Search Results

Search found 15558 results on 623 pages for 'basic authentication'.

Page 5/623 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Windows Authentication Website Asking for Credentials

  - by ChrisHDog

  I have a website that has ASP.Net Impersonation Enabled and Windows Authentication Enabled. When navigating to that site using IE8 with "Enable Integrated Windows Authentication" (under Tools - Internet Options - Advanced) checked, the browser pops-up a "Windows Security" dialog box asking for User name and Password. My understanding was that this was automatically passed through and I would not need to type in those details. Additional Information: If I uncheck "Enable Integrated Windows Authentication" I do not get the pop-up window and it appears to work was intended (though that is the opposite of what I would be expecting) If I enable Windows Authentication in Firefox I do not get the pop-up window (i.e. works as intended) Are there some settings or similar that could have been set to create this behavior? Or has anyone else seen similar behavior and know how to fix?

  Read the article

• Microsoft Application Request Routing with Windows Authentication

  - by theplatz

  I'm running into a problem trying to get Windows Authentication working in an environment that uses Microsoft Application Request Routing and was hoping someone might be able to help. The problem I'm running into is that only some requests are authenticated, while others fail with 401 errors. I have followed the Special Case of Running IIS 7.0 in a Web Farm instructions found at http://blogs.msdn.com/b/webtopics/archive/2009/01/19/service-principal-name-spn-checklist-for-kerberos-authentication-with-iis-7-0.aspx to no avail. My current server setup looks like the following: ARR Two servers set up with IIS shared configuration using IIS 7.5 on Windows 2008 R2 Anonymous authentication turned on for the Default Web Site Web Farm Two servers running IIS 7.5 on Windows 2008 R2 Three web sites set up using port binding to differentiate between virtual hosts. Ports being used are 8000, 8001, and 8002 Application pools for Windows Authentication all use a common domain account SPN added to domain account for http/<virthalhost-name>:<port-number> and http/<virtualhost-name>.<fully-qualified-domain>:<port-number> The IIS logs show the following when authentication is working/failing. If I understand correctly, all requests should show DOMAIN\User_Name: 2012-11-19 15:03:17 CLUSTER-IP-ADDRESS GET /home/stylesheets/techweb.landing.css - 8002 DOMAIN\User_Name ARR-HOST-1-IP-ADDRESS 200 0 0 62 2012-11-19 15:03:17 CLUSTER-IP-ADDRESS GET /home/images/user-background-right.gif - 8002 - ARR-HOST-1-IP-ADDRESS 401 2 5 0 2012-11-19 15:03:17 CLUSTER-IP-ADDRESS GET /home/images/user-background-left.gif - 8002 DOMAIN\User_Name ARR-HOST-IP-ADDRESS 200 0 0 31 2012-11-19 15:03:17 CLUSTER-IP-ADDRESS GET /home/images/user-icon.png - 8002 - ARR-HOST-1-IP-ADDRESS 401 2 5 0 2012-11-19 15:03:17 CLUSTER-IP-ADDRESS GET /home/images/user-icon.png - 8002 - ARR-HOST-1-IP-ADDRESS 401 1 2148074248 0 2012-11-19 15:03:17 CLUSTER-IP-ADDRESS GET /home/images/application-icon.png - 8002 - ARR-HOST-1-IP-ADDRESS 401 1 2148074248 0 2012-11-19 15:03:17 CLUSTER-IP-ADDRESS GET /home/images/user-background-right.gif - 8002 - ARR-HOST-1-IP-ADDRESS 401 1 3221225581 15 2012-11-19 15:03:17 CLUSTER-IP-ADDRESS GET /home/images/building.gif - 8002 DOMAIN\User_Name ARR-HOST-2-IP-ADDRESS 200 0 0 218 Does anyone know what might cause this problem and how I can resolve it?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu 9.10 RSA authentication: ssh fails, filezilla runs fine

  - by MariusPontmercy

  This is quite a mistery for me. I usually use passwordless RSA authentication to login into my remote *nix servers with ssh and sftp. Never had any problem until now. I cannot connect to an Ubuntu 9.10 machine: user@myclient$ ssh -i .ssh/Ganymede_key [email protected] [...] debug1: Host 'ganymede.server.com' is known and matches the RSA host key. debug1: Found key in /home/user/.ssh/known_hosts:14 debug2: bits set: 494/1024 debug1: ssh_rsa_verify: signature correct debug2: kex_derive_keys debug2: set_newkeys: mode 1 debug1: SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS sent debug1: expecting SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS debug2: set_newkeys: mode 0 debug1: SSH2_MSG_NEWKEYS received debug1: SSH2_MSG_SERVICE_REQUEST sent debug2: service_accept: ssh-userauth debug1: SSH2_MSG_SERVICE_ACCEPT received debug2: key: .ssh/Ganymede_key (0xb96a0ef8) debug2: key: .ssh/Ganymede_key ((nil)) debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password,keyboard-interactive debug1: Next authentication method: publickey debug1: Offering public key: .ssh/Ganymede_key debug2: we sent a publickey packet, wait for reply debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password,keyboard-interactive debug1: Trying private key: .ssh/Ganymede_key debug1: read PEM private key done: type RSA debug2: we sent a publickey packet, wait for reply debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password,keyboard-interactive debug2: we did not send a packet, disable method debug1: Next authentication method: keyboard-interactive debug2: userauth_kbdint debug2: we sent a keyboard-interactive packet, wait for reply debug2: input_userauth_info_req debug2: input_userauth_info_req: num_prompts 1 Then it falls back to password authentication. If I disable password authentication on the remote machine my connection attempt just fails with a "Permission denied (publickey)." state. Same thing for sftp from command line. The "funny" thing is that the exact same RSA key works like a charm with a Filezilla sftp session instead: 12:08:00 Trace: Offered public key from "/home/user/.filezilla/keys/Ganymede_key" 12:08:00 Trace: Offer of public key accepted, trying to authenticate using it. 12:08:01 Trace: Access granted 12:08:01 Trace: Opened channel for session 12:08:01 Trace: Started a shell/command 12:08:01 Status: Connected to ganymede.server.com 12:08:02 Trace: CSftpControlSocket::ConnectParseResponse() 12:08:02 Trace: CSftpControlSocket::ResetOperation(0) 12:08:02 Trace: CControlSocket::ResetOperation(0) 12:08:02 Status: Retrieving directory listing... 12:08:02 Trace: CSftpControlSocket::SendNextCommand() 12:08:02 Trace: CSftpControlSocket::ChangeDirSend() 12:08:02 Command: pwd 12:08:02 Response: Current directory is: "/root" 12:08:02 Trace: CSftpControlSocket::ResetOperation(0) 12:08:02 Trace: CControlSocket::ResetOperation(0) 12:08:02 Trace: CSftpControlSocket::ParseSubcommandResult(0) 12:08:02 Trace: CSftpControlSocket::ListSubcommandResult() 12:08:02 Trace: CSftpControlSocket::ResetOperation(0) 12:08:02 Trace: CControlSocket::ResetOperation(0) 12:08:02 Status: Directory listing successful Any thoughts? M

  Read the article

• Multi- authentication scenario for a public internet service using Kerberos

  - by StrangeLoop

  I have a public web server which has users coming from internet (via HTTPS) and from a corporate intranet. I wish to use Kerberos authentication for the intranet users so that they would be automatically logged in the web application without the need to provide any login/password (assuming they are already logged to the Windows domain). For the users coming from internet I want to provide traditional basic/form- based authentication. User/password data for these users would be stored internally in a database used by the application. Web application will be configured to use Kerberos authentication for users coming from specific intranet ip networks and basic/form- based authentication will be used for the rest of the users. From a security perspective, are there some risks involved in this kind of setup or is this a generally accepted solution? My understanding is that server doesn't need access to KDC (see Kerberos authentication, service host and access to KDC) and it can be completely isolated from AD and corporate intranet. The server has a keytab file stored locally that is used to decrypt tickets sent by the users coming from intranet. The tickets only contain username and domain of the incoming user. Server never sees the passwords of authenticated users. If the server would be hacked and the keytab file compromised, it would mean that attacker could forge tickets for any domain user and get access to the web application as any user. But typically this is the case anyway if hacker gains access to the keytab file on the local filesystem. The encryption key contained in the keytab file is based on the service account password in AD and is in hashed form, I guess it is very difficult to brute force this password if strong Kerberos encryption like AES-256-SHA1 is used. As the server has no network access to intranet, even the compromised service account couldn't be directly used for anything.

  Read the article

• Google chrome proxy authentication dialogue timeout

  - by Nihar Sarangi

  I am on a network that uses LDAP proxy for authentication based on a username and password. Whenever I start Google Chrome, it pops up with a proxy authentication dialogue, but the dialogue disappears automatically after variable amount of time (sometimes it stays for 5 seconds some times less than 1 second). I have found the same issue with Chromium also. Is there any configuration I can set to control this timeout, or say, auto-authenticate with my authentication details from the shell or DE (Gnome3 on Arch)?

  Read the article

• Turning off ASP.Net WebForms authentication for one sub-directory

  - by Keith

  I have a large enterprise application containing both WebForms and MVC pages. It has existing authentication and authorisation settings that I don't want to change. The WebForms authentication is configured in the web.config: <authentication mode="Forms"> <forms blah... blah... blah /> </authentication> <authorization> <deny users="?" /> </authorization> Fairly standard so far. I have a REST service that is part of this big application and I want to use HTTP authentication instead for this one service. So, when a user attempts to get JSON data from the REST service it returns an HTTP 401 status and a WWW-Authenticate header. If they respond with a correctly formed HTTP Authorization response it lets them in. The problem is that WebForms overrides this at a low level - if you return 401 (Unauthorised) it overrides that with a 302 (redirection to login page). That's fine in the browser but useless for a REST service. I want to turn off the authentication setting in the web.config: <location path="rest"> <system.web> <authentication mode="None" /> <authorization><allow users="?" /></authorization> </system.web> </location> The authorisation bit works fine, but when I try to change the authentication I get an exception: It is an error to use a section registered as allowDefinition='MachineToApplication' beyond application level. I'm configuring this at application level though - it's in the root web.config How do I override the authentication so that all of the rest of the site uses WebForms authentication and this one directory uses none? This is similar to another question: 401 response code for json requests with ASP.NET MVC, but I'm not looking for the same solution - I don't want to just remove the WebForms authentication and add new custom code globally, there's far to much risk and work involved. I want to change just the one directory in configuration.

  Read the article

• Outlook Anywhere inconsistencies with authentication methods

  - by gravyface

  So I've read this question and attempted just about every other workaround I've found online. Problem seems completely illogical to me, anyways: SBS 2011, vanilla install; haven't touched anything in IIS or Exchange outside of what's been done through the checklist (brand new domain, completely new customer) except to import an existing wildcard certificate for *.example.com (which is valid, Remote Web Workplace and Outlook Web Access work fine). On the two test machines and one production machine running a mixture of Windows XP Pro, Windows 7 and Outlook 2003 through to 2010, I've had no problem saving the password after configuring Outlook Anywhere using the wrong authentication method. I repeat, I have had no issues using the wrong authentication method on these test machines; password saves the first time, no problem, can verify it exists in the credentials manager (Start Run control userpasswords2), close Outlook, reboot, go make a sammie, come back, credentials are still saved. When I say wrong, it's because I was choosing NTLM and Exchange (under Exchange Console Server Configuration Client Access) was set by default to use Basic. On two completely different machines setup by a co-worker, they had (under my guidance) used NTLM as well... except that frustratingly, Outlook would always ask for a password. One machine was Windows XP with Outlook 2010, the other was Windows 7 with Outlook 2003. When these two machines were set to use Basic -- the correct settings -- the option to save was there and now works without issue. Puzzled by how my machines could possibly work with the wrong authentication, I then went into one of them and changed the authentication method to Basic. Now here's where it gets a little crazy: if I go under Outlook and change the authentication to use the correct setting (Basic) it fails to save the password and Outlook prompts every time (without a "remember me" checkbox). I have not had a chance to change it to Basic on the other two machines to see if this is just a fluke or not, but something just isn't right here. My two hunches are either a missing/installed KB Update or perhaps a local security policy. I should add that none of the 5 test machines in the equation here have ever been joined to the domain.

  Read the article

• Should BASIC continue to be recommended for non-programmers and beginners?

  - by Casey

  I just came across a new BASIC implementation for Google Android application called Simple. You can read about it here: http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2009/07/programming-made-simple.html Clearly, a lot of time and effort has been recently put into enabling this functionality for Android. Should the software industry continue to encourage non-programmers into learning BASIC, or are modern languages like C#, Python, Ruby more appropriate at this time?

  Read the article

• Laptop authentication/logon via accelerometer tilt, flip, and twist

  - by wonsungi

  Looking for another application/technology: A number of years ago, I read about a novel way to authenticate and log on to a laptop. The user simply had to hold the laptop in the air and execute a simple series of tilts and flips to the laptop. By logging accelerometer data, this creates a unique signature for the user. Even if an attacker watched and repeated the exact same motions, the attacker could not replicate the user's movements closely enough. I am looking for information about this technology again, but I can't find anything. It may have been an actual feature on a laptop, or it may have just been a research project. I think I read about it in a magazine like Wired. Does anyone have more information about authentication via unique accelerometer signatures? Here are the closest articles I have been able to find: Knock-based commands for your Linux laptop Shake Well Before Use: Authentication Based on Accelerometer Data[PDF] Inferring Identity using Accelerometers in Television Remote Controls User Evaluation of Lightweight User Authentication with a Single Tri-Axis Accelerometer Identifying Users of Portable Devices from Gait Pattern with Accelerometers[PDF] 3D Signature Biometrics Using Curvature Moments[PDF] MoViSign: A novel authentication mechanism using mobile virtual signatures

  Read the article

• IIS 6 Windows Authentication in ASP.Net app fails

  - by Kjensen

  I am trying to install an ASP.Net app on an IIS6 webserver. The site requires the user to authenticate with windows, and this works on several other apps on the same server. In IIS I have enabled anonymous access and windows authentication. In web.config, authentication is set to: <authentication mode="Windows"/> and authorization...: <authorization> <allow roles="Users"/> <deny users="*"/> </authorization> Ie. allow all users in role "Users" and deny everybody else. This is the approach that is working with several other apps on the same server. If I run the site, I am prompted for username and password. If I remove the line: <deny users="*"/> I can access the site and everything works - but the user credentials are not passed to the site (Page.User.Identity.Name returns a blank string in ASP.Net). The site has identical (inherited) file permissions as other working sites on the server. The only difference in authentication/authorization between this site and the other working sites is, that this runs Asp.Net 4 (but there are other working asp.net 4 sites on the server as well). What am I missing here? Where should I look?

  Read the article

• Laptop authentication/logon via accelometer tilt, flip, and twist

  - by wonsungi

  Looking for another application/technology: A number of years ago, I read about a novel way to authenticate and log on to a laptop. The user simply had to hold the laptop in the air and execute a simple series of tilts and flips to the laptop. By logging accelerometer data, this creates a unique signature for the user. Even if an attacker watched and repeated the exact same motions, the attacker could not replicate the user's movements closely enough. I am looking for information about this technology again, but I can't find anything. It may have been an actual feature on a laptop, or it may have just been a research project. I think I read about it in a magazine like Wired. Does anyone have more information about authentication via unique accelerometer signatures? Here are the closest articles I have been able to find: Knock-based commands for your Linux laptop Shake Well Before Use: Authentication Based on Accelerometer Data[PDF] Inferring Identity using Accelerometers in Television Remote Controls User Evaluation of Lightweight User Authentication with a Single Tri-Axis Accelerometer Identifying Users of Portable Devices from Gait Pattern with Accelerometers[PDF] 3D Signature Biometrics Using Curvature Moments[PDF] MoViSign: A novel authentication mechanism using mobile virtual signatures

  Read the article

• IIS7 authentication

  - by Kev

  To give our user's the ability to protect content on their IIS6 sites we used a tool called IISPassword which emulates .htaccess to provide Basic authentication. There isn't support for IISPassword on IIS7 at the moment. Is there an equivalent mechanism I can use built into IIS7 instead? I'm well aware of ASP.NET Forms Authentication, but I need a way for users deploying non-ASP.NET content (such as PHP, Perl, images etc) to be able to use Basic authentication but not have to write code to achieve this. Is this possible?

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008, IIS7 and Windows Authentication

  - by Chalkey

  We currently have a development server set up which we are trying to test some Windows authentication ASP.NET code on. We have turned on Windows Authentication in IIS7 on Windows Server 2008 R2 fine, and it asks the user for a username and password as excepted, but the problem is it doesn't appear to accept any credentials. This code for example... Protected Sub Page_Load(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Me.Load Page.Title = "Home page for " + User.Identity.Name End Sub ...always returns an empty string. One theory we have is that we dont have Active Directory installed as of yet, we are just testing this by logging on via the machine name not a domain. Is this type of authentication only applicatable to domains (if so we can probably install Active Directory and some test accounts) - or is it possible to get the user identity when logging in using the machine name? Ideally we would like to be able to test this on our local machines (Windows 7 Pro) using our own accounts (again these aren't on a domain) and IIS but this has the same issue as our dev server. Thanks,

  Read the article

• MOSS 2007 authentication

  - by Dante

  Hi, I have a MOSS web site configured with Windows Integrated Authentication. I added a couple of local users in the server, added them to Sharepoint groups, and I can log into my site (as long as the local user is part of the administrators group... odd). If I add a domain user to the Owners group, I can't access the site with it. Anybody knows what must be done to open access to domain users in a site configured with Windows Authentication or Basic Authentication? Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• External USB Fingerprint Reader for Pre-boot Authentication for Dell Laptop

  - by cop1152

  My company just purchased several Dell Latitude E6500 laptops with docking stations and external monitors. These laptops have a fingerprint scanner located next to the keyboard. DOCKED users who prefer to use the included fingerprint scanner for pre-boot authentication are forced to open their laptop in order to access the scanner. This is an inconvenience when the laptop is docked. We are looking for an external, usb fingerprint scanner, that will work with the current preboot authentication setup. I assume that this scanner would have to access the existing credentials for authentication....wherever they are stored. So we would require something that would work PRE-BOOT, use the existing credentials, and not interfere with usage when the machine was not docked, such as when the laptop is being used at home. Does anyone have experience with this scenario? Thanks.

  Read the article

• IIS: redirect to a webpage if authentication fails

  - by DrStalker

  We have an IIS site (MOSS 2007) that uses Windows Authentication. When a user that has forgotten their password tries to login the servers keeps sending 401 requests. This means on IE the user gets three prompts before IE displays a blank page, on Firefox the user is prompted over and over until they give up. We would like to change the behavior so if a user fails to login three times in a row we send them a redirect to a different site, instead of another 401 Forms authentication is not an option; the site has to remain on windows authentication to allow for SSO capabilities and certain sharepoint functions. Is there any way to tweak the IIS behavior to do this?

  Read the article

• Cannot connect to a VPN server - authentication failed with error code 691

  - by stacker

  When trying to connect to a VPN server, I get the 691 error code on the client, which say: Error Description: 691: The remote connection was denied because the user name and password combination you provided is not recognized, or the selected authentication protocol is not permitted on the remote access server. Now, I validated that the username and password are correct, and tried to login with domain name and without. I also installed a certification to use with the IKEv2 security type. I also validated that the VPN server support security method. But I cannot login. In the server log I get this log: Network Policy Server denied access to a user. The user DomainName\UserName connected from IP address but failed an authentication attempt due to the following reason: The remote connection was denied because the user name and password combination you provided is not recognized, or the selected authentication protocol is not permitted on the remote access server. Any idea of what can I do? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• apache redirect to https for basic auth

  - by shreddd

  I have a tricky variation on an old problem. I have an apache based site that should generally be accessed via http/port 80. However for certain areas protected areas that require authentication (designated by .htaccess), I want to be able to redirect the user the https/port 443. The key here is that I want this to always happen - i.e. I don't want to have to rewrite each htaccess file with a redirect. I only want to enforce this for basic authentication and the protected areas are scattered all over the site. Is it possible to somehow redirect all basic authentication requests to the SSL host?

  Read the article

• AD Authentication fails in local machine but works from Production server

  - by jesu

  Hi i am using a AD authentication and facing 2 problems. Authentication works fine when i move the application to a production server but FAILS in my LOCAL machine. Both local machine and server are in same domain and used same domain account logging in. When the machine logs in the users with domain account , AD authentication from the application says that the account is not valid. Please suggest me , if you can find out the problem and ways to recover. thanks in advance! Regards jesu

  Read the article

• Improving Windows Authentication performance on IIS

  - by flalar

  We're struggling with performance issues with a ASP.NET MVC site that is using Windows Authentication. Response time is very slow on the first request to the site when the user is being authenticated. Further, every time the Authorization header is sent from the browser the response time increases with many seconds. The same issue occurs for both executed files and static content like CSS and JS. Access to the application is restricted to users within a certain role and we are now planning to allow access to static files for all authenticated users to see if that helps. The authentication method in use is NTLM. How should we go forward in pinpointing why authentication decreases performance drastically?

  Read the article

• How to stop LDAP authentication in ubuntu?

  - by Kery

  My OS is Ubuntu 12.04 and use LDAP authentication. Now I meet a problem that another people want to access my system. But he is in another domain so he can't login. And I have no right to change this configuration in LDAP server. So I have to choose a workaround to solve this problem, for example close the LDAP authentication and use local authentication (I have root right in my system) or create another account which is not registered in LDAP server (I did this but can't change the created account password. The error is 'password reset by root is not supported'). Of course any other suggestion is appreciated! Than you in advance!

  Read the article

• DCOM Authentication Fails to use Kerberos, Falls back to NTLM

  - by Asa Yeamans

  I have a webservice that is written in Classic ASP. In this web service it attempts to create a VirtualServer.Application object on another server via DCOM. This fails with Permission Denied. However I have another component instantiated in this same webservice on the same remote server, that is created without problems. This component is a custom-in house component. The webservice is called from a standalone EXE program that calls it via WinHTTP. It has been verified that WinHTTP is authenticating with Kerberos to the webservice successfully. The user authenticated to the webservice is the Administrator user. The EXE to webservice authentication step is successful and with kerberos. I have verified the DCOM permissions on the remote computer with DCOMCNFG. The default limits allow administrators both local and remote activation, both local and remote access, and both local and remote launch. The default component permissions allow the same. This has been verified. The individual component permissions for the working component are set to defaults. The individual component permissions for the VirtualServer.Application component are also set to defaults. Based upon these settings, the webservice should be able to instantiate and access the components on the remote computer. Setting up a Wireshark trace while running both tests, one with the working component and one with the VirtualServer.Application component reveals an intresting behavior. When the webservice is instantiating the working, custom, component, I can see the request on the wire to the RPCSS endpoint mapper first perform the TCP connect sequence. Then I see it perform the bind request with the appropriate security package, in this case kerberos. After it obtains the endpoint for the working DCOM component, it connects to the DCOM endpoint authenticating again via Kerberos, and it successfully is able to instantiate and communicate. On the failing VirtualServer.Application component, I again see the bind request with kerberos go to the RPCC endpoing mapper successfully. However, when it then attempts to connect to the endpoint in the Virtual Server process, it fails to connect because it only attempts to authenticate with NTLM, which ultimately fails, because the webservice does not have access to the credentials to perform the NTLM hash. Why is it attempting to authenticate via NTLM? Additional Information: Both components run on the same server via DCOM Both components run as Local System on the server Both components are Win32 Service components Both components have the exact same launch/access/activation DCOM permissions Both Win32 Services are set to run as Local System The permission denied is not a permissions issue as far as I can tell, it is an authentication issue. Permission is denied because NTLM authentication is used with a NULL username instead of Kerberos Delegation Constrained delegation is setup on the server hosting the webservice. The server hosting the webservice is allowed to delegate to rpcss/dcom-server-name The server hosting the webservice is allowed to delegate to vssvc/dcom-server-name The dcom server is allowed to delegate to rpcss/webservice-server The SPN's registered on the dcom server include rpcss/dcom-server-name and vssvc/dcom-server-name as well as the HOST/dcom-server-name related SPNs The SPN's registered on the webservice-server include rpcss/webservice-server and the HOST/webservice-server related SPNs Anybody have any Ideas why the attempt to create a VirtualServer.Application object on a remote server is falling back to NTLM authentication causing it to fail and get permission denied? Additional information: When the following code is run in the context of the webservice, directly via a testing-only, just-developed COM component, it fails on the specified line with Access Denied. COSERVERINFO csi; csi.dwReserved1=0; csi.pwszName=L"terahnee.rivin.net"; csi.pAuthInfo=NULL; csi.dwReserved2=NULL; hr=CoGetClassObject(CLSID_VirtualServer, CLSCTX_ALL, &csi, IID_IClassFactory, (void **) &pClsFact); if(FAILED( hr )) goto error1; // Fails here with HRESULT_FROM_WIN32(ERROR_ACCESS_DENIED) hr=pClsFact->CreateInstance(NULL, IID_IUnknown, (void **) &pUnk); if(FAILED( hr )) goto error2; Ive also noticed that in the Wireshark Traces, i see the attempt to connect to the service process component only requests NTLMSSP authentication, it doesnt even attmept to use kerberos. This suggests that for some reason the webservice thinks it cant use kerberos...

  Read the article

• SQL Server Authentication vs Windows Authentication

  - by Nandu

  Hi, I am a SQL Server newbie and would really appreciate any help. I have created a new login (test2) with sql server authentication and granted select & vierw definition permission on another schema (test1) to test2. I am however not able to see the objects of test1 in the object explorer. However I can select the objects from the Query Window. Since this new login is being used to develop reports the user would like to view the objects in the Object Explorer. Another user test3 created using windows authentication and similar permissions is able to see test1's objects in the explorer. Please let me if this is the cause and if not how can help test2 see the objects in Object Explorer.

  Read the article

• Should I manage authentication on my own if the alternative is very low in usability and I am already managing roles?

  - by rumtscho

  As a small in-house dev department, we only have experience with developing applications for our intranet. We use the existing Active Directory for user account management. It contains the accounts of all company employees and many (but not all) of the business partners we have a cooperation with. Now, the top management wants a technology exchange application, and I am the lead dev on the new project. Basically, it is a database containing our know-how, with a web frontend. Our employees, our cooperating business partners, and people who wish to become our cooperating business partners should have access to it and see what technologies we have, so they can trade for them with the department which owns them. The technologies are not patented, but very valuable to competitors, so the department bosses are paranoid about somebody unauthorized gaining access to their technology description. This constraint necessitates a nightmarishly complicated multi-dimensional RBAC-hybrid model. As the Active Directory doesn't even contain all the information needed to infer the roles I use, I will have to manage roles plus per-technology per-user granted access exceptions within my system. The current plan is to use Active Directory for authentication. This will result in a multi-hour registration process for our business partners where the database owner has to manually create logins in our Active Directory and send them credentials. If I manage the logins in my own system, we could improve the usability a lot, for example by letting people have an active (but unprivileged) account as soon as they register. It seems to me that, after I am having a users table in the DB anyway (and managing ugly details like storing historical user IDs so that recycled user IDs within the Active Directory don't unexpectedly get rights to view someone's technologies), the additional complexity from implementing authentication functionality will be minimal. Therefore, I am starting to lean towards doing my own user login management and forgetting the AD altogether. On the other hand, I see some reasons to stay with Active Directory. First, the conventional wisdom I have heard from experienced programmers is to not do your own user management if you can avoid it. Second, we have code I can reuse for connection to the active directory, while I would have to code the authentication if done in-system (and my boss has clearly stated that getting the project delivered on time has much higher priority than delivering a system with high usability). Third, I am not a very experienced developer (this is my first lead position) and have never done user management before, so I am afraid that I am overlooking some important reasons to use the AD, or that I am underestimating the amount of work left to do my own authentication. I would like to know if there are more reasons to go with the AD authentication mechanism. Specifically, if I want to do my own authentication, what would I have to implement besides a secure connection for the login screen (which I would need anyway even if I am only transporting the pw to the AD), lookup of a password hash and a mechanism for password recovery (which will probably include manual identity verification, so no need for complex mTAN-like solutions)? And, if you have experience with such security-critical systems, which one would you use and why?

  Read the article

• Apache, Tomcat 5 and problem with HTTP basic auth

  - by Juha Syrjälä

  I have setup a Tomcat with a webapp that uses http basic auth in some of its URLs. There is a Apache server in front of the Tomcat. I have setup Apache as a proxy like this (all traffic should go directly to tomcat): /etc/httpd/conf.d/proxy_ajp.conf: LoadModule proxy_ajp_module modules/mod_proxy_ajp.so ProxyPass / ajp://localhost:8009/ ProxyPassReverse / ajp://localhost:8009/ There is a webapp installed to root of Tomcat (ROOT.war), so I should be able to use http://localhost/ to access my webapp. But it is not working with http basic auth. The problem is that everything works until I try to access URL that are protected by the HTTP basic auth. URLs without authentication work just fine. When accessing this url via apache I am getting an error message from Apache. If I access the same URL directly from tomcat, everything works just fine. I am getting this to Apache error log: [Wed Sep 01 21:34:01 2010] [error] proxy: dialog to [::1]:8009 (localhost) failed access log looks like this: ::1 - - [01/Sep/2010:21:34:01 +0300] "GET /protected_path/ HTTP/1.0" 503 360 "-" "w3m/0.5.2" I am using: Fedora release 13 (Goddard) httpd-2.2.16-1.fc13.x86_64 tomcat5-5.5.27-7.4.fc12.noarch The basic auth is implemented in the webapp (not in Apache or Tomcat). The webapp is actually implemented in Scala/Lift, but that shouldn't matter. The auth works if I access the tomcat directly. Error message that I am getting from Apache. It is curious that the title is Unauthorized and not Internal error: Unauthorized The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later. Apache/2.2.16 (Fedora) Server at my.server.name.com Port 80 It could be that Apache is seeing a some thing else than 200 OK response and thinks that it is an error when it actually should pass the received 401 Unauthorized response directly to browser. If this is the problem, how to fix it?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >