Search Results

Search found 9696 results on 388 pages for 'proxy authentication'.

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 53/388 | < Previous Page | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >

  • Using Default Document with Forms Authentication

    - by John Rabotnik
    I have a site hosted on IIS7 with a default document specified as default.aspx. This works fine but my app uses Forms Authentication and I want to disable Anonymous Authentication completely. When I do disable anonymous authentication for everything except the login page, everything works fine but the default document setting stops working. With Anonymous authentication switched on if I visit http://mysite I get passed to http://mysite/default.aspx (which then redirects to the login page if the user hasn't already logged in) If I disable anonymous authentication (leaving only forms based auth enabled) and I visit http://mysite I get a permission denied page from IIS. Yet, if I visit http://mysite/default.aspx directly then the site works fine. I just want to disable anonymous authentication and have http://mysite go to http://mysite/default.aspx. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • .NET - Is it possible to proxy a HTTPS request using HttpListener & HttpWebRequest? (or is it not p

    - by Greg
    Hi, Question - Is it possible to proxy a HTTPS request using HttpListener & HttpWebRequest? (or is it not possbile due to the encryption?) I have got a .NET proxy working by using HttpListener & HttpWebRequest using the approach here. I'm trying to extend this at the moment to listen for HTTPS too (refer this question) however I'm wondering if I'm trying to tackle something that is not possible...That is if this code works by listening for the HTTPS request (using HttpListener) and then copying headers & content across to a new HttpWebRequest, is this flawed as it may not be able to decrypt the request to get the content? But then normal proxy servers obviously can proxy HTTPS, so I guess perhaps it will work because it will just copy across the encrypted content?

    Read the article

  • What's right for me: htAccess, form submittion, HTTP header authentication w/ PHP?

    - by Brook Julias
    I am creating a website with multiple sections--admin, client, user, and anonymous--each user group having less access then the next. I am wondering what form of authentication would be best for my use? I have heard the if you are just dealing with a websites then a web form is for you (because it's prettier). HTTP header authentication with PHP is said to get clunky/sloppy. htAcess is pretty much the hard core of various authentication methods I have looked up, but is it too much?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET: disabling authentication for a single aspx page (custom error page)?

    - by Richard Collette
    I am using a custom error page: <customErrors redirectMode="ResponseRedirect" mode="On" defaultRedirect="Error2.aspx"/> I want to disable authentication for the custom error page because the error being raised is related to an authentication module and I don't want to get into an infinite loop and I want to display a clean error page to the user. I have been trying the following configuration to do that. <location path="Error2.aspx"> <system.web> <authentication mode="None"/> <authorization> <allow users="?"/> <allow users="*"/> </authorization> </system.web> </location> I am getting a System.Configuration.ConfigurationErrorsException for the line that sets the authentication mode. It is an error to use a section registered as allowDefinition='MachineToApplication' beyond application level. This error can be caused by a virtual directory not being configured as an application in IIS. I have verified that there are no other web.config files in subdirectories under the application's folder. The applications folder is configured as an application in IIS and the error page is at the application's root. File permissions set for the error page in IIS include anonymous and windows authentication (I have tried just anonymous as well).

    Read the article

  • spring.net proxy factory with target type needs property virtual ?

    - by Vince
    Hi all, I'm creating spring.net proxy in code by using ProxyFactory object with ProxyTargetType to true to have a proxy on a non interfaced complex object. Proxying seems ok till i call a method on that object. The method references a public property and if this property is not virtual it's value is null. This doesn't happen if i use Spring.Aop.Framework.AutoProxy.InheritanceBasedAopConfigurer in spring config file but in this case i can't use this because spring context doesn't own this object. Is this normal to have such behavior or is there a tweak to perform what i want (proxying object virtual method without having to change properties virtual)? Note that i tried factory.AutoDetectInterfaces and factory.ProxyTargetAttributes values but doesn't help. My proxy creation code: public static T CreateMethodCallStatProxy<T>() { // Proxy factory ProxyFactory factory = new ProxyFactory(); factory.AddAdvice(new CallMonitorTrackerAdvice()); factory.ProxyTargetType = true; // Create instance factory.Target = Activator.CreateInstance<T>(); // Get proxy T proxiedClass = (T)factory.GetProxy(); return proxiedClass; } Thanks for your help

    Read the article

  • Weird result with apache vs lighttpd in reverse proxy.

    - by northox
    I have an Apache server running in reverse proxy mode in front of a Tomcat java server. It handle HTTP and HTTPS and send those request back and forth to the Tomcat server on an internal HTTP port. I'm trying to replace the reverse proxy with Lighttpd. Here's the problem: while asking for the same HTTPS url, while using Apache as the reverse proxy, the Tomcat server redirect (302) to an HTTPS page but with Lighttpd it redirect to the same page in HTTP (not HTTPS). What does Lighttpd could do different in order to have a different result from the backend server? In theory, using Apache or Lighttpd server as a reverse proxy should not change anything... but it does. Any idea? I'll try to find something by sniffing the traffic on the backend tomcat server.

    Read the article

  • How to setup Lighttpd as a proxy for cross-site requests?

    - by NilColor
    I want to setup my lighttpd server to proxy some requests (for ex. RSS requests) to other domains so i can fetch data using javascript. For example i'd like to fetch Atmo feed from internal Redmine (say http://code.internal.acme) to developer dashboard (say http://dashboard.internal.acme). I'd like to fetch it using JavaScript but i cant use something like JSONP and i don't want to use Flash for that. Currently i have this in my lighttpd.conf proxy.server = ( "/http-bind/" => ( ( "host" => "10.0.100.52", "port" => 5280 ) ) ) This way i can connect to our internal jabber server via Javascript. But i want more generic way... Something like proxy.server = ( "/proxy/{1}" => ( ( "url" => {1} ) ) )

    Read the article

  • implementing proxy support in C, is there any library for that?

    - by Sabya
    Hi, I want to implement proxy support in my application. There are two parts that needs to be implemented: Detection of proxy details (protocol, host, port): I am using libproxy for that. Connecting to the the proxy server and telling it to relay the packets. Get the connected socket and then use it in your application. Is there library for the #2 part?

    Read the article

  • Can a proxy server cache SSL GETs? If not, would response body encryption suffice?

    - by Damian Hickey
    Can a (||any) proxy server cache content that is requested by a client over https? As the proxy server can't see the querystring, or the http headers, I reckon they can't. I'm considering a desktop application, run by a number of people behind their companies proxy. This application may access services across the internet and I'd like to take advantage of the in-built internet caching infrastructure for 'reads'. If the caching proxy servers can't cache SSL delivered content, would simply encrypting the content of a response be a viable option? I am considering all GET requests that we wish to be cachable be requested over http with the body encrypted using asymmetric encryption, where each client has the decryption key. Anytime we wish to perform a GET that is not cachable, or a POST operation, it will be performed over SSL.

    Read the article

  • How to set the tomcat to act as a proxy server?

    - by Rakesh Juyal
    Can i use Apache Tomcat to behave like a proxy server? I know there are other methods also, to create a proxy server [ using HTTP/Socks-5 , using google app engine, blah blah ] The answer can be simply, No . or if it is possible to create a proxy server using Tomcat then please let us know.

    Read the article

  • Intro to MySQL Proxy

    It's no surprise that the concept of a proxy has made its way into the database arena. The MySQL Proxy sits between your application and your MySQL database. Future articles will discuss the myriad of uses for this technology.

    Read the article

  • Token based Authentication and Claims for Restful Services

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    WIF as it exists today is optimized for web applications (passive/WS-Federation) and SOAP based services (active/WS-Trust). While there is limited support for WCF WebServiceHost based services (for standard credential types like Windows and Basic), there is no ready to use plumbing for RESTful services that do authentication based on tokens. This is not an oversight from the WIF team, but the REST services security world is currently rapidly changing – and that’s by design. There are a number of intermediate solutions, emerging protocols and token types, as well as some already deprecated ones. So it didn’t make sense to bake that into the core feature set of WIF. But after all, the F in WIF stands for Foundation. So just like the WIF APIs integrate tokens and claims into other hosts, this is also (easily) possible with RESTful services. Here’s how. HTTP Services and Authentication Unlike SOAP services, in the REST world there is no (over) specified security framework like WS-Security. Instead standard HTTP means are used to transmit credentials and SSL is used to secure the transport and data in transit. For most cases the HTTP Authorize header is used to transmit the security token (this can be as simple as a username/password up to issued tokens of some sort). The Authorize header consists of the actual credential (consider this opaque from a transport perspective) as well as a scheme. The scheme is some string that gives the service a hint what type of credential was used (e.g. Basic for basic authentication credentials). HTTP also includes a way to advertise the right credential type back to the client, for this the WWW-Authenticate response header is used. So for token based authentication, the service would simply need to read the incoming Authorization header, extract the token, parse and validate it. After the token has been validated, you also typically want some sort of client identity representation based on the incoming token. This is regardless of how technology-wise the actual service was built. In ASP.NET (MVC) you could use an HttpModule or an ActionFilter. In (todays) WCF, you would use the ServiceAuthorizationManager infrastructure. The nice thing about using WCF’ native extensibility points is that you get self-hosting for free. This is where WIF comes into play. WIF has ready to use infrastructure built-in that just need to be plugged into the corresponding hosting environment: Representation of identity based on claims. This is a very natural way of translating a security token (and again I mean this in the widest sense – could be also a username/password) into something our applications can work with. Infrastructure to convert tokens into claims (called security token handler) Claims transformation Claims-based authorization So much for the theory. In the next post I will show you how to implement that for WCF – including full source code and samples. (Wanna learn more about federation, WIF, claims, tokens etc.? Click here.)

    Read the article

  • Mixing Forms and Token Authentication in a single ASP.NET Application

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    I recently had the task to find out how to mix ASP.NET Forms Authentication with WIF’s WS-Federation. The FormsAuth app did already exist, and a new sub-directory of this application should use ADFS for authentication. Minimum changes to the existing application code would be a plus ;) Since the application is using ASP.NET MVC this was quite easy to accomplish – WebForms would be a little harder, but still doable. I will discuss the MVC solution here. To solve this problem, I made the following changes to the standard MVC internet application template: Added WIF’s WSFederationAuthenticationModule and SessionAuthenticationModule to the modules section. Add a WIF configuration section to configure the trust with ADFS. Added a new authorization attribute. This attribute will go on controller that demand ADFS (or STS in general) authentication. The attribute logic is quite simple – it checks for authenticated users – and additionally that the authentication type is set to Federation. If that’s the case all is good, if not, the redirect to the STS will be triggered. public class RequireTokenAuthenticationAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute {     protected override bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase httpContext)     {         if (httpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated &&             httpContext.User.Identity.AuthenticationType.Equals( WIF.AuthenticationTypes.Federation, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase))         {             return true;         }                     return false;     }     protected override void HandleUnauthorizedRequest(AuthorizationContext filterContext)     {                    // do the redirect to the STS         var message = FederatedAuthentication.WSFederationAuthenticationModule.CreateSignInRequest( "passive", filterContext.HttpContext.Request.RawUrl, false);         filterContext.Result = new RedirectResult(message.RequestUrl);     } } That’s it ;) If you want to know why this works (and a possible gotcha) – read my next post.

    Read the article

  • Reach Local Proxy Page - Duplicate content?

    - by Simon Bennett
    We have a client who has instructed Reach Local to manage their paid SEO work etc. RL have created a proxy version of the page at http://example-px.rtrk.co.uk which mirrors the existing site completely. Would I be correct in assuming that this would count as duplicate content and one or both of the sites would be penalized because of this? And would the addition of a rel="canonical" meta-tag on the proxy site assist with this? Many thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Restricting URL w.r.t HTTP method and setting different authentication mechanism for each

    - by user31745
    I shall start with an example. I want to restrict to POST requests only for http://path/to/logical/abc.xml and restrict to GET only for http://path/to/logical/def.xml. How do I put constraints like this as the paths are logical and location directive is not supported in .htaccess? The actual problem is to set different authentication type(basic, digest) on diff logical file.for eg. for abc.xml I want to authenticate for Basic type of authentication and def.xml with digest.

    Read the article

  • Setup Web Authentication on Your Website

    There have been many occasions in which I have had to setup Web Authentication for websites or particular web pages. In this article, I will tell you how I set up web authentication using PHP and MySQL and where the real power lies in this technology.

    Read the article

  • How can I set up Redmine => Active Directory authentication?

    - by Chris R
    First, I'm not an AD admin on site, but my manager has asked me to try to get my personal Redmine installation to integrate with ActiveDirectory in order to test-drive it for a larger-scale rollout. Our AD server is at host:port ims.example.com:389 and I have a user IMS/me. Right now, I also have a user me in Redmine using local authentication. I have created an ActiveDirectory LDAP authentication method in RedMine with the following parameters: Host: ims.example.com Port: 389 Base DN: cn=Users,dc=ims,dc=example,dc=com On-The-Fly User Creation: YES Login: sAMAccountName Firstname: givenName Lastname: sN Email: mail Testing this connection works just fine. I have, however, not successfully authenticated with it. I've created a backup admin user so that I can get back in to the me account if I break things, and then I've tried changing me to use the ActiveDirectory credentials. However, once I do, nothing works to log in. I have tried all of these login name options: me IMS/me IMS\me I've used my known Domain password, but no joy. So, what setting do I have wrong, or what information do I need to acquire in order to make this work?

    Read the article

  • Cisco ASA user authentication options - OpenID, public RSA sig, others?

    - by Ryan
    My organization has a Cisco ASA 5510 which I have made act as a firewall/gateway for one of our offices. Most resources a remote user would come looking for exist inside. I've implemented the usual deal - basic inside networks with outbound NAT, one primary outside interface with some secondary public IPs in the PAT pool for public-facing services, a couple site-to-site IPSec links to other branches, etc. - and I'm working now on VPN. I have the WebVPN (clientless SSL VPN) working and even traversing the site-to-site links. At the moment I'm leaving a legacy OpenVPN AS in place for thick client VPN. What I would like to do is standardize on an authentication method for all VPN then switch to the Cisco's IPSec thick VPN server. I'm trying to figure out what's really possible for authentication for these VPN users (thick client and clientless). My organization uses Google Apps and we already use dotnetopenauth to authenticate users for a couple internal services. I'd like to be able to do the same thing for thin and thick VPN. Alternatively a signature-based solution using RSA public keypairs (ssh-keygen type) would be useful to identify user@hardware. I'm trying to get away from legacy username/password auth especially if it's internal to the Cisco (just another password set to manage and for users to forget). I know I can map against an existing LDAP server but we have LDAP accounts created for only about 10% of the user base (mostly developers for Linux shell access). I guess what I'm looking for is a piece of middleware which appears to the Cisco as an LDAP server but will interface with the user's existing OpenID identity. Nothing I've seen in the Cisco suggests it can do this natively. But RSA public keys would be a runner-up, and much much better than standalone or even LDAP auth. What's really practical here?

    Read the article

  • limiting connections from tomcat to IIS - proxy? iptables?

    - by Chris Phillips
    Howdy, I've webapp on tomcat6 which is connecting to an M$ PlayReady DRM instance on IIS6.0 The performance is seen to be best when we bench mark (using ab) the DRM service with 25 concurrent connections, which gives about 250 requests per second, which is ace. higher concurrent connections results in TCP/IP timeouts and other lower level mess. But there is no way to control how the tomcat app connects to the service - it's not internally managing a pool of connections etc, they are all isolated http connections to the server. Ideally I'd like a situation where we can have 25 http 1.1 connections being kept alive permanently from tomcat and requesting the licenses through this static pool of connections, which I think would the best performance. But this is not in the code, so was looking for a way to possibly simulate this at the Linux level. I was possibly thinking that iptables connlimit might be able to gracefully handle these connections, but whilst it could limit, it'd probably still annoy the app. What about a proxy? nginx (or possibly squid) seems potentially appealing to run on the tomcat server and hit on localhost as we might want to add additional DRM servers to use under load balance anyway. Could this take 100 incoming connections from tomcat, accept them all and proxy over the the IIS server in a more respectful manner? Any other angles? EDIT - looking over mod_proxy for apache, which we are already using for conventional use on an apache instance in front of this tomcat instance, might be ideal. I can set a max value on the proxy_pass to only allow 25 connections, and keep them alive permanently. Is that my answer? Many thanks, Chris

    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 | 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60  | Next Page >