Search Results

Search found 11444 results on 458 pages for 'protected internal'.

Page 55/458 | < Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >

  • Multiple Set Peer for VPN Failover

    - by Kyle Brandt
    I will have two Cisco routers at Location A serving the same internal networks, and one router in location B. Currently, I have one router in each location with a IPSec site-to-site tunnel connecting them. It looks something like: Location A: crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location B set peer 12.12.12.12 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Location B: crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location A set peer 11.11.11.11 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Can I achieve fail over by simply adding another set peer at location B?: Location A (New secondary Router, configuration on previous router stays the same): crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location B set peer 12.12.12.12 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Location B (Configuration Changed): crypto map crypto-map-1 1 ipsec-isakmp description Tunnel to Location A set peer 11.11.11.11 ! 11.11.11.100 is the ip of the new second router at location A set peer 11.11.11.100 set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address internal-ips Cisco Says: For crypto map entries created with the crypto map map-name seq-num ipsec-isakmp command, you can specify multiple peers by repeating this command. The peer that packets are actually sent to is determined by the last peer that the router heard from (received either traffic or a negotiation request from) for a given data flow. If the attempt fails with the first peer, Internet Key Exchange (IKE) tries the next peer on the crypto map list. But I don't fully understand that in the context of a failover scenerio (One of the routers as Location A blowing up).

    Read the article

  • Can I have HTTPS and HTTP for a single instance of an application?

    - by Sivakanesh
    I'm planning a web application that will have its own server behind the corporate firewall. There will be two sets of users, internal and external to the organisation. Internal users will be located inside of the firewall as same as the application server and the external users are outside over the internet. All users will be authenticated via a login by the web application. I would like a setup where the external users will be required to access whole of the application using SSL and the internal users via standard http connection. I would like to know, if it is possible to setup a single instance the application so that it can be accessed via SSL for external (over the internet) users AND over http for internal users? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Sonicwall NAT Policy Loopback

    - by John
    I have an issue and am pretty perplexed over it. I have a sonicwall and its setup with NAT polices and reflexive nat for an internal web server. That is, only 2 policies, no loopback policy, and the internal clients can access the web server by public ip no problems. Now, on another connection, another sonicwall, i have the exact same setup for another web server, with exact same policies (obviously different IP's) and the internal clients can't access the internal website by its public IP without creating the loopback policy. Maybe on the first one I've overlooked it, but I don't see any loopback what so ever and its working fine. My question is, does anyone know why the first one works like this but the second one needs the loopback policy? Thanks

    Read the article

  • DNS name not on cert

    - by blsub6
    I've got an interesting one... My users have always typed in 'mail' to get to their mail. There was an internal DNS A record that resolved that to the IP of the mail server. I'm putting in an Exchange server to replace that. In order for people to get their mail, I try putting in an A record that does the same thing as the previous one. When I try to get to OWA, it tells me that the certificate on the server is not trusted. I only have the names: mail.mydomain.com autodiscover.mydomain.com autodiscover.mydomain.internal mydomain.internal mailserver.mydomain.internal so when the browser sees that this cert is trying to cover https://mail/owa it says the cert's not trusted. What amy I supposed to do about that?

    Read the article

  • How to determine the Kerberos realm from an LDAP directory?

    - by tstm
    I have two Kerberos realms I can authenticate against. One of them I can control, and the other one is external from my point of view. I also have an internal user database in LDAP. Let's say the realms are INTERNAL.COM and EXTERNAL.COM. In ldap I have user entries like this: 1054 uid=testuser,ou=People,dc=tml,dc=hut,dc=fi shadowFlag: 0 shadowMin: -1 loginShell: /bin/bash shadowInactive: -1 displayName: User Test objectClass: top objectClass: account objectClass: posixAccount objectClass: shadowAccount objectClass: person objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: inetOrgPerson uidNumber: 1059 shadowWarning: 14 uid: testuser shadowMax: 99999 gidNumber: 1024 gecos: User Test sn: Test homeDirectory: /home/testuser mail: [email protected] givenName: User shadowLastChange: 15504 shadowExpire: 15522 cn: User.Test userPassword: {SASL}[email protected] What I would like to do, somehow, is to specify per-user basis to which authentication server / realm the user is authenticated against. Configuring kerberos to handle multiple realms is easy. But how to I configure other instances, like PAM, to handle the fact that some users are from INTERNAL.COM and some from EXTERNAL.COM? There needs to be an LDAP lookup of some kind where the realm and the authentication name is fetched from, and then the actual authentication itself. Is there a standardized way to add this information to LDAP, or look it up? Are there some other workarounds for a multi-realm user base? I might be ok with a single realm solution, too, as long as I can specify the user name - realm -combination for the user separately.

    Read the article

  • How to increase the speed between two external hard drives on my laptop?

    - by Roman
    Hello, I own Sony Vaio Z laptop with two external USB ports. It's quite new and has USB 2.0 support. I'm using Vista x64 on it. I also have two external usb hard drives, Iomega 500GB and WD for 1TB. Every hard drive has USB 2.0 support. I connect two devices to my laptop and trying to copy date from one hard drive to another. But it takes a lot of time! The speed is about 15 Megabytes per second. I have to wait toooooo long to copy all the information from one hard drive to another. When I try to copy information from my internal (SSD) hard drive, it works fine for both external drives. The speed is very high and it shows me something about 100 Megabytes per second. It makes me feel that USB 2.0 is OK on both drives. But when I'm trying to copy from one external drive to another external, I still get very low speed. I checked out Device Manager and here is the settings I have: (sorry, can't upload image because of my rating, check this url: http://picbite.com/image/122073daljo/ ) I think it's because two of my external drives use the same USB 2.0 controller. Is there any way to make it work faster? Is it possible to move one of my USB ports to other USB 2.0 controller? Or is there any software which can help me to automate copying all the files thru my internal drive? I have only about 3 gigabytes free space on internal drive and it's quite difficult to move manually every file from one hard drive to internal and then again to another internal.

    Read the article

  • How to increase the speed between two external hard drives on my laptop?

    - by Roman
    Hello, I own Sony Vaio Z laptop with two external USB ports. It's quite new and has USB 2.0 support. I'm using Vista x64 on it. I also have two external usb hard drives, Iomega 500GB and WD for 1TB. Every hard drive has USB 2.0 support. I connect two devices to my laptop and trying to copy date from one hard drive to another. But it takes a lot of time! The speed is about 15 Megabytes per second. I have to wait toooooo long to copy all the information from one hard drive to another. When I try to copy information from my internal (SSD) hard drive, it works fine for both external drives. The speed is very high and it shows me something about 100 Megabytes per second. It makes me feel that USB 2.0 is OK on both drives. But when I'm trying to copy from one external drive to another external, I still get very low speed. I checked out Device Manager and here is the settings I have: (sorry, can't upload image because of my rating, check this url: http://picbite.com/image/122073daljo/ ) I think it's because two of my external drives use the same USB 2.0 controller. Is there any way to make it work faster? Is it possible to move one of my USB ports to other USB 2.0 controller? Or is there any software which can help me to automate copying all the files thru my internal drive? I have only about 3 gigabytes free space on internal drive and it's quite difficult to move manually every file from one hard drive to internal and then again to another internal.

    Read the article

  • Why can host and nslookup resolve a name but dig cannot?

    - by musashiXXX
    Can anyone tell me why this is happening? I can resolve a hostname using host and/or nslookup but forward lookups do not work with dig; reverse lookups do: musashixxx@box:~$ host someserver someserver.somenet.internal has address 192.168.0.252 musashixxx@box:~$ host 192.168.0.252 252.0.168.192.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer someserver.somenet.internal. musashixxx@box:~$ nslookup someserver Server: 192.168.0.253 Address: 192.168.0.253#53 Name: someserver.somenet.internal Address: 192.168.0.252 musashixxx@box:~$ nslookup 192.168.0.252 Server: 192.168.0.253 Address: 192.168.0.253#53 252.0.168.192.in-addr.arpa name = someserver.somenet.internal. musashixxx@box:~$ dig someserver ; <<>> DiG 9.8.1-P1 <<>> someserver ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 55306 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;someserver. IN A ;; Query time: 0 msec ;; SERVER: 192.168.0.253#53(192.168.0.253) ;; WHEN: Wed Oct 3 15:47:38 2012 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 27 musashixxx@box:~$ dig -x 192.168.0.252 ; <<>> DiG 9.8.1-P1 <<>> -x 192.168.0.252 ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 28126 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;252.0.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR ;; ANSWER SECTION: 252.0.168.192.in-addr.arpa. 3600 IN PTR someserver.somenet.internal. ;; Query time: 0 msec ;; SERVER: 192.168.0.253#53(192.168.0.253) ;; WHEN: Wed Oct 3 15:49:11 2012 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 86 Here's what my resolv.conf looks like: nameserver 192.168.0.253 search somenet.internal Is this behavior normal? Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • iptables and snatting to different networks

    - by codingfreak
    linuxbox (p.q.r.t) | | INTERNAL ------ ABCD ----- INTERNET (p.q.r.s) (m.n.o.k) ABCD has 3 interfaces connected to linuxbox, INTERNAL N/W, INTERNET. Linuxbox has a private address (p.q.r.t). At present I am snatting the packets from linuxbox to INTERNET at ABCD. I have a small doubt regarding the FTP from linuxbox since I have to support ftp from linuxbox to both INTERNAL N/W as well as in INTERNET. How can I right a rule in iptables present in ABCD where it can decide if the destination ip-address of ftp server is within INTERNAL N/W or in INTERNET and do natting accordingly.

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu 10.04 Windows2003 adding a route for GPO assignment

    - by David Carvalho
    I want the PC's that receive IP from my Ubuntu DHCP3-server to be able to retrieve the GPOs that are on my windows 2003 server. I'm using virtualbox and 3 virtual machines: 1 windows 2003 server 192.168.0.2 with 1 NIC (internal network). 1 ubuntu server 10.04 lts 192.168.0.1 with 1 NIC (internal network) and 3 aliases 192.168.21.0, 192.168.22.0, 192.168.100.0 1 Windows XP machine with 3 NIC's (internal network).

    Read the article

  • Port knocking via SSH tunnels

    - by j0ker
    I have a server running in my university's internal network. There is only one SSH daemon running which is secured by port knocking with knockd. Works fine if I try to connect from within the internal network. But since the server has no external IP, I have to tunnel into the internal network every time I want to access the server from outside. And since tunneling only works for a single port I cannot do the port knocking as easily as from an internal client. In fact, I don't get it to work at all. What I'm trying is opening tunnels for all the different ports that have to be knocked. Then I send TCP-SYN packets into the tunnels. But that doesn't work even for a single port. If I establish the tunnel on the first port in the knock sequence and send a packet through it, it doesn't reach the server. There is no entry in the log file of knockd, while there should be something like 123.45.67.89: openSSH: Stage 1 (as shown with internal knocks). So I guess, the problem doesn't exist within my knocking script but is a more general one. Are there any known problems with what I'm trying to do? Is it even possible or am I missing something? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Cisco access-list confusion

    - by LonelyLonelyNetworkN00b
    I'm having troubles implementing access-lists on my asa 5510 (8.2) in a way that makes sense for me. I have one access-list for every interface i have on the device. The access-lists are added to the interface via the access-group command. let's say I have these access-lists access-group WAN_access_in in interface WAN access-group INTERNAL_access_in in interface INTERNAL access-group Production_access_in in interface PRODUCTION WAN has security level 0, Internal Security level 100, Production has security level 50. What i want to do is have an easy way to poke holes from Production to Internal. This seams to be pretty easy, but then the whole notion of security levels doesn't seam to matter any more. I then can't exit out the WAN interface. I would need to add an ANY ANY access-list, which in turn opens access completely for the INTERNAL net. I could solve this by issuing explicit DENY ACEs for my internal net, but that sounds like quite the hassle. How is this done in practice? In iptables i would use a logic of something like this. If source equals production-subnet and outgoing interface equals WAN. ACCEPT.

    Read the article

  • tc u32 --- how to match L2 protocols in recent kernels?

    - by brownian
    I have a nice shaper, with hashed filtering, built at a linux bridge. In short, br0 connects external and internal physical interfaces, VLAN tagged packets are bridged "transparently" (I mean, no VLAN interfaces are there). Now, different kernels do it differently. I can be wrong with exact kernel verions ranges, please forgive me. Thanks. 2.6.26 So, in debian, 2.6.26 and up (up to 2.6.32, I believe) --- this works: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 flowid 1:200 Here, "kernel" matches two bytes in "protocol" field with 0x8100, but counts the beginning of ip packet as a "zero position" (sorry for my English, if I'm a bit unclear). 2.6.32 Again, in debian (I've not built vanilla kernel), 2.6.32-5 --- this works: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 at 20 flowid 1:200 Here, "kernel" matches the same for protocol, but counts offset from the beginning of this protocol's header --- I have to add 4 bytes to offset (20, not 16 for dst address). It's ok, seems more logical, as for me. 3.2.11, the latest stable now This works --- as if there is no 802.1q tag at all: tc filter add dev internal protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 ht 1:64 match ip dst 192.168.1.100 flowid 1:200 The problem is that I couldn't find a way to match 802.1q tag so far. Matching 802.1q tag at past I could do this before as follows: tc filter add dev internal protocol 802.1q parent 1:0 prio 100 \ u32 match u16 0x0ed8 0x0fff at -4 flowid 1:300 Now I'm unable to match 802.1q tag with at 0, at -2, at -4, at -6 or like that. The main issue that I have zero hits count --- this filter is not being checked at all, "wrong protocol", in other words. Please, anyone, help me :-) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Setting up sendmail to perform mail routing

    - by Diden
    Is sendmail is able to do the following: Forward many user emails to office 365:- [email protected] -> [email protected] [email protected] -> [email protected] [email protected] -> [email protected] [email protected] -> [email protected] Forward the following to a separate server to run php scripts:- [email protected] [email protected] An autoresponder will be sent to the sender. Does anyone know of any sample configuration I could get this started on? Is there a good autoresponder for sendmail? Our emails are hosted on Office365 and it does not allow us to run scripts. Therefore I was considering this option. Is this viable? Please refer to the diagram for more information. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Replicate portion of an LDAP directory to external server

    - by colemanm
    We're in the process of setting up a Jabber server on Amazon EC2 right now, and we'd like to have our internal users authenticate via LDAP so we don't have to create/manage a separate set of user accounts than the master directory in the office. My question is: is there a way to copy, unidirectionally, a segment of our internal LDAP directory (the user accounts OU) to an external LDAP server and authenticate Jabber against that? We're trying to work around having our externally hosted machines out in the cloud accessing our internal network directly... If we can replicate in one direction only a subset of the user accounts, then if that gets compromised we don't necessarily have a critical security breach into our internal network.

    Read the article

  • Seperate external and intranet portals using the same functions .htaccess

    - by jezzipin
    We are currently struggling with setting up rules for a .htaccess file for a website built upon our company product. The product is built using PLSQL and procedures can be accessed using URLs. We use this functionality to present different options to our users. These options can be injected into HTML pages using replacement tags. So, the tag [user_menu] is always replaced with: /wd_portal_cand.menu?p_web_site_id={variable1}&p_candidate_id={variable2} for external sites and /intranet/wd_portal_cand.menu?p_web_site_id={variable1}&p_candidate_id={variable2} for internal sites. The issue we are having is twofold. We need to write our .htaccess rules so that the user can access the functionality whether they are internal or external. So, the links should work as follows: http://www.example.com/wd_portal_cand.menu?p_web_site_id={variable1}&p_candidate_id={variable2} or http://www.example.com/internal/wd_portal_cand.menu?p_web_site_id={variable1}&p_candidate_id={variable2} This is the other problem. As you can see for the internal link above, the procedure needs to be prefixed with internal instead or intranet. We cannot change this in our standard tags as this will affect other sites so we need to achieve this also using htaccess. Could anyone assist with this issue? I apologise if this is brief or confusing but it's something i've never done before and have been given the task of doing. I apologise for the lack of code that will be posted above however I am a front end developer and have been left to make these changes having no prior experience of .htaccess to please bare with me.

    Read the article

  • Cisco 1841 and routing /29 address

    - by Jonathan
    Could someone please explain in general terms how I'd configure a Cisco 1841 (2x ethernet ports) to route a public /29 address block (6 hosts) to my internal network. I wish to give the Cisco router one public IP and then several of my internal Windows servers will receive the other public IP addresses. Other hosts behind the router will access Internet via NAT. I'm a bit confused as I've only ever setup routers/firewalls that had a single public IP address with NAT and port forwarding to internal servers.

    Read the article

  • Configuring Windows Server Backup Destination Drive Sets

    - by Nicholas
    Is it possible to set up the standard backup system in SBS 2011 (or Server 2008 R2) to use an internal drive as a destination as well as external drives? Before you say yes, from my tests and from what I've read on the web, backups with internal drives included as a destination always seems to prefer the internal drive over connected external ones. (Regardless of what drive might be marked as 'active'). So no data ever gets written to a plugged in external drive. In my opinion external drives should always have priority over internal drives or including them is pointless.

    Read the article

  • PHP scripts run only in webroot directory,and return 500 error in other dirs

    - by a44
    I have uploaded a folder with php scripts and they run only when they are in the webroot directory,Everytime i try to execute php script in some internal dir,i get internal server error,even if it works in the parent directory EDIT:So,i it's apache 2 server,nothing is logged in my error log about the errors in the internal directory , permissions for php file and for the direcory are -rw-r--r-- drwxrwxr-x

    Read the article

  • Remote access and local access same hostname

    - by cpf
    Hi serverfault, I have a server in a clients network, seperated from theirs with a router/firewall, the intention is to have this server available through one hostname (example.com) My idea is to have (at least) a DNS server in the outside, to have outside (out of the clients' network) access the internal server. The problem would at that point be the internal client (PC A) My question: What would I have to do to make something like this work? Is it even possible or already done? The goal is to not have to change anything on either PC A or PC B, while both should access the same "internal server" while surfing to "example.com" Perhaps adding logic to the DNS server would work (Detect the external IP of internal client [PC A] is the same as the IP for example.com - Give the local IP as reply?) Anyhow: Thanks for helping me think on this!

    Read the article

  • Duplication of Windows 7 Backup

    - by Steven Pickles
    I use the built in backup utility for Windows 7 because it's automated and flexible enough to allow me to schedule a daily shadow copy backup of particular files and folders directly to a separate internal RAID 0 array (2 x 1TB). It's also lightweight and stays out of the way. For off-site backup purposes, each week I copy the contents of the internal backup from the RAID 0 array to an external 1 TB drive. I then store move this drive to a different building. The copy from the internal backup to the external backup typically works like this: mount and erase contents of external drive highlight "file" on internal drive, hit CTRL+C CTRL+V on root directory of external drive Is there a better way to synchronize? Microsoft's SyncToy application does a pitiful job, and often leaves the folders not truly synchronized... which completely defeats the ability to use the backup's restore feature.

    Read the article

  • When using Windows 2003 DNS Server, how do I configure it to resolve a particular FQDN but rely on e

    - by Corey
    Let's say I have a web-server on my internal network which is behind a NAT router. I have my external DNS for the “xyz.com” domain configured with an A record for “foo” that points to my router's public address. I want my internal network clients to resolve foo.xyz.com to the internal address. However, this is the only xyz.com record that should point to an internal address. Do I need to create a primary zone for xyz.com and mirror all the records from my external zone with the exception of “foo” (this is what I am doing now), or is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Setting up central git repo on local Mac network

    - by Dashman
    We are a team of three, all working on our local machines on the same internal network. We will all be working on websites in local working copies of the same Git repo hosted on Github. We have an internal staging machine here (dev.internal), and I am looking for a way for us to be able to push to this machine. At each milestone in the development cycle. In essence, all I really want us to be able to do is add the dev.internal machine as a remote, and push to this whenever we are ready. Could somebody please point me in the right direction to get this set up?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >