Search Results

Search found 46494 results on 1860 pages for 'public key encryption'.

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

Page 5/1860 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Unable to Uninstall Exchange 2010 ("Internet Newsgroups" public folder)

    - by helplessITguy
    I am trying to uninstall Exchange 2010, before installing a new instance of Exchange 2010 SP1 on a different server. (Our production Exchange server is 2003) We have met all of the Mailbox uninstall prereqs except for the following: Error: Uninstall cannot continue. Database 'Public Folder Database 1579722947': The public folder database "Public Folder Database 1579722947" contains folder replicas. Before deleting the public folder database, remove the folders or move the replicas to another public folder database. For detailed instructions about how to remove a public folder database, see http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=81409&clcid=0x409. Recommended Action: We have been able to delete all Public Folders in the 2010 storage group except for the one (previously replicated) folder - "Internet Newsgroups". How can I delete this folder without impacting public folders on the production Exchange 2003 server? We have: verified permissions to the public folder removed replication for the folder on (on the Exch 2010 server) tried PowerShell scripts: RemoveReplicaFromPFRecursive Get-PublicFolder -Server "\" -Recurse -ResultSize:Unlimited | Remove-PublicFolder -Server -Recurse -ErrorAction:SilentlyContinue

    Read the article

  • SQl server 2008 permission and encryption

    - by Paranjai
    i have made columns in some of the tables encrypted in sql server 2008. Now as i am a db owner i have the access to encode and decode the data using the symmetric key and certificate. But some other users have only currently datareader and datawriter rights ,and when they execute any SP referring the logic which uses the key and certificate "User does has not right on the certificate to execute". What rights / exact permission should i grant them just to solve this problem

    Read the article

  • TDE Tablespace Encryption 11.2.0.1 Certified with EBS 12

    - by Steven Chan
    Oracle Advanced Security is an optional licenced Oracle 11g Database add-on.  Oracle Advanced Security Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) offers two different features:  column encryption and tablespace encryption.  11.2.0.1 TDE Column encryption was certified with E-Business Suite 12 as part of our overall 11.2.0.1 database certification.  As of today, 11.2.0.1 TDE Tablespace encryption is now certified with Oracle E-Business Suite Release 12. What is Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) ? Oracle Advanced Security Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) allows you to protect data at rest. TDE helps address privacy and PCI requirements by encrypting personally identifiable information (PII) such as Social Security numbers and credit card numbers. TDE is completely transparent to existing applications with no triggers, views or other application changes required. Data is transparently encrypted when written to disk and transparently decrypted after an application user has successfully authenticated and passed all authorization checks. Authorization checks include verifying the user has the necessary select and update privileges on the application table and checking Database Vault, Label Security and Virtual Private Database enforcement policies.

    Read the article

  • pix 501 encryption license reduces inside hosts to 10

    - by user7764
    Hi I have an unlimted pix 501 with no encryption license installed. I have applied for and received a 3DES license. When I install the 3DES license, the inside hosts goes from unlimited to 10. Thankfully I had the presence of mind to keep a note of the old activation key. Is this normal behaviour? I would have thought not as I bought the pix as unlimited. Thanks Cammy

    Read the article

  • How safe is the quicken encryption of files?

    - by jmvidal
    Quicken has a password-protection option where you type in a password and your file is encrypted. How good is this encryption and how does it depend on the length or complexity of my password? A google search reveals a lot of "quicken password recovery" programs, like this one, which make me feel like the password is just for keeping the really dumb criminals away, not the ones with large computers.

    Read the article

  • Stop ssh client from offering all the public keys it can find?

    - by Rory McCann
    Like most sysadmins I use openssh all the time. I have about a dozen ssh keys, I like to have a different ssh key for each host. However this causes a problem when I am connecting to a host for the first time, and all I have is a password. I want to just connect to the host using a password, no ssh key in this case. However the ssh client will offer all the public keys in my ~/.ssh/ (I know this from looking at the output of ssh -v). Since I have so many, I will get disconnected for too many authentication failures. Is there some way to tell my ssh client to not offer all the ssh keys?

    Read the article

  • Java Encryption issue

    - by r1k0
    I am using PBE encryption to encrypt and decrypt some text on an Android application but I get the BadPaddingException: with the "pad block corrupted" message when I use the wrong private key to decrypt the text. My question, since I am not well versed with encryption in Java, is if this is the normal behavior of the encryption API, because I need to do some logic in the case when the wrong key is entered, but I do not know the private key, nor do I store it anywhere (storing just the encrypted and decrypted check text). Thanks, Mihai

    Read the article

  • sftp and public keys

    - by Lizard
    I am trying to sftp into an a server hosted by someone else. To make sure this worked I did the standard sftp [email protected] i was promted with the password and that worked fine. I am setting up a cron script to send a file once a week so have given them our public key which they claim to have added to their authorized_keys file. I now try sftp [email protected] again and I am still prompted for a password, but now the password doesn't work... Connecting to [email protected]... [email protected]'s password: Permission denied, please try again. [email protected]'s password: Permission denied, please try again. [email protected]'s password: Permission denied (publickey,password). Couldn't read packet: Connection reset by peer I did notice however that if I simply pressed enter (no password) it logged me in fine... So here are my questions: Is there a way to check what privatekey/pulbickey pair my sftp connection is using? Is it possible to specify what key pair to use? If all is setup correctly (using correct key pair and added to authorized files) why am I being asked to enter a blank password? Thanks for your help in advance! UPDATE I have just run sftp -vvv [email protected] .... debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password debug3: start over, passed a different list publickey,password debug3: preferred gssapi-with-mic,publickey,keyboard-interactive,password debug3: authmethod_lookup publickey debug3: remaining preferred: keyboard-interactive,password debug3: authmethod_is_enabled publickey debug1: Next authentication method: publickey debug1: Offering public key: /root/.ssh/id_rsa debug3: send_pubkey_test debug2: we sent a publickey packet, wait for reply debug1: Server accepts key: pkalg ssh-rsa blen 277 debug2: input_userauth_pk_ok: SHA1 fp 45:1b:e7:b6:33:41:1c:bb:0f:e3:c1:0f:1b:b0:d5:e4:28:a3:3f:0e debug3: sign_and_send_pubkey debug1: read PEM private key done: type RSA debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,password debug1: Trying private key: /root/.ssh/id_dsa debug3: no such identity: /root/.ssh/id_dsa debug2: we did not send a packet, disable method debug3: authmethod_lookup password debug3: remaining preferred: ,password debug3: authmethod_is_enabled password debug1: Next authentication method: password It seems to suggest that it tries to use the public key... What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Keyboard-shortcut key-press-detection sensitivity settings

    - by Juve
    last week I switched from Ubuntu 10.10 to 12.04 and after setting up my keyboard shortcuts, e.g., CTRL+ALT+E for my favorite editor and CTRL+ALT+X for the terminal, I noticed that the behavior when pressing the appropriate keys changed somehow. I know this is very subjective and I am not 100% percent sure if I am suddenly just too lazy when using my keyboard, but here is what I noticed: To run your shortcuts, you usually press the modifiers first and in addition press the alphanum key. Now, if I hold the modifiers down very consciously and press the alphanum key afterwards everything works fine. However, I noticed that I may often release the modifiers a bit too early. In Ubuntu 10.10 (metacity/compiz) my keyboard shortcuts would still execute and my tools would pop up. This does not work anymore in 12.04. Nevertheless, I still believe the old behavior to be more intuitive and would like to have it back. I a nutshell: Is there a parameter to control the shortcut-key-press detection behavior? I already searched the ubuntu keyboard options and searched for "keyboard" in gconf-editor but could not find any hints so far.

    Read the article

  • Looking for a USB Thumbdrive / Flash drive encryption solution (not TrueCrypt)

    - by Max888
    I am looking for a USB Thumbdrive / Flash drive encryption solution. I have searched the net but I have never come accross a solution which meets the following: Must handle at least 4GB volume If possible, fully portable (no install required required) Does not require admin rights in order to access/write encrypted files on the flash drive Does not corrupt data should the flash drive is removed from a USB port and the data is in a 'unencrypted' status Data is automatically encrypted if the flash drive is removed from a USB port and the data is in a 'unencrypted' status Portable apps must be able to run from the 'unencrypted' volume (in non-admin mode) PLEASE do not mention TrueCrypt as I am not considering (especially for wish list #3) Many thanks! Update 5th October 2009: Still unresolved.

    Read the article

  • Office 365 E3 with Exchange Hosted Encryption (EHE)

    - by Stephen
    I hope this is the right forum for posting this question. I have a client who wants to move to Office 365. They are currently running on a trial of Office 365 E3 plan. My staff are now also using Office 365 E3 via the internal use licences provided as part of the MS Cloud Partner benefits. We've search high and low, spoken to about 15 different people at Office 365 Support, as well as my local distributor's MS Product Manager, but we cannot seem to find out exactly how to purchase/subscribe to the Exchange Hosted Encryption (EHE) service, or how to configure/use it from Office 365. Does anybody out there have any insight into how we can setup and use the EHE service? Thanks! Stephen

    Read the article

  • openSuse full disk encryption

    - by djechelon
    I'm a proud Suser. I'm about to reinstall 12.2 on my ASUS N76VZ (UEFI x64 laptop). Since I'm very sensitive about laptop security against theft or unwanted inspection, I chose to use BitLocker with USB dongle in Windows 7. When installing Suse the last time I found that only the home partition (separated from root) was capable of being encrypted. Does Suse offer a full disk encryption solution like BitLocker that I haven't discovered yet? Or is encrypting home partition the only way to protect data? Encrypting only home is feasible as one stores personal data in home, but I still would like to encrypt the whole thing! Also, using a hardware token (no TPM available) for unlocking is preferred to password, if possible! Thanks

    Read the article

  • Encryption over gigabit carrier ethernet

    - by Roy
    I would like to encrypt traffic between two data centres. Communication between the sites is provided as a standard provider bridge (s-vlan/802.1ad), so that our local vlan tags (c-vlan/802.1q) are preserved on the trunk. The communication traverse several layer 2 hops in the provider network. Border switches on both sides are Catalyst 3750-X with the MACSec service module, but I assume MACSec is out of the question, as I don't see any way to ensure L2 equality between the switches over a trunk, although it may be possible over a provider bridge. MPLS (using EoMPLS) would certainly allow this option, but is not available in this case. Either way, equipment can always be replaced to accommodate technology and topology choices. How do I go about finding viable technology options that can provide layer 2 point-to-point encryption over ethernet carrier networks?

    Read the article

  • What does the NTFS encryption protect against?

    - by Ray
    I have encrypted a folder from the (PropertiesAdvancedEncrypt contents to secure data). However when I change my user profile to another one which is also an administrator the folder seems to be accessible as if nothing happened. What exactly does this encryption protect against. I'm looking to encrypt folders that no other user, or another OS or even if the HDD were to be removed and plugged to another device will be accessible. My OS is Windows 7 Ultimate. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Encryption container for multiple people

    - by Adam M.
    I was just wondering if anyone may have come across a product that would allow for a container based encryption to be used by multiple people, in a Windows Server setup. I wanted to see if there might be something like a truecrypt that could handle being accessed by two accounts? Looking to see if there is a product that would have such properties that would allow only a hand full of users access to the content of the location, but allow for the files to be backed up a normal backup system. That way if a file had to be restored, the container could be redirected to another location for one of the users to get access to it? This would allow for access to be restricted beyond the NTFS and file share permissons

    Read the article

  • Mixed surrogate composite key insert in JPA 2.0, PostgreSQL and Hibernate 3.5

    - by Gerald
    First off, we are using JPA 2.0 and Hibernate 3.5 as persistence provider on a PostgreSQL database. We successfully use the sequence of the database via the JPA 2.0 annotations as an auto-generated value for single-field-surrogate-keys and all works fine. Now we are implementing a bi-temporal database-scheme that requires a mixed key in the following manner: Table 1: id (pk, integer, auto-generated-sequence) validTimeBegin (pk, dateTime) validTimeEnd (dateTime) firstName (varChar) Now we have a problem. You see, if we INSERT a new element, the field id is auto-generated and that's fine. Only, if we want to UPDATE the field within this scheme, then we have to change the validTimeBegin column WITHOUT changing the id-field and insert it as a new row like so: BEFORE THE UPDATE OF THE ROW: |---|-------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------| | id| validTimeBegin | validTimeEnd | firstName | |---|-------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------| | 1| 2010-05-01-10:00:00.000 | NULL | Gerald | |---|-------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------| AFTER THE UPDATE OF THE ROW happening at exactly 2010-05-01-10:35:01.788 server-time: (we update the person with the id:1 to reflect his new first name...) |---|-------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------| | id| validTimeBegin | validTimeEnd | firstName | |---|-------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------| | 1| 2010-05-01-10:00:00.000 | 2010-05-01-10:35:01.788 | Gerald | |---|-------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------| | 1| 2010-05-01-10:35:01.788 | NULL | Jerry | |---|-------------------------|-------------------------|-------------------| So our problem is, that this doesn't work at all using an auto-generated-sequence for the field id because when inserting a new row then the id ALWAYS is auto-generated although it really is part of a composite key which should sometimes behave differently. So my question is: Is there a way to tell hibernate via JPA to stop auto-generating the id-field in the case I want to generate a new variety of the same person and go on as usual in every other case or do I have to take over the whole id-generation with custom code? Thanks in advance, Gerald

    Read the article

  • Natural vs surrogate keys on support tables

    - by Bugeo
    I have read many articles about the battle between natural versus surrogate primary keys. I agree in the use of surrogate keys to identify records of tables whose contents are created by the user. But in the case of supporting tables what should I use? For example, in a hypothetical table "orderStates". If you use a natural key would have the following data: TABLE ORDERSTATES {ID: "NEW", NAME: "New"} {ID: "MANAGEMENT" NAME: "Management"} {ID: "SHIPPED" NAME: "Shipped"} If I use a surrogate key would have the following data: TABLE ORDERSTATES {ID: 1 CODE: "NEW", NAME: "New"} {ID: 2 CODE: "MANAGEMENT" NAME: "Management"} {ID: 3 CODE: "SHIPPED" NAME: "Shipped"} Now let's take an example: a user enters a new order. In the case in which use natural keys, in the code I can write this: newOrder.StateOrderId = "NEW"; With the surrogate keys instead every time I have an additional step. stateOrderId_NEW = .... I retrieve the id corresponding to the recod code "NEW" newOrder.StateOrderId = stateOrderId_NEW; The same will happen every time I have to move the order in a new status. So, in this case, what are the reason to chose one key type vs the other one?

    Read the article

  • Internet key not always detected by the operating system

    - by Carlo Gisonni
    I've over the time, tried and installed several versions of Ubuntu. Those versions I like more than others are: Lubuntu and Kubuntu. Everything seems to work properly but the Internet key. I do not know if it may depends on the weather, the moonphase or the tides but the Internet key is not always detected by the system and is sometimes very difficult to establish a connection when I do need to connect to internet. Without applyng any change sometimes works sometimes not. I've so far not found the solution and I think is a quite strange behaviour of the operating system as if the settings are wrong, should never work Awaiting a kind answer from those of you willing to help.

    Read the article

  • How to obtain a S/MIME certificate for e-mail encryption?

    - by mghg
    There are parties, e.g. enterprises, that uses S/MIME certificates for e-mail encryption. To my understanding Thunderbird has support by default for S/MIME. But I have not found a way to obtain a personal S/MIME certificate to be used on a Ubuntu system. Thus my question: How to obtain a S/MIME certificate for e-mail encryption? Moreover, is it correct to believe that Thunderbird has support by default for S/MIME? I am fully aware of PGP, GnuPG and OpenPGP for public-key cryptography and secure e-mail communication. In my opinion, it is very useful that OpenPGP is installed by default on Ubuntu systems. But I need to find a method to communicate securely with parties that use S/MIME and not PGP/GnuPG/OpenPGP.

    Read the article

  • Super Key doesn't work on Kubuntu 12.04

    - by zigma80
    I have Kubuntu 12.04 installed on HP 430 Notebook PC. My problem is that when I press Super Key, nothing happened. Some of my Fn keys did not work either. I have changed the Keyboard Model in System SettingsHardwareInput DevicesKeyboard to Hewlett Packard Internet keyboard but doesn't seems to help. I have also Compiz-Config-Setting-Manager installed but I don't know how to make the right keyboard setting. I would like to have the Super Key launch Start Menu Launcher as in MS-Windows, is it possible ... Thanks for the help

    Read the article

  • Does GPG allow encryption of multiple files using a wild card like *filename*? [on hold]

    - by user47427
    I am trying to automate the encryption of files on a windows server using a .bat file I created. As long as the filename is hardcoded in the .bat file this works. I want to encrypt numerous files using this .bat file but files are not encrypted when I use wildcards in the filename like filename.txt. I've been trying various version of the following command at the DOS prompt to no avail. All attempts have returned syntax for usage. C:\gpg -v --batch -- yes --always-trust -e -r <encryption-key> *part-of-the-file-name* usage: gpg [options] --encrypt [filename] I received the same usage message with this command: C:\gpg -v --batch -- yes --always-trust -e -r --encrypt part-of-the-file-name I tried without the -v and some of the other options and I still received the same message. I have spent hours today searching the internet for an answer and I can't find one anywhere? Please help.

    Read the article

  • Using our own certificate authority for business email encryption

    - by LumenAlbum
    I've read the available similar questions on serverfault but I haven't quite found a definite answer to the security aspect of it - hence here's my question: I'm administrator of an office working with tax data and we want to start using certificate-based eMail encryption with our clients. Considering the prices for issued certificates by VeriSign & Co I was wondering if we couldn't issue the necessary certificates with a certificate authority of our own. I realize that they do not offer the trust hierarchy that commercial certificates do but I don't see why we would need that. Most of our clients have small businesses and only 20% of them even exchange data with us via email. So if we were to issue certificates for those 20% and our employees, that would enable us to use encrypted emails. Of course they would have to trust our certificate authority and thus once receive our public root certificate. But if we would hand them out to them (or install it) personally, they'd know that it really is our certificate. Is thery a huge security risk that I am missing here? As long as nobody has access to our certificate authority server nobody should be able to interfere with security, right? And the client certificates would be generated and handed out by us, as well... Please advise me if I am making an error in judgement here and thank you in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to Disable Home Folder Encryption After Installing Ubuntu

    - by Chris Hoffman
    Ubuntu offers to encrypt your home directory during installation. The encryption has some drawbacks – there’s a performance penalty and recovering your files is more difficult. If you change your mind later, you can remove the encryption without reinstalling Ubuntu. The process of removing the encryption involves creating a backup copy of your home directory without encryption, deleting the existing home directory, removing the encryption utilities, and moving the unencrypted copy back into place. HTG Explains: What Is RSS and How Can I Benefit From Using It? HTG Explains: Why You Only Have to Wipe a Disk Once to Erase It HTG Explains: Learn How Websites Are Tracking You Online

    Read the article

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

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