redirect the user to this URL with "window.location = deploymentUrl;". It works fine in Firefox, but IE does not prompt the user for installation. I guess it is a ClickOnce security constraints, but I am able to do the redirection when doing it on localhost, so I hope there is a workaround. I have also added the server on the "trusted sites" list in IE options. Is it possible to have that working in IE? What are my other options to do that?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484  | Next Page >