Search Results

Search found 32551 results on 1303 pages for 'sql 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 530/1303 | < Previous Page | 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537  | Next Page >

  • Can't log in a user in MVC!

    - by devlife
    I have been scratching my head on this for a while now but still can't get it. I'm trying to simply log in a user in an MVC2 application. I have tried everything that I know to try but still can't figure out what I'm doing wrong. Here are a few things that I have tried: FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie( emailAddress, rememberMe ); var cookie = FormsAuthentication.GetAuthCookie( emailAddress, rememberMe ); HttpContext.Response.Cookies.Add( cookie ); FormsAuthenticationTicket ticket = new FormsAuthenticationTicket( emailAddress, rememberMe, 15 ); FormsIdentity identity = new FormsIdentity( ticket ); GenericPrincipal principal = new GenericPrincipal(identity, new string[0]); HttpContext.User = principal; I'm not sure if any of this is the right thing to do (as it's not working). After setting HttpContext.User = principal then Request.IsAuthenticated == true. However, in Global.asax I have this: HttpCookie authenCookie = Context.Request.Cookies.Get( FormsAuthentication.FormsCookieName ); The only cookie that ever is available is the aspnet session cookie. Any ideas at all would be much appreciated!

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET and Session State/Login info

    - by V-Man
    Are Session variables (in ASP.NET) the safest way to store data relating to whether a user is logged in or not? i.e. Session["LoggedIn"] = 'No' I know Session variables can be spoofed so I assume there must be a safer way. Any ideas for ASP.NET? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • ChangePassword control without provider

    - by EugeneK
    Hello, Is there a way to make ChangePassword control work without Membership provider? Like the same way Login control works through an Authenticate event, could I make this component to use my password changing function and then showing success view without me writing custom provider? Thanks, Eugene.

    Read the article

  • Django's self.client.login(...) does not work in unit tests

    - by thebossman
    I have created users for my unit tests in two ways: 1) Create a fixture for "auth.user" that looks roughly like this: { "pk": 1, "model": "auth.user", "fields": { "username": "homer", "is_active": 1, "password": "sha1$72cd3$4935449e2cd7efb8b3723fb9958fe3bb100a30f2", ... } } I've left out the seemingly unimportant parts. 2) Use 'create_user' in the setUp function (although I'd rather keep everything in my fixtures class): def setUp(self): User.objects.create_user('homer', '[email protected]', 'simpson') Note that the password is simpson in both cases. I've verified that this info is correctly being loaded into the test database time and time again. I can grab the User object using User.objects.get. I can verify the password is correct using 'check_password.' The user is active. Yet, invariably, self.client.login(username='homer', password='simpson') FAILS. I'm baffled as to why. I think I've read every single Internet discussion pertaining to this. Can anybody help? The login code in my unit test looks like this: login = self.client.login(username='homer', password='simpson') self.assertTrue(login) Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Secure Webservice (WCF) without storing credentials on consumer application

    - by Pai Gaudêncio
    Howdy folks, I have a customer that sells a lottery analysis application. In this application, he consumes a webservice (my service, I mean, belongs to the company I work for now) to get statistical data about lottery results, bets made, amounts, etc., from all across the globe. The access to this webservice is paid, and each consult costs X credits. Some people have disassembled this lottery application and found the api key/auth key used to access the paid webservice, and started to use it. I would like to prevent this from happening again, but I can't find a way to authenticate on the webservice without storing the auth. keys on the application. Does anyone have any ideas on how to accomplish such task? ps1.Can't ask for the users to input any kind of credentials. Has to be transparent for them (they shouldn't know what is happening). ps2. Can't use digital certificates for the same reason above, not to mention it's easy to retrieve them and we would fall into the original problem. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How to set Img scr from a server that is not live but connected with live server.

    - by Ghulam Haider
    I want to display photo of employee who is login but our company doesn't want to expose the photos of all employees publically that is why we put that employees photos on a server that is not live but connected with the live server. Now problem it that when I run my website on localhost the photos of employees display but as soon as I publish it on IIS it doesn't display images. Please suggest a solution.

    Read the article

  • using sfDoctrineGuardPlugin for regular member login?

    - by fayer
    i want to create users for my webapplication. im using symfony. i wonder if i should do that with sfDoctrineGuardPlugin or symfony's provided methods for this? // Add one or more credentials $user->addCredential('foo'); $user->addCredentials('foo', 'bar'); // Check if the user has a credential echo $user->hasCredential('foo'); => true // Check if the user has both credentials echo $user->hasCredential(array('foo', 'bar')); => true // Check if the user has one of the credentials echo $user->hasCredential(array('foo', 'bar'), false); => true // Remove a credential $user->removeCredential('foo'); echo $user->hasCredential('foo'); => false // Remove all credentials (useful in the logout process) $user->clearCredentials(); echo $user->hasCredential('bar'); => false or is the purpose of sfDoctrineGuardPlugin just securing the admin page and not the frontend logging system? thanks.

    Read the article

  • how to specify open id realm in openid4java 0.9.5

    - by Salvin Francis
    my url @ development : http://192.168.0.1:8888/com.company.MyEntryPoint/MyEntrypoint.html my url @ live env : http://www.example.com/com.company.MyEntryPoint/MyEntrypoint.html I need users to authenticate using open id, this is how i want my realm to be: *.company.MyEntryPoint I wrote a simple code to specify realm: AuthRequest authReq = manager.authenticate( discovered, returnToUrl, "*.company.MyEntryPoint" ); it does not work. Exception: org.openid4java.message.MessageException: 0x301: Realm verification failed (2) for: *.company.MyEntryPoint at org.openid4java.message.AuthRequest.validate(AuthRequest.java:354) at org.openid4java.message.AuthRequest.createAuthRequest(AuthRequest.java:101) at org.openid4java.consumer.ConsumerManager.authenticate(ConsumerManager.java:1073) Of all the combinations I tried, curiously, the following worked: AuthRequest authReq = manager.authenticate( discovered, returnToUrl, "http://localhost:8888/com.capgent.MyEntryPoint" ); This does not solves my issue but rather complicates it :) According to google and open id spec it should have worked complete code snippet: List discoveries = manager.discover(clientUrl); DiscoveryInformation discovered = manager.associate(discoveries); AuthRequest authReq = manager.authenticate(discovered, returnToUrl,"*.company.MyEntryPoint"); FetchRequest fetch = FetchRequest.createFetchRequest(); fetch.addAttribute("email", "http://schema.openid.net/contact/email", true); fetch.addAttribute("country", "http://axschema.org/contact/country/home", true); fetch.addAttribute("firstname", "http://axschema.org/namePerson/first", true); fetch.addAttribute("lastname", "http://axschema.org/namePerson/last", true); fetch.addAttribute("language", "http://axschema.org/pref/language", true); authReq.addExtension(fetch); String returnStr; if (!discovered.isVersion2()) { returnStr = authReq.getDestinationUrl(true); } else { returnStr = authReq.getDestinationUrl(false); } What am I doing wrong over here ?

    Read the article

  • User signup in REST API

    - by Bhaktavatsalam Nallanthighal
    I have a PHP web application that I want to make accessible across multiple clients. So, I'm trying to make it more like an API. My question is: How would I handle the creation of new users using the API? If I have a URL like http://example.com/user/signup which takes new user details and creates a new user via a POST request, wouldn't it be a problem that people can misuse it and create fake users easily?

    Read the article

  • OpenID like Stack Overflow

    - by eWolf
    I want to create an OpenID login with PHP just like it can be found on Stack Overflow. I know there are many questions for this, but mine is different. If I understood it correctly, every OpenID is defined by a unique URL. But: If I hit the Google button on the Stack Overflow login page, one generic URL is inserted in the text field. Is this the direct URL to the OpenID server? And if it is, how do I have to pass the URL to this class?

    Read the article

  • Google's Oauth for Installed apps vs. Oauth for Web Apps

    - by burgerguy
    So I'm having trouble understanding something... If you do Oauth for Web Apps, you register your site with a callback URL and get a unique consumer secret key. But once you've obtained an Oauth for Web Apps token, you don't have to generate Oauth calls to the google server from your registered domain. I regularly use my key and token from scripts running via an apache server at localhost on my laptop and Google never says "you're not sending this request from the registered domain." It just sends me the data. Now, as I understand it, if you do Oauth for Installed Apps, you use "anonymous" instead of a secret key you got from Google. I've been thinking of just using the OAuth for Web Apps auth method, then passing that token to an installed app that has my secret code embedded in its innards. The worry is that the code could be discovered by bad people. But what's more secure... making them work for the secret code or letting them default to anonymous? What really goes bad if the "secret" is discovered when the alternative is using "anonymous" as the secret?

    Read the article

  • Alternatives to requiring users to register for an account?

    - by jamieb
    I'm working on a side project to build a new web app idea of mine. For the sake of discussion, let's say this app displays a random photograph of a famous work of art. On a scale of 1 to 5, users are asked to rate how well they like each piece of art, and then are shown the next photo. Eventually, the app is able to get an sense of the person's style and is able to recommend artwork that he/she may find pleasing. The whole concept is similar to Netflix. I understand how to do all the preference matching logic (although not as sophisticated as Netflix). But I'd like to find a way to do this without requiring that users create an account first. This is a novelty website that a typical user might use only a handful of times. Requiring registration is overkill and will likely drastically reduce it's utility. I'd like to allow people to begin rating artwork within five seconds of their initial pageview, yet maintain the integrity of the voting (since recommendations are predicated on how other people have rated the various pieces of artwork). Can it be done? Some ideas: OpenID. The perfect solution except for the fact that it's not wildly used and my target audience isn't the most technically adept demographic. Text message. User inputs phone number and is texted a four digit code to key into the web app. Quick, easy, and great way to limit abuse. However, privacy concerns abound... people are probably even less likely to give me their phone number than their email address. Facebook login. I personally don't have a Facebook account due to privacy concerns. And I'd really hate to support such a proprietary platform. Hash code/Bookmark. Vistor's initial pageview generates a 5 or 6 digit alphanumeric code that is embedded in each subsequent URL. They can bookmark any page to save their state. Good: Very simple system that doesn't require any user action. Bad: Very easy to stuff the ballot box, might be difficult to account for users sharing the link containing their ID code via email or social networking sites.

    Read the article

  • DRY Authenticated Tasks in Cocoa (with distributed objects)

    - by arbales
    I'm kind of surprise/infuriated that the only way for me to run an authenticated task, like perhaps sudo gem install shi*t, is to make a tool with pre-written code. I'm writing a MacRuby application, which doesn't seem to expose the KAuthorization* constants/methods. So.. I learned Cocoa and Objective-C. My application creates a object, serves it and calls the a tool that elevates itself and then performs a selector on a distributed object (in the tool's thread). I hoped that the distributed object's methods would evaluated inside the tool, so I could use delegation to create "privileged" tasks. If this won't work, don't try to save it, I just want a DRY/cocoa solution. AuthHelper.m //AuthorizationExecuteWithPrivileges of this. AuthResponder* my_responder = [AuthResponder sharedResponder]; // Gets the proxy object (and it's delegate) NSString *selector = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:argv[3]]; NSLog(@"Performing selector: %@", selector); setuid(0); if ([[my_responder delegate] respondsToSelector:NSSelectorFromString(selector)]){ [[my_responder delegate] performSelectorOnMainThread:NSSelectorFromString(selector) withObject:nil waitUntilDone:YES]; } RandomController.m - (void)awakeFromNib { helperToolPath = [[[NSBundle mainBundle] resourcePath] stringByAppendingString:@"/AuthHelper"]; delegatePath = [[[NSBundle mainBundle] resourcePath] stringByAppendingString:@"/ABExtensions.rb"]; AuthResponder* my_responder = [AuthResponder initAsService]; [my_responder setDelegate:self]; } -(oneway void)install_gems{ NSArray *args = [NSArray arrayWithObjects: @"gem", @"install", @"sinatra", nil]; [NSTask launchedTaskWithLaunchPath:@"/usr/bin/sudo" arguments:args]; NSLog(@"Ran AuthResponder.delegate.install_gems"); // This prints. } ... other privileges tasks. "sudo gem update --system" for one. I'm guessing the proxy object is performing the selector in it's own thread, but I want the current (privileged thread) to do it so I can use sudo. Can I force the distributed object to evaluate the selector on the tool's thread? How else can I accomplish this dryly/cocoaly?

    Read the article

  • Use default credentials in order to call DirectoryEntry

    - by Copeleto
    Hi, I am working in a Login page and teh logic is like - try { DirectoryEntry LDAPLogin = new DirectoryEntry(ConfigurationSettings.AppSettings ["LDAPPath"].ToString(), Usuario, Txt_Contrasenia.Text.ToString()); if (LDAPLogin.NativeGuid != LDAPLogin.Name) ValidarGrupo(); } catch (Exception exc) { Label_Info.Text = "Sus credenciales no son validas: " + Usuario.ToString() + " " + exc.Message; } If the user enters the rights credentials I call a method ValidarGrupo that implements a lookup in the AD for a group of the user I would like to replace the username and password with UseDefaultCredentials in order to avoid that the user has to enter the username and password and the Login pages use the credentials of the user that is login on the machine.

    Read the article

  • Multiple user roles in Ruby on Rails

    - by aguynamedloren
    I am building an inventory management application with four different user types: admin, employee, manufacturer, transporter. I haven't started coding yet, but this is what I'm thinking.. Manufacturers and transporters are related with has_many :through many-to-many association with products as follows: class Manufacturer < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :products has_many :transporters, :through => :products end class Product < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :manufacturer belongs_to :transporter end class Transporter < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :products has_many :manufacturers, :through => :products end All four user types will be able to login, but they will have different permissions and views, etc. I don't think I can put them in the same table (Users), however, because they will have different requirements, ie: vendors and manufacturers must have a billing address and contact info (through validations), but admins and employees should not have these fields. If possible, I would like to have a single login screen as opposed to 4 different screens. I'm not asking for the exact code to build this, but I'm having trouble determining the best way to make it happen. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated - thanks!

    Read the article

  • Use web.sitemap to control page access

    - by Jakob Gade
    I was setting up permissions for pages in a ASP.NET website with <location> tags in web.config, something similar to this: <location path="Users.aspx"> <system.web> <authorization> <allow roles="Administrator"/> <deny users="*"/> </authorization> </system.web> </location> However, I also have a web.sitemap which basically contains the same information, i.e. which user roles can see/access which pages. A snippet from my web.sitemap: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <siteMap xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/AspNet/SiteMap-File-1.0" > <siteMapNode title="Home"> ... lots of nodes here ... <siteMapNode url="users.aspx" roles="Administrator" title="users" description="Edit users" /> ... </siteMapNode> </siteMap> Is there some kind of nifty way of using web.sitemap only to configure access? The <location> tags are quite verbose, and I don't like having to duplicate this information.

    Read the article

  • Node.js fetching Twitter Streaming API - EADDRNOTAVAIL

    - by Jordan Scales
    I have the following code written in node.js to access to the Twitter Streaming API. If I curl the URL below, it works. However, I cannot get it to work with my code. var https = require('https'); https.request('https://USERNAME:[email protected]/1.1/statuses/sample.json', function(res) { res.on('data', function(chunk) { var d = JSON.parse(chunk); console.log(d); }); }); But I receive the following node.js:201 throw e; // process.nextTick error, or 'error' event on first tick ^ Error: connect EADDRNOTAVAIL at errnoException (net.js:642:11) at connect (net.js:525:18) at Socket.connect (net.js:589:5) at Object.<anonymous> (net.js:77:12) at new ClientRequest (http.js:1073:25) at Object.request (https.js:80:10) at Object.<anonymous> (/Users/jordan/Projects/twitter-stream/app.js:3:7) at Module._compile (module.js:441:26) at Object..js (module.js:459:10) at Module.load (module.js:348:31) If anyone can offer an alternative solution, or explain to me why this doesn't work, I would be very grateful.

    Read the article

  • Help with storing/accessing user access roles C# Winforms

    - by user222453
    Hello, firstly I would like to thank you in advance for any assistance provided. I am new to software development and have designed several Client/Server applications over the last 12 months or so, I am currently working on a project that involves a user logging in to gain access to the application and I am looking at the most efficient and "simple" method of storing the users permissions once logged in to the application which can be used throughout restricting access to certain tabs on the main form. I have created a static class called "User" detailed below: static class User { public static int _userID; public static string _moduleName; public static string _userName; public static object[] UserData(object[] _dataRow) { _userID = (int)_dataRow[0]; _userName = (string)_dataRow[1]; _moduleName = (string)_dataRow[2]; return _moduleName; } } When the user logs in and they have been authenticated, I wish to store the _moduleName objects in memory so I can control which tabs on the main form tab control they can access, for example; if the user has been assigned the following roles in the database: "Sales Ledger", "Purchase Ledger" they can only see the relevant tabs on the form, by way of using a Switch - Case block once the login form is hidden and the main form is instantiated. I can store the userID and userName variables in the main form once it loads by means of say for example: Here we process the login data from the user: DataAccess _dal = new DataAccess(); switch (_dal.ValidateLogin(txtUserName.Text, txtPassword.Text)) { case DataAccess.ValidationCode.ConnectionFailed: MessageBox.Show("Database Server Connection Failed!"); break; case DataAccess.ValidationCode .LoginFailed: MessageBox.Show("Login Failed!"); _dal.RecordLogin(out errMsg, txtUserName.Text, workstationID, false); break; case DataAccess.ValidationCode .LoginSucceeded: frmMain frmMain = new frmMain(); _dal.GetUserPrivList(out errMsg,2); //< here I access my DB and get the user permissions based on the current login. frmMain.Show(); this.Hide(); break; default: break; } private void frmMain_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { int UserID = User._userID; } That works fine, however the _modules object contains mutiple permissions/roles depending on what has been set in the database, how can I store the multiple values and access them via a Switch-Case block? Thank you again in advance.

    Read the article

  • Can django's auth_user.username be varchar(75)? How could that be done?

    - by perrierism
    Is there anything wrong with running alter table on auth_user to make username be varchar(75) so it can fit an email? What does that break if anything? If you were to change auth_user.username to be varchar(75) where would you need to modify django? Is it simply a matter of changing 30 to 75 in the source code?: username = models.CharField(_('username'), max_length=30, unique=True, help_text=_("Required. 30 characters or fewer. Letters, numbers and @/./+/-/_ characters")) Or is there other validation on this field that would have to be changed or any other repercussions to doing so? See comment discussion with bartek below regarding the reason for doing it.

    Read the article

  • How safe am I signing into Google Spreadsheets with yeroon.net/ggplot2

    - by Farrel
    I am impressed by what I have seen of yeroon.net/ggplot2 which is a web interface for Hadley Wickham's R package ggplot2. I want to try it out on my own data. The part that has me very excited is that one can use data stored in one's own Google spreadsheet as the data. One just signs into their Google Account so that yeroon.net/ggplot2 can access the spreadsheet list. I have been hesitant to do it. If I sign in whilst on yeroon.net am I handing over my username and password to a third party? It would not be wise of me to divulge my google password to third parties since Google is fast becoming my repository of everything. How do I know if Jeroon's application is using ClientLogin or OAuth? My understanding is very basic and may be wrong but nevertheless here it is. OAuth would be better since it does not actually pass the password onto the third party application.

    Read the article

  • Setting the Identity/Principal from a MessageInspector in WCF

    - by Robert Wagner
    I am developing a WCF service that receives the user's credentials in the SOAP header. These credentials are read on the server side using a MessageInspector. So far so good. I want to set the Thread.CurrentPrincipal to a custom principal (CustomPrincipal), but when I do this from the MessageInspector, it gets overridden by the time the service is invoked. When is the best time to set the principal? Also what is the best way to pass the principal, identity or credentials from the inspector to that location?

    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 | 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537  | Next Page >