Search Results

Search found 1485 results on 60 pages for 'encrypted'.

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

  • Programmatically setup a PEAP connection in Windows Mobile

    - by tomlog
    I have been working on this for a few days and this is doing my head in: Our application is built using the .NET Compact Framework 2.0 and running on Windows Mobile 5 & 6 devices. We can set the WLAN connection of the device programmatically using the Wireless Zero Config functions (described here: msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms894771.aspx), most notably the WZCSetInterface function which we pinvoke from our application. This works fine for WEP and WPA-PSK connections. In a recent effort to add support for WPA2 networks we decided to modify the code. We have successfully added support for WPA2 which uses a certificate for the 802.1x authentication by setting the correct registry settings before calling WZCSetInterface. Now we want to do the same for WPA2 using PEAP (MS-CHAPv2) authentication. When manually creating such a connection in Windows Mobile the user will be prompted to enter the domain/user/password details. In our application we will have those details stored locally and want to do this all programmatically without any user intervention. So I thought going along the same route as the certificate authentication, setting the correct registry entries before calling WZCSetInterface. The registry settings we set are: \HKCU\Comm\EAP\Config\[ssid name] Enable8021x = 1 (DWORD) LastAuthSuccessful = 1 (DWORD) EapTypeId = 25 (DWORD) Identity = "domain\username" (string) Password = binary blob containing the password that is encrypted using the CryptProtectData function (described here: msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms938309.aspx) But when these settings are set and I call WZCSetInterface with the correct parameters, it still prompts me with the User Logon dialog asking for the domain/username/password. Has anyone got an idea what I need to do to prevent the password dialog from appearing and connect straight away with the settings stored in the registry?

    Read the article

  • How do i prevent my code from being stolen?

    - by Calmarius
    What happens exactly when I launch a .NET exe? I know that C# is compiled to IL code and I think the generated exe file just a launcher that starts the runtime and passes the IL code to it. But how? And how complex process is it? IL code is embedded in the exe. I think it can be executed from the memory without writing it to the disk while ordinary exe's are not (ok, yes but it is very complicated). My final aim is extracting the IL code and write my own encrypted launcher to prevent scriptkiddies to open my code in Reflector and just steal all my classes easily. Well I can't prevent reverse engineering completely. If they are able to inspect the memory and catch the moment when I'm passing the pure IL to the runtime then it won't matter if it is a .net exe or not, is it? I know there are several obfuscator tools but I don't want to mess up the IL code itself. EDIT: so it seems it isn't worth trying what I wanted. They will crack it anyway... So I will look for an obfuscation tool. And yes my friends said too that it is enough to rename all symbols to a meaningless name. And reverse engineering won't be so easy after all.

    Read the article

  • Error logging/handling on application basis?

    - by Industrial
    Hi everybody, We have a web server that we're about to launch a number of applications on. On the server-level we have managed to work out the error handling with the help of Hyperic to notify the person who is in charge in the event of a database/memcached server is going down. However, we are still in the need of handling those eventual error and log events that happen on application level to improve the applications for our customers, before the customers notices. So, what's then a good solution to do this? Utilizing PHP:s own error log would quickly become cloggered if we would run a big number of applications at the same time. It's probably isn't the best option if you like structure. One idea is to build a off-site lightweight error-handling application that has a REST/JSON API that receives encrypted and serialized arrays of error messages and stores them into a database. Maybe it could, depending on the severity of the error also be directly inputted into our bug tracker. Could be a few well spent hours, but it seems like a quite fragile solution and I am sure that there's better more-reliable alternatives out there already. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Parsing Windows Event Logs, is it possible?

    - by xceph
    Hello, I am doing a little research into the feasibility of a project I have in mind. It involves doing a little forensic work on images of hard drives, and I have been looking for information on how to analyze saved windows event log files. I do not require the ability to monitor current events, I simply want to be able to view events which have been created, and record the time and application/process which created those events. However I do not have much experience in the inner workings of the windows system specifics, and am wondering if this is possible? The plan is to create images of a hard drive, and then do the analysis on a second machine. Ideally this would be done in either Java or Python, as they are my most proficient languages. The main concerns I have are as follows: Is this information encrypted in anyway? Are there any existing API for parsing this data directly? Is there information available regarding the format in which these logs are stored, and how does it differ from windows versions? This must be possible from analyzing the drive itself, as ideally the installation of windows on the drive would not be running, (as it would be a mounted image on another system) The closest thing I could find in my searches is http://www.j-interop.org/ but that seems to be aimed at remote clients. Ideally nothing would have to be installed on the imaged drive. The other solution which seemed to also pop up is the JNI library, but that also seems to be more so in the area of monitoring a running system. Any help at all is greatly appreciated. :)

    Read the article

  • How to strengthen Mysql database server Security?

    - by i need help
    If we were to use server1 for all files (file server), server2 for mysql database (database server). In order for websites in server1 to access to the database in server2, isn't it needed to connect to to ip address of second (mysql server) ? In this case, is remote mysql connection. However, I seen from some people comment on the security issue. remote access to MySQL is not very secure. When your remote computer first connects to your MySQL database, the password is encrypted before being transmitted over the Internet. But after that, all data is passed as unencrypted "plain text". If someone was able to view your connection data (such as a "hacker" capturing data from an unencrypted WiFi connection you're using), that person would be able to view part or all of your database. So I just wondering ways to secure it? Allow remote mysql access from server1 by allowing the static ip adress allow remote access from server 1 by setting port allowed to connect to 3306 change 3306 to other port? Any advice?

    Read the article

  • Logging in with sha1() encryption.

    - by Samir Ghobril
    Hey guys, I added this to my sign up code : $password=mysql_real_escape_string(sha1($_POST['password'])); and now it inserts the password into the database while its encrypted. But signing in doesn't seem to work anymore. Here is the login code. function checklogin($username, $password){ global $mysqli; $password=sha1($password); $result = $mysqli->prepare("SELECT * FROM users WHERE username = ? and password=?"); $result->bind_param("ss", $username, $password); $result->execute(); if($result != false){ $dbArray=$result->fetch(); if(!$dbArray){ echo '<p class="statusmsg">The username or password you entered is incorrect, or you haven\'t yet activated your account. Please try again.</p><br/><input class="submitButton" type="button" value="Retry" onClick="location.href='."'login.php'\">"; return; } $_SESSION['username']=$username; if(isset($_POST['remember'])){ setcookie("jmuser",$username,time()+60*60*24*356); setcookie("jmpass",$password ,time()+60*60*24*356); } redirect(); }

    Read the article

  • Using Supermicro IPMI behind a Proxy?

    - by Stefan Lasiewski
    This is a SuperMicro server with a X8DT3 motherboard which contains an On-board IPMI BMC. In this case, the BMC is a Winbond WPCM450). I believe many Dell servers use this a similar BMC model. A common practice with IPMI is to isolated it to a private, non-routable network. In our case all IPMI cards are plugged into a private management LAN at 192.168.1.0/24 which has no route to the outside world. If I plug my laptop into the 192.168.1.0/24 network, I can verify that all IPMI features work as expected, including the remote console. I need to access all of the IPMI features from a different network, over some sort of encrypted connection. I tried SSH port forwarding. This works fine for a few servers, however, we have close to 100 of these servers and maintaining a SSH client configuration to forward 6 ports on 100 servers is impractical. So I thought I would try a SOCKS proxy. This works, but it seems that the Remote Console application does not obey my systemwide proxy settings. I setup a SOCKS proxy. Verbose logging allows me to see network activity, and if ports are being forwarded. ssh -v -D 3333 [email protected] I configure my system to use the SOCKS proxy. I confirm that Java is using the SOCKS proxy settings. The SOCKS proxy is working. I connect to the BMC at http://192.168.1.100/ using my webbrowser. I can log in, view the Server Health, power the machine on or off, etc. Since SSH verbose logging is enabled, I can see the progress. Here's where it get's tricky: I click on the "Launch Console" button which downloads a file called jviewer.jnlp. JNLP files are opened with Java Web Start. A Java window opens. The titlebar says says "Redirection Viewer" in the title bar. There are menus for "Video" "Keyboard" "Mouse", etc. This confirms that Java is able to download the application through the proxy, and start the application. 60 seconds later, the application times out and simply says "Error opening video socket". Here's a screenshot. If this worked, I would see a VNC-style window. My SSH logs show no connection attempts to ports 5900/5901. This suggests that the Java application started the VNC application, but that the VNC application ignores the systemwide proxy settings and is thus unable to connect to the remote host. Java seems to obey my systemwide proxy settings, but this VNC application seems to ignore it. Is there any way for me to force this VNC application to use my systemwide proxy settings?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to route all traffic from Android through a proxy/tunnel to my Tomato router?

    - by endolith
    I'd like to be able to connect my Android phone to public Wi-Fi points with unencrypted connections, but People can see what I'm doing by intercepting my radio transmissions People who own the access point can see what I'm doing. There are tools like WeFi and probably others to automatically connect to access points, but I don't trust random APs. I'd like all my traffic to go through an encrypted tunnel to my home router, and from there out to the Internet. I've done such tunnels from other computers with SSH/SOCKS and PPTP before. Is there any way to do this with Android? I've asked the same question on Force Close, so I'll change this question to be about both sides of the tunnel. More specifically: My phone now has CyanogenMod 4.2.3 My router currently has Tomato Version 1.25 I'm willing to change the router firmware, but I was having issues with DD-WRT disconnecting, which is why I'm using Tomato. Some possible solutions: SSH with dynamic SOCKS proxy: Android supposedly supports this through ConnectBot, but I don't know how to get it to route all traffic. Tomato supports this natively. I've been using this with MyEntunnel for my web browsing at work. Requires setting up each app to go through the proxy, though. PPTP: Android supports this natively. Tomato does not support this, unless you get the jyavenard mod and compile it? I previously used PPTP for web browsing at work and in China because it's native in Windows and DD-WRT. After a while I started having problems with it, then I started having problems with DD-WRT, so I switched to the SSH tunnel instead. Also it supposedly has security flaws, but I don't understand how big of a problem it is. IPSec L2TP: Android (phone) and Windows (work/China) both support this natively I don't know of a router that does. I could run it on my computer using openswan, but then there are two points of failure. OpenVPN: CyanogenMod apparently includes this, and now has an entry to create a new OpenVPN in the normal VPN interface, but I have no idea how to configure it. TunnelDroid apparently handles some of this. Future versions will have native support in the VPN settings? Tomato does not support this, but there are mods that do? I don't know how to configure this, either. TomatoVPN roadkill mod SgtPepperKSU mod Thor mod I could also run a VPN server on my desktop, I guess, though that's less reliable and presumably slower than running it in the router itself. I could change the router firmware, but I'm wary of more fundamental things breaking. Tomato has been problem-free for the regular stuff. Related: Anyone set up a SSH tunnel to their (rooted) G1 for browsing?

    Read the article

  • Installing OpenLDAP on Fedora 12: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49)

    - by Arcturus
    Hello. I've been trying to set up the OpenLDAP installed by default on Fedora 12, very unsuccessfully. My ultimate goal is to use LDAP authentication for user login and Apache, using the OpenLDAP server running on the same machine. The server is running, but the error I always get when I try to use ldapsearch or ldapadd is: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49) I've been following these tutorials, but none of them helped me: http://www.howtoforge.com/openldap_fedora7 http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-9-Manual/ref-guide/s1-ldap-quickstart.html http://www.howtoforge.com/linux_ldap_authentication http://docs.fedoraproject.org/deployment-guide/f12/en-US/html/s1-ldap-pam.html http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/quickstart.html First, some components were already installed, and I installed these with yum: yum install openldap-servers openldap-devel Then, I created a basic slapd.conf file in /etc/openldap: database bdb suffix "dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" rootdn "cn=root,dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" rootpw {SSHA}cxdz55ygPu4T3ykg7dgu+L0VRvsFSeom directory /var/lib/ldap/sniejana-sandbox.com I obtained the rootpw with this command: slappasswd -s changeme I also created the /var/lib/ldap/sniejana-sandbox.com directory and made sure the entire contents of /var/lib/ldap were owned by the ldap user. I found two ldap.conf files, one in /etc and one in /etc/openldap. I don't know which is the right one. If I understood correctly, this file is to configure the client. I put this in both: HOST localhost BASE dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com I then ran the server with: service slapd start It said OK. Most of the tutorials above say to use the command ldapsearch -D "cn=Manager,dc=my-domain,dc=com" -W to ensure that everything's working. When I execute this command, a password prompt appears, and after entering the password, I get the error. ldapsearch -D "cn=root,dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" -W Enter LDAP password: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49) The same thing happens when trying to use ldapadd. I tried with an encrypted and unencrypted password in slapd.conf, it doesn't change anything. Adding a -x for simple authentication doesn't change anything either. netstat -ap confirms the server is listening: tcp 0 0 *:ldap *:* LISTEN 4148/slapd tcp 0 0 *:ldap *:* LISTEN 4148/slapd ps -ef|grep slapd confirms the process is running: ldap 4148 1 0 15:22 ? 00:00:00 /usr/sbin/slapd -h ldap:/// -u ldap Running slaptest procudes config file testing succeeded. I read somewhere that the command ldapsearch -x -b '' -s base '(objectclass=*)' namingContext can confirm the server is running. It appears to work: # extended LDIF # # LDAPv3 # base <> with scope baseObject # filter: (objectclass=*) # requesting: namingContext # # dn: # search result search: 2 result: 0 Success # numResponses: 2 # numEntries: 1 I'm running out of ideas. Am I missing something obvious?

    Read the article

  • TPROXY Not working with HAProxy, Ubuntu 14.04

    - by Nyxynyx
    I'm trying to use HAProxy as a fully transparent proxy using TPROXY in Ubuntu 14.04. HAProxy will be setup on the first server with eth1 111.111.250.250 and eth0 10.111.128.134. The single balanced server has eth1 and eth0 as well. eth1 is the public facing network interface while eth0 is for the private network which both servers are in. Problem: I'm able to connect to the balanced server's port 1234 directly (via eth1) but am not able to reach the balanced server via Haproxy port 1234 (which redirects to 1234 via eth0). Am I missing out something in this configuration? On the HAProxy server The current kernel is: Linux extremehash-lb2 3.13.0-24-generic #46-Ubuntu SMP Thu Apr 10 19:11:08 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux The kernel appears to have TPROXY support: # grep TPROXY /boot/config-3.13.0-24-generic CONFIG_NETFILTER_XT_TARGET_TPROXY=m HAProxy was compiled with TPROXY support: haproxy -vv HA-Proxy version 1.5.3 2014/07/25 Copyright 2000-2014 Willy Tarreau <[email protected]> Build options : TARGET = linux26 CPU = x86_64 CC = gcc CFLAGS = -g -fno-strict-aliasing OPTIONS = USE_LINUX_TPROXY=1 USE_LIBCRYPT=1 USE_STATIC_PCRE=1 Default settings : maxconn = 2000, bufsize = 16384, maxrewrite = 8192, maxpollevents = 200 Encrypted password support via crypt(3): yes Built without zlib support (USE_ZLIB not set) Compression algorithms supported : identity Built without OpenSSL support (USE_OPENSSL not set) Built with PCRE version : 8.31 2012-07-06 PCRE library supports JIT : no (USE_PCRE_JIT not set) Built with transparent proxy support using: IP_TRANSPARENT IPV6_TRANSPARENT IP_FREEBIND Available polling systems : epoll : pref=300, test result OK poll : pref=200, test result OK select : pref=150, test result OK Total: 3 (3 usable), will use epoll. In /etc/haproxy/haproxy.cfg, I've configured a port to have the following options: listen test1235 :1234 mode tcp option tcplog balance leastconn source 0.0.0.0 usesrc clientip server balanced1 10.111.163.76:1234 check inter 5s rise 2 fall 4 weight 4 On the balanced server In /etc/networking/interfaces I've set the gateway for eth0 to be the HAProxy box 10.111.128.134 and restarted networking. auto eth0 eth1 iface eth0 inet static address 111.111.250.250 netmask 255.255.224.0 gateway 111.131.224.1 dns-nameservers 8.8.4.4 8.8.8.8 209.244.0.3 iface eth1 inet static address 10.111.163.76 netmask 255.255.0.0 gateway 10.111.128.134 ip route gives: default via 111.111.224.1 dev eth0 10.111.0.0/16 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 10.111.163.76 111.111.224.0/19 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 111.111.250.250

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2003 IPSec Tunnel Connected, But Not Working (Possibly NAT/RRAS Related)

    - by Kevinoid
    Configuration I have setup a "raw" IPSec tunnel between a Windows Server 2003 (SBS) machine and a Netgear FVG318 according to the instructions in Microsoft KB816514. The configuration is as follows (using the same conventions as the article): NetA | SBS2003 | FVG318 | NetB 10.0.0.0/24 | 216.x.x.x | 69.y.y.y | 10.0.254.0/24 Both the Main Mode and Quick Mode Security Associations are successfully completed and appear in the IP Security Monitor. I am also able to ping the SBS2003 server on its private address from any computer on NetB. The Problem Any traffic sent from a computer on NetA to NetB, or from SBS2003 to NetB (excluding ICMP Ping responses), is sent out on the public network interface outside the IPSec tunnel (no encryption or header authentication, as if the tunnel were not there). Pings sent from a computer on NetB to a computer on NetA successfully reach computers on NetA, but the responses are silently discarded by SBS2003 (they do not go out in the clear and do not generate any encrypted traffic). Possible Solutions Incorrect Configuration I could have mistyped something, somewhere, or KB816514 could be incorrect in some way. I have tried very hard to eliminate the first option. Have re-created the configuration several times, tried tweaking and adjusting all the settings I could without success (most prevent the SA from being established). NAT/RRAS I have seen multiple posts elsewhere suggesting that this could be due to interaction between NAT and the IPSec filters. Possibly the NetA private addresses get rewritten to 216.x.x.x before being compared with the Quick Mode IPSec filters and don't get tunneled because of the mismatch. In fact, The Cable Guy article from June 2005 "TCP/IP Packet Processing Paths" suggests that this is the case, (see step 2 and 4 of the Transit Traffic path). If this is the case, is there a way to exclude NetA-NetB traffic from NAT? Any thoughts, ideas, suggestions, and/or comments are appreciated. Update (2011-06-26) After failing to solve the problem, I resorted to paid Microsoft support. They were unable to solve the problem. Since then I have implemented a solution based on Linux that is working quite well. I will attempt to evaluate any proposed answers as best I can, but current configurations and time constraints will make this slow...

    Read the article

  • netsh wlan add profile not importing passphrase

    - by sirlancelot
    I exported a wireless network connection profile from a Windows 7 machine correctly connected to a WiFi network with a WPA-TKIP passphrase. The exported xml file shows the correct settings and a keyMaterial node which I can only guess is the encrypted passphrase. When I take the xml to another Windows 7 computer and import it using netsh wlan add profile filename="WiFi.xml", it correctly adds the profile's SSID and encryption type, but a balloon pops up saying that I need to enter the passphrase. Is there a way to import the passphrase along with all other settings or am I missing something about adding profiles? Here is the exported xml with personal information removed: <?xml version="1.0"?> <WLANProfile xmlns="http://www.microsoft.com/networking/WLAN/profile/v1"> <name>[removed]</name> <SSIDConfig> <SSID> <hex>[removed]</hex> <name>[removed]</name> </SSID> <nonBroadcast>false</nonBroadcast> </SSIDConfig> <connectionType>ESS</connectionType> <connectionMode>auto</connectionMode> <autoSwitch>false</autoSwitch> <MSM> <security> <authEncryption> <authentication>WPAPSK</authentication> <encryption>TKIP</encryption> <useOneX>false</useOneX> </authEncryption> <sharedKey> <keyType>passPhrase</keyType> <protected>true</protected> <keyMaterial>[removed]</keyMaterial> </sharedKey> </security> </MSM> </WLANProfile> Any help or advice is appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is dual-booting an OS more or less secure than running a virtual machine?

    - by Mark
    I run two operating systems on two separate disk partitions on the same physical machine (a modern MacBook Pro). In order to isolate them from each other, I've taken the following steps: Configured /etc/fstab with ro,noauto (read-only, no auto-mount) Fully encrypted each partition with a separate encryption key (committed to memory) Let's assume that a virus infects my first partition unbeknownst to me. I log out of the first partition (which encrypts the volume), and then turn off the machine to clear the RAM. I then un-encrypt and boot into the second partition. Can I be reasonably confident that the virus has not / cannot infect both partitions, or am I playing with fire here? I realize that MBPs don't ship with a TPM, so a boot-loader infection going unnoticed is still a theoretical possibility. However, this risk seems about equal to the risk of the VMWare/VirtualBox Hypervisor being exploited when running a guest OS, especially since the MBP line uses UEFI instead of BIOS. This leads to my question: is the dual-partitioning approach outlined above more or less secure than using a Virtual Machine for isolation of services? Would that change if my computer had a TPM installed? Background: Note that I am of course taking all the usual additional precautions, such as checking for OS software updates daily, not logging in as an Admin user unless absolutely necessary, running real-time antivirus programs on both partitions, running a host-based firewall, monitoring outgoing network connections, etc. My question is really a public check to see if I'm overlooking anything here and try to figure out if my dual-boot scheme actually is more secure than the Virtual Machine route. Most importantly, I'm just looking to learn more about security issues. EDIT #1: As pointed out in the comments, the scenario is a bit on the paranoid side for my particular use-case. But think about people who may be in corporate or government settings and are considering using a Virtual Machine to run services or applications that are considered "high risk". Are they better off using a VM or a dual-boot scenario as I outlined? An answer that effectively weighs any pros/cons to that trade-off is what I'm really looking for in an answer to this post. EDIT #2: This question was partially fueled by debate about whether a Virtual Machine actually protects a host OS at all. Personally, I think it does, but consider this quote from Theo de Raadt on the OpenBSD mailing list: x86 virtualization is about basically placing another nearly full kernel, full of new bugs, on top of a nasty x86 architecture which barely has correct page protection. Then running your operating system on the other side of this brand new pile of shit. You are absolutely deluded, if not stupid, if you think that a worldwide collection of software engineers who can't write operating systems or applications without security holes, can then turn around and suddenly write virtualization layers without security holes. -http://kerneltrap.org/OpenBSD/Virtualization_Security By quoting Theo's argument, I'm not endorsing it. I'm simply pointing out that there are multiple perspectives here, so I'm trying to find out more about the issue.

    Read the article

  • How to make a 100% UNIQUE dvd? [closed]

    - by sajawikio
    Is it possible to make a DVD which would be next to impossible to replicate exactly even with special equipment? To be clear, not in the sense of making the data itself resistant to piracy - nothing like that. More like as an analogy to antiques - a reproduction of a furniture would be able to be spotted to a trained eye, that it is not the original. Is it possible to do this for a dvd? Like, say a dvd is copied, even by someone who is trying to use even special equipment and is hypothetically dying to copy the dvd exactly for whatever reason - even such copied dvd would be detectable that it is not exactly the original dvd somehow (as if it were a reproduction of an original antique, but not the original), and would be almost or even preferably impossible to actually copy 100% exact the dvd ever again. Just some ideas below on the sort of thing i might go about doing to do this, but really am not sure how or what programs, media, hardware, etc. would do the trick Not sure what would do the trick -- but for instance do there exist any blank dvd's that already come pre-recorded with some sort of serial number or bar code, or other metadata, or an encrypted hash, or something like that? Maybe any blank dvd will do but i should get a special software to extract hardcoded metadata? If so which software? Or special hardware even maybe? Such dvd which the "secret" can be: Well, to know what the "secret" is and if it is present on the disk, it probably should be readable by some software or maybe a particular hardware (i guess preferably only if some sort of key is known and input into the software, even better, only then such secret data on disk can be read, otherwise nothing shows up and it looks like just a regular disk with no secret on it), and Would be impossible to actually replicate, especially not with regular burning hardware and preferably not at all. Other idea: Is there any special software that can direct the write head of laser to physically "mar" the dvd in such a way that, when played in dvd player, makes a particular visual pattern or something like that, also say the mar itself shows up as faint scratch on disk, but would be impossible for someone to do themselves exactly? EDIT: Also to clarify suppose the dvd contains video and music that should be playable on dvd players, maybe a menu too (i.e not a dvd containing software), and also to clarify the question is about how to make dvd 100% unique, not how to make the actual content of dvd protected from "piracy".

    Read the article

  • Installing OpenLDAP on Fedora 12: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49)

    - by Alpha Hydrae
    I've been trying to set up the OpenLDAP installed by default on Fedora 12, very unsuccessfully. My ultimate goal is to use LDAP authentication for user login and Apache, using the OpenLDAP server running on the same machine. The server is running, but the error I always get when I try to use ldapsearch or ldapadd is: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49) I've been following these tutorials, but none of them helped me: http://www.howtoforge.com/openldap_fedora7 http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-9-Manual/ref-guide/s1-ldap-quickstart.html http://www.howtoforge.com/linux_ldap_authentication http://docs.fedoraproject.org/deployment-guide/f12/en-US/html/s1-ldap-pam.html http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/quickstart.html First, some components were already installed, and I installed these with yum: yum install openldap-servers openldap-devel Then, I created a basic slapd.conf file in /etc/openldap: database bdb suffix "dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" rootdn "cn=root,dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" rootpw {SSHA}cxdz55ygPu4T3ykg7dgu+L0VRvsFSeom directory /var/lib/ldap/sniejana-sandbox.com I obtained the rootpw with this command: slappasswd -s changeme I also created the /var/lib/ldap/sniejana-sandbox.com directory and made sure the entire contents of /var/lib/ldap were owned by the ldap user. I found two ldap.conf files, one in /etc and one in /etc/openldap. I don't know which is the right one. If I understood correctly, this file is to configure the client. I put this in both: HOST localhost BASE dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com I then ran the server with: service slapd start It said OK. Most of the tutorials above say to use the command ldapsearch -D "cn=Manager,dc=my-domain,dc=com" -W to ensure that everything's working. When I execute this command, a password prompt appears, and after entering the password, I get the error. ldapsearch -D "cn=root,dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" -W Enter LDAP password: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49) The same thing happens when trying to use ldapadd. I tried with an encrypted and unencrypted password in slapd.conf, it doesn't change anything. Adding a -x for simple authentication doesn't change anything either. netstat -ap confirms the server is listening: tcp 0 0 *:ldap *:* LISTEN 4148/slapd tcp 0 0 *:ldap *:* LISTEN 4148/slapd ps -ef|grep slapd confirms the process is running: ldap 4148 1 0 15:22 ? 00:00:00 /usr/sbin/slapd -h ldap:/// -u ldap Running slaptest procudes config file testing succeeded. I read somewhere that the command ldapsearch -x -b '' -s base '(objectclass=*)' namingContext can confirm the server is running. It appears to work: # extended LDIF # # LDAPv3 # base <> with scope baseObject # filter: (objectclass=*) # requesting: namingContext # # dn: # search result search: 2 result: 0 Success # numResponses: 2 # numEntries: 1 I'm running out of ideas. Am I missing something obvious?

    Read the article

  • Adding a Microsoft Exchange 2010 account to my Windows Phone 7.5 mobile (Nokia Lumia 800) without trusted certificate

    - by MAXE
    I have problems in creating an account on my Nokia Lumia 800 (OS version: 7.10.8773.98, of course with Windows Phone 7.1 mounted with all updates) to one of my company's Microsoft Exchange 2010 server, because it cannot provide a trusted certificate...but only when contacting it from outside my network (like https ://mail.(CompanyName).com). Accessing the server from inside my network (pointing directly to the machine name or internal IP address: https ://(MachineName) or https ://10.0.1.200) gives me NO PROBLEM AT ALL! Setting correctly (I guess) all the parameters for the account (accessing from outside my network), the connection (after correctly set my credentials as asked) will not be established. It gives the next error (translated from my language manually): Error of <CompanyName> There is a problem with the certificate of (Server Address). Please contact support or the provider. Last try: X minutes ago Error code: 80072F06 I've tried all possible configurations and parameters (including the check The server requires an encrypted (SSL) connection, of course), but no way. EDITED: As suggested by Oliver Salzburg, I also tried this way without any results. I tried so: I went to my OWA (Outlook Web Access) that gives me the same problem (problems the certificate, it's not trusted) After accepting to continue, I clicked on the Error in Certificate button of the Internet Explorer 9 address bar - Show Certificates - page Details, show: - Copy to file... button - in the exporting wizard: Next - Binary encoding DER X.509 (.cer) (but there was also Base binary 64 X.509 (.cer), no way) - Next - saved to a new file From my Google Mail Account, I sent a mail to myself the certificate as attachment I read the mail from my WP7 phone, saved the attachment and then ran it: answering Yes to Do you wany to install the certificate? of course... Closed any active program and rebooted the phone Re-tried in synchronizing my account....:(...SAME PROBLEM! EDITED 2: Thanks again to Oliver Salzburg, I tried the next solution: I went to the site https://www.testexchangeconnectivity.com/ I selected Exchange ActiveSync option, as suggested I setted all my parameters, as I made for my phone I also setted the option Ignore SSL attendibility (and in another test I didn't) I performed my test This is the complete log (I removed my parameters): Seems the same problem (machine name in the certificate is different from the external Exchange website domain name?)! It is possible to get rid of this annoying (I know by myself who is this server!) problem? Thank you very much.

    Read the article

  • Why can't I use SSL certs imported via Server Admin in a custom Apache install?

    - by morgant
    I've got a couple of Mac OS X 10.6.8 Server web servers that run a custom AMP255 (Apache 2.x, MySQL 5.x, and PHP 5.x) stack installed using MacPorts. We've got a lot of Mac OS X Server servers and generally install SSL certs via Server Admin and they "just work" in the built-in services, however, these web servers have always had SSL certs installed in a non-standard location and used only for Apache. Long story short, we're trying to standardize this part of our administration and install certs via Server Admin, but have run into the following issue: when the certs are installed via Server Admin and referenced in our Apache conf files, Apache then prompts for a password upon trying to start. It does not seem to be any password we know, certainly not the admin or keychain passwords! We've added the _www user to the certusers (mainly just to ensure they have the proper access to the private key in /etc/certificates/). So, with the custom installed certs we have the following files (basically just pasted in from the company we purchase our certs from): -rw-r--r-- 1 root admin 1395 Apr 10 11:22 *.domain.tld.ca -rw-r--r-- 1 root admin 1656 Apr 10 11:21 *.domain.tld.cert -rw-r--r-- 1 root admin 1680 Apr 10 11:22 *.domain.tld.key And the following in the VirtualHost in /opt/local/apache2/conf/extra/httpd-ssl.conf: SSLCertificateFile /path/to/certs/*.domain.tld.cert SSLCertificateKeyFile /path/to/certs/*.domain.tld.key SSLCACertificateFile /path/to/certs/*.domain.tld.ca This setup functions normally. If we use the certs installed via Server Admin, which both Server Admin & Keychain Assistant show as valid, they're installed in /etc/certificates/ as follows: -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 1655 Apr 9 13:44 *.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.cert.pem -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 4266 Apr 9 13:44 *.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.chain.pem -rw-r----- 1 root certusers 3406 Apr 9 13:44 *.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.concat.pem -rw-r----- 1 root certusers 1751 Apr 9 13:44 *.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.key.pem And if we replace the aforementioned lines in our httpd-ssl.conf with the following: SSLCertificateFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.cert.pem SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.key.pem SSLCertificateChainFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.chain.pem This prompts for the unknown password. I have also tried httpd-ssl.conf configured as follows: SSLCertificateFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.cert.pem SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.key.pem SSLCertificateChainFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.concat.pem And as: SSLCertificateFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.cert.pem SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.key.pem SSLCACertificateFile /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.chain.pem We've verified that the certificate is configured to allow all applications access it (in Keychain Assistant). A diff of the /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.key.pem & *.domain.tld.key files shows the former is encrypted and the latter is not, so we're assuming that Server Admin/Keychain Assistant is encrypting them for some reason. I know I can create an unencrypted key file as follows: sudo openssl rsa -in /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.key.pem -out /etc/certificates/*.domain.tld.SOMELONGHASH.key.no_password.pem But, I can't do that without entering the password. I thought maybe I could export an unencrypted copy of the key from Keychain Admin, but I'm not seeing such an option (not to mention that the .pem options are greyed out in all export options). Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Backing Up vs. Redundancy

    - by TK Kocheran
    I'm currently in stage 2 of 3 of building my home workstation. What this means is that my RAID-0 array of solid state disks will be backed up nightly to a RAID-5 or RAID-6 array of traditional spinning hard disks. However, it recently dawned on me that redundancy is not backup. The main reason for setting up a RAID array with redundancy was to protect myself in the event of a drive failure to serve as an effective backup solution. Wait. What if a bolt of lightning finds a way to travel into my house, through my surge-protector, into my power supply and physically destroys all of my hard disks and SSDs? Well, in that case, I guess I'd be fine because I generally keep most important files (music, pictures, videos) stored in multiple places like on my laptop, my wife's laptop, and an encrypted USB hard drive. Wait. What if a giant hedgehog meteor attacks my house from space traveling at mach 3 and all machines and hard disks are blown to smithereens. Well, I guess I could find a way to do ridiculously slow and cumbersome rsyncs or backups to Amazon's Glacier. Wait. What if there's a nuclear apocalypse... and at this point I start laughing hysterically. At what point does backing up become irrelevant? I completely understand situation one (mechanical drive failure), situation two (workstation compromised or destroyed somehow), possibly even situation three (all machines and disks destroyed), but situation four? There's no questioning the need for backups. None. However, there are three questions I'd really like addressed: To what level should one backup? I definitely understand the merits of physical disk redundancy. I also believe in keeping important files on multiple machines and thinning out the possibility of losing all of my files. Online backups make sense, but they beg the following question. What should I be backing up remotely and how often? It's no problem storage-wise to back up important files (music, pictures, videos) and even configuration and temporal data for all of the machines in my network (all Linux based)... albeit locally. Transferring to the cloud is another story. Worst-case scenario, if I lost all of my configuration for my individual computers, the reality is that I probably lost the machines too. The cloud is a long way away from here; I can run backups over CAT-6 here and see 100MB/s easily, but I'm afraid that I'm only going to see 2MB/s at best when transferring up to the cloud.

    Read the article

  • Installing OpenLDAP: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49)

    - by Arcturus
    Hello. I've been trying to set up the OpenLDAP installed by default on Fedora 12, very unsuccessfully. My ultimate goal is to use LDAP authentication for user login and Apache, using the OpenLDAP server running on the same machine. The server is running, but the error I always get when I try to use ldapsearch or ldapadd is: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49) I've been following these tutorials, but none of them helped me: http://www.howtoforge.com/openldap_fedora7 http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-9-Manual/ref-guide/s1-ldap-quickstart.html http://www.howtoforge.com/linux_ldap_authentication http://docs.fedoraproject.org/deployment-guide/f12/en-US/html/s1-ldap-pam.html http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/quickstart.html First, some components were already installed, and I installed these with yum: yum install openldap-servers openldap-devel Then, I created a basic slapd.conf file in /etc/openldap: database bdb suffix "dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" rootdn "cn=root,dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" rootpw {SSHA}cxdz55ygPu4T3ykg7dgu+L0VRvsFSeom directory /var/lib/ldap/sniejana-sandbox.com I obtained the rootpw with this command: slappasswd -s changeme I also created the /var/lib/ldap/sniejana-sandbox.com directory and made sure the entire contents of /var/lib/ldap were owned by the ldap user. I found two ldap.conf files, one in /etc and one in /etc/openldap. I don't know which is the right one. If I understood correctly, this file is to configure the client. I put this in both: HOST localhost BASE dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com I then ran the server with: service slapd start It said OK. Most of the tutorials above say to use the command ldapsearch -D "cn=Manager,dc=my-domain,dc=com" -W to ensure that everything's working. When I execute this command, a password prompt appears, and after entering the password, I get the error. ldapsearch -D "cn=root,dc=sniejana-sandbox,dc=com" -W Enter LDAP password: ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49) The same thing happens when trying to use ldapadd. I tried with an encrypted and unencrypted password in slapd.conf, it doesn't change anything. Adding a -x for simple authentication doesn't change anything either. netstat -ap confirms the server is listening: tcp 0 0 *:ldap *:* LISTEN 4148/slapd tcp 0 0 *:ldap *:* LISTEN 4148/slapd ps -ef|grep slapd confirms the process is running: ldap 4148 1 0 15:22 ? 00:00:00 /usr/sbin/slapd -h ldap:/// -u ldap Running slaptest procudes config file testing succeeded. I read somewhere that the command ldapsearch -x -b '' -s base '(objectclass=*)' namingContext can confirm the server is running. It appears to work: # extended LDIF # # LDAPv3 # base <> with scope baseObject # filter: (objectclass=*) # requesting: namingContext # # dn: # search result search: 2 result: 0 Success # numResponses: 2 # numEntries: 1 I'm running out of ideas. Am I missing something obvious?

    Read the article

  • Weird IIS with Windows Authentication + IE problem

    - by Paulius Maruška
    Hello. I have a website running on IIS and using Windows Authentication. All users that are configured to get access to the site are form a AD domain (not local users). In the properties of a Website, I have set to use the AD domain as the realm. Now, when using Firefox, Safari or Chrome - Everything is fine. When the user tries to open the site, he get's the login box. he enters simply "username" and "password" (let's pretend that it's an actual login and password :P) and he get's into the site. When using IE, however, things get nasty. When the user tries to open the site - he get's the login box. User enters the "username" and "password" again, but those get rejected! And when the second time login box pops up - it has the username filled in as "web-server-domain-name\username" which is wrong, because web-server-domain-name is not the domain where all users reside (it's "ad-domain"). I've spent days trying to figure out what's going on... Note, that if I manually enter "ad-domain\username" - I get accepted into the site without problems. So, my guess is that IE sends wrong username if domain is not specified. Anyway, IE is the only browser that triggers this behavior! Is it possible to do a server-side fix? Maybe it's possible to somehow auto-map the users to AD users? If it's not solvable server-side - is there a client-side fix for this? Thank you. PS: I'm more of a programmer than a sys-admin, so configuring servers isn't the strong side of mine... :P UPDATE: @Evan: Yes, "Digest authentication for Windows domain servers" is also enabled. @Eric: IIS version is 6.0. The authentication methods enabled are: Integrated and digest - all other methods are disabled. As for the security log. I looked at it, when doing "username" and "password" login in Chrome/Firefox and when doing "ad-domain\username" and "password" login from IE - the generated log messages are the same (I see no difference, anyway). When entering "username" and "password" I don't see any errors in the security (or any other) log, so can't tell what method it's trying to use. UPDATE 2: As suggested by Eric in the comments - I played around with Fiddler... While playing with it, I noticed, that when "username" and "password" is entered in FF and IE - the "Authorization" header value (encrypted) sent by IE is longer (almost two times) than one sent by FF. I tried to disable Windows Integrated authentication and only leave the Digest enabled - that fixed the problem (meaning, IE used the right realm just like other browsers), but that caused bazillion other problems with my site, because with Digest - user impersonation on the server doesn't work (that causes problems, when connecting to database etc). Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • PCI-DSS compliance for business with only swipe terminals [migrated]

    - by rowatt
    I support the IT infrastructure for a small retail business which is now required to undergo a PCI-DSS assessment. The payment service and terminal provider (Streamline) has asked that we use Trustwave to do the PCI-DSS certification. The problem I face is that if I answer all questions and follow Trustwave's requirements to the letter, we will have to invest significantly in networking equipment to segment LANs and /or do internal vulnerability scanning, while at the same time Streamline assures me that the terminals we have (Verifone VX670-B and MagIC3 X-8) are secure, don't store any credit card information and are PCI-DSS compliant so by implication we don't need to take any action to ensure their network security. I'm looking for any suggestions as to how we can most easily meet the networking requirements for PCI-DSS. Some background on our current network setup: single wired LAN, also with WiFi turned on (though if this creates any PCI-DSS complexities we can turn it off). single Netgear ADSL router. This is the only firewall we have in place, and the firewall is out the box configuration (i.e. no DMZ, SNMP etc). Passwords have been changed though :-) a few windows PCs and 2 windows based tills, none of which ever see any credit card information at all. two swipe terminals. Until a few months ago (before we were told we had to be PCI-DSS certified) these terminals did auth/capture over the phone. Streamline suggested we moved to their IP Broadband service, which instead uses an SSL encrypted channel over the internet to do auth/capture, so we now use that service. We don't do any ecommerce or receive payments over the internet. All transactions are either cardholder present, or MOTO with details given over phone and typed direct into terminal. We're based in the UK. As I currently understand it we have three options in order to get PCI-DSS certification. segment our network so the POS terminals are isolated from all PCs, and set up internal vulnerability scanning on that network. don't segment the network, and have to do more internal scanning and have more onerous management of PCs than I think we need (for example, though the tills are Windows based, they are fully managed so I have no control over software update policies, anti virus etc). All PCs have anti virus (MSE) and windows updates automatically applied, but we don't have any centralised go back to auth/capture over phone lines. I can't imagine we are the first merchant to be in this situation. I'm looking for any recommendations a simple, cost effective way to be PCI-DSS compliant - either by doing 1 or 2 above with (hopefully) simple and inexpensive equipment/software, or any other ways if there's a better way to do this. Or... should we just go back to the digital stone age and do auth/capture over the phone, which means we don't need to do anything on our network to be PCI-DSS certified?

    Read the article

  • Good maintained privacy Add-On/settings set that takes usability into account?

    - by Foo Bar
    For some weeks I've been trying to find a good set of Firefox Addons that give me a good portion of privacy/security without losing to much of usability. But I can't seem to find a nice combination of add-ons/settings that I'm happy with. Here's what I tried, together with the pros and cons that I discovered: HTTPS Everywhere: Has only pro's: just install and be happy (no interaction needed), loads known pages SLL-encrypted, is updated fairly often NoScript - Fine, but needs a lot of fine-tuning, often maintained, mainly blocks all non-HTML/CSS Content, but the author sometimes seems to do "untrustworthy" decission RequestPolicy - seems dead (last activity 6 months ago, has some annoying bugs, official support mail address is dead), but the purpose of this is really great: gives you full control over cross-site requests: blocks by default, let's you add sites to a whitelist, once this is done it works interaction-less in the background AdBlock Edge: blocks specific cross-site requests from a pre-defined whitelist (can never be fully sure, need to trust others) Disconnect: like AdBlock Edge, just looking different, has no interaction possibilities (can never be fully sure, need to trust others, can not interact even if I wanted to) Firefox own Cookie Managment (block by default, whitelist specific sites), after building own whitelist it does it's work in the background and I have full control All These addons together basically block everything unsecure. But there are a lot of redundancies: NoScript has a mixed-content blocker, but FF has it's own for a while now. Also the Cookie blocker from NoScript is reduntant to my FF-Cookie setting. NoScript also has an XSS-blocker, which is redundant to RequestPolicy. Disconnect and AdBlock are extremly redundant, but not fully. And there are some bugs (especially RequestPolicy). And RequestPolicy seems to be dead. All in all, this list is great but has these heavy drawbacks. My favourite set would be "NoScript Light" (only script blocking, without all the additonal redundant-to-other-addons hick-hack it does) + HTTPS Everywhere + RequestPolicy-clone (maintained, less buggy), because RequestPolicy makes all other "site-blockers" obsolete (because it blocks everything by default and let's me create a whitelist). But since RequestPolicy is buggy and seems to be dead I have to fallback to AdBlock Edge and Disconnect, which don't block all and and need more maintaining (whitelist updates, trust-check). Are there addons that fulfill my wishes?

    Read the article

  • Weird IIS with Windows Authentication + IE problem

    - by Paulius Maruška
    I have a website running on IIS and using Windows Authentication. All users that are configured to get access to the site are form a AD domain (not local users). In the properties of a Website, I have set to use the AD domain as the realm. Now, when using Firefox, Safari or Chrome - Everything is fine. When the user tries to open the site, he get's the login box. he enters simply "username" and "password" (let's pretend that it's an actual login and password :P) and he get's into the site. When using IE, however, things get nasty. When the user tries to open the site - he get's the login box. User enters the "username" and "password" again, but those get rejected! And when the second time login box pops up - it has the username filled in as "web-server-domain-name\username" which is wrong, because web-server-domain-name is not the domain where all users reside (it's "ad-domain"). I've spent days trying to figure out what's going on... Note, that if I manually enter "ad-domain\username" - I get accepted into the site without problems. So, my guess is that IE sends wrong username if domain is not specified. Anyway, IE is the only browser that triggers this behavior! Is it possible to do a server-side fix? Maybe it's possible to somehow auto-map the users to AD users? If it's not solvable server-side - is there a client-side fix for this? Thank you. PS: I'm more of a programmer than a sys-admin, so configuring servers isn't the strong side of mine... :P UPDATE: @Evan: Yes, "Digest authentication for Windows domain servers" is also enabled. @Eric: IIS version is 6.0. The authentication methods enabled are: Integrated and digest - all other methods are disabled. As for the security log. I looked at it, when doing "username" and "password" login in Chrome/Firefox and when doing "ad-domain\username" and "password" login from IE - the generated log messages are the same (I see no difference, anyway). When entering "username" and "password" I don't see any errors in the security (or any other) log, so can't tell what method it's trying to use. UPDATE 2: As suggested by Eric in the comments - I played around with Fiddler... While playing with it, I noticed, that when "username" and "password" is entered in FF and IE - the "Authorization" header value (encrypted) sent by IE is longer (almost two times) than one sent by FF. I tried to disable Windows Integrated authentication and only leave the Digest enabled - that fixed the problem (meaning, IE used the right realm just like other browsers), but that caused bazillion other problems with my site, because with Digest - user impersonation on the server doesn't work (that causes problems, when connecting to database etc). Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Why won't IE let users login to a website unless in In Private mode?

    - by Richard Fawcett
    I'm not entirely sure this belongs on SuperUser.com. I also considered ServerFault.com and StackOverflow.com, but on balance, I think it should belong here? We host a website which has the same code responding to multiple domain names. On 28th December (without any changes deployed to the website) a percentage of users suddenly could not login, and the blank login page was just rendered again even when the correct credentials were entered. The issue is still ongoing. After remote controlling an affected user's PC, we've found the following: The issue affects Internet Explorer 9. The user can login from the same machine on Chrome. The user can login from an In Private browser session using IE9. The user can login if the website is added to the Trusted Sites security zone. The user can NOT login from an IE session in safe mode (started with iexplore -extoff). Only one hostname that the website responds to prevents login, the same user account on the other hostname works fine (note that this is identical code and database running server side), even though that site is not in trusted sites zone. Series of HTTP requests in the failure case: GET request to protected page, returns a 302 FOUND response to login page. GET request to login page. POST to login page, containing credentials, returns redirect to protected page. GET request to protected page... for some reason auth fails and browser is redirected to login page, as in step 1. Other information: Operating system is Windows 7 Ultimate Edition. AV system is AVG Internet Security 2012. I can think of lots of things that could be going wrong, but in every case, one of the findings above is incompatible with the theory. Any ideas what is causing login to fail? Update 06-Jan-2012 Enhanced logging has shown that the .ASPXAUTH cookie is being set in step 3. Its expiry date is 28 days in the future, its path is /, the domain is mysite.com, and its value is an encrypted forms ticket, as expected. However, the cookie is not being received by the web server during step 4. Other cookies are being presented to the server during step 4, it's just this one that is missing. I've seen that cookies are usually set with a domain starting with a period, but mine isn't. Should it be .mysite.com instead of mysite.com? However, if this was wrong, it would presumably affect all users?

    Read the article

  • a couple of questions about proxy server,vpn & how they works

    - by Q8Y
    I have a couple of questions that are related to security. Correct me if i'm wrong :) If I want to request something (ex: visiting www.google.com): my computer will request that then it will to the ISP then to my ISP proxy server that will take the request and act as a middle man in this situation ask for the site (www.google.com) and retrieve it then the proxy will send it back to me. I know that its being done like that. So, my question is that, in this situation my ISP knows everything and what I did request, and the proxy server is set by default (when I ask for an internet subscription). So, if I use here another proxy (lets assume that is a highly anonymous and my ISP can't detect my IP address from it), would I visit my ISP and then from my ISP it will redirect me to the new proxy server that I provide? Will it know that there is someone using another proxy? Or will it go to another network rather than my ISP? Because I didn't get the view clearly. This question is related to the first one. When I use a VPN, I know that VPN provides for me a tunneling, encryption and much more features that a proxy can't. So my data is travelling securely and my ISP can't know what I'm doing. But my questions are: From where is the tunneling started? Does it start after I visit the ISP network (since they are the one that are responsible for forwarding my data and requests)? If so, then not all my connection is tunneled in this way, there is a part that is not being tunneled. Since, every time I need to do anything I have to go to my ISP and ask to do that. Correct me if I misunderstand this. I know that VPN can let my computer be virtually in another place and access its resources (ex: be like in my office while I'm in my home. This is done via VPN). If I use a VPN service provider so that I can access the internet securely and without being monitored by my ISP. In this case, where is my encrypted data saved? Is it saved in my ISP or in the VPN service provider? If I use a VPN, does anyone on the internet know what I'm doing or who I am? Even the VPN service provider? Can they know me? I think they should know the person that is asking for this VPN service, am I right?

    Read the article

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