Search Results

Search found 62215 results on 2489 pages for 'http basic authentication'.

Page 57/2489 | < Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >

  • Is it possible to configure simultaneous authentication against 2 different AD domains by IIS 7?

    - by just3ws
    Basically, I need to be able to attempt to authenticate against two different AD domains from IIS. I'd like to be able to automatically query both AD's and whichever comes back with an authentication wins. The users are completely separate and will only exist in their respective domain.         IIS           |           |   /-------------\   |                 |  ------        ------  AD1         AD2  JoeU        AmyU  JillU         JohnU So, if IIS requests to authenticate JoeU it will query both domains. JoeU will be found in AD1 so we can ignore whatever response comes back from AD2. Is this even possible using stock IIS 7? Is there a middleware or something to allow this type of configuration on IIS 7? Would this be a job for some kind of middleware sitting between IIS and the AD domains?

    Read the article

  • Security settings for this service require 'Basic' Authentication

    - by Jake Rutherford
    Had an issue calling WCF service today. The following exception was being thrown when service was called:WebHost failed to process a request. Sender Information: System.ServiceModel.ServiceHostingEnvironment+HostingManager/35320229 Exception: System.ServiceModel.ServiceActivationException: The service '/InteliChartVendorCommunication/VendorService.svc' cannot be activated due to an exception during compilation.  The exception message is: Security settings for this service require 'Basic' Authentication but it is not enabled for the IIS application that hosts this service..Ensured Basic authentication was indeed enabled in IIS before getting stumped on what actual issue could be. Turns out it was CustomErrors setting. Value was set to "off" vs "Off". Would have expected different exception from .NET (i.e. web.config parse exception) but it works now either way.

    Read the article

  • New .Net Authentication in 4.5.1

    - by Aligned
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/Aligned/archive/2013/11/05/new-.net-authentication-in-4.5.1.aspxThere has been a lot of traffic on my post about Simple Membership that came with the File new Project MVC 4 in 2012. I was reading the release notes for Visual Studio 2013 and .Net 4.5.1 and it mentioned a new/updated Authentication approach. “ASP.NET Identity is the new membership system for ASP.NET applications. ASP.NET Identity makes it easy to integrate user-specific profile data with application data. ASP.NET Identity also allows you to choose the persistence model for user profiles in your application. You can store the data in a SQL Server database or another data store, including NoSQL data stores such as Windows Azure Storage Tables” There’s a great page on the asp.net site that gives an introduction, overview, how to use it, and how to migrate to it. I won’t be doing a new project for awhile at work, but I’ll definitely be looking into this more when I get the time.

    Read the article

  • URL Rewrite – Protocol (http/https) in the Action

    - by OWScott
    IIS URL Rewrite supports server variables for pretty much every part of the URL and http header. However, there is one commonly used server variable that isn’t readily available.  That’s the protocol—HTTP or HTTPS. You can easily check if a page request uses HTTP or HTTPS, but that only works in the conditions part of the rule.  There isn’t a variable available to dynamically set the protocol in the action part of the rule.  What I wish is that there would be a variable like {HTTP_PROTOCOL} which would have a value of ‘HTTP’ or ‘HTTPS’.  There is a server variable called {HTTPS}, but the values of ‘on’ and ‘off’ aren’t practical in the action.  You can also use {SERVER_PORT} or {SERVER_PORT_SECURE}, but again, they aren’t useful in the action. Let me illustrate.  The following rule will redirect traffic for http(s)://localtest.me/ to http://www.localtest.me/. <rule name="Redirect to www"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="http://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> The problem is that it forces the request to HTTP even if the original request was for HTTPS. Interestingly enough, I planned to blog about this topic this week when I noticed in my twitter feed yesterday that Jeff Graves, a former colleague of mine, just wrote an excellent blog post about this very topic.  He beat me to the punch by just a couple days.  However, I figured I would still write my blog post on this topic.  While his solution is a excellent one, I personally handle this another way most of the time.  Plus, it’s a commonly asked question that isn’t documented well enough on the web yet, so having another article on the web won’t hurt. I can think of four different ways to handle this, and depending on your situation you may lean towards any of the four.  Don’t let the choices overwhelm you though.  Let’s keep it simple, Option 1 is what I use most of the time, Option 2 is what Jeff proposed and is the safest option, and Option 3 and Option 4 need only be considered if you have a more unique situation.  All four options will work for most situations. Option 1 – CACHE_URL, single rule There is a server variable that has the protocol in it; {CACHE_URL}.  This server variable contains the entire URL string (e.g. http://www.localtest.me:80/info.aspx?id=5)  All we need to do is extract the HTTP or HTTPS and we’ll be set. This tends to be my preferred way to handle this situation. Indeed, Jeff did briefly mention this in his blog post: … you could use a condition on the CACHE_URL variable and a back reference in the rewritten URL. The problem there is that you then need to match all of the conditions which could be a problem if your rule depends on a logical “or” match for conditions. Thus the problem.  If you have multiple conditions set to “Match Any” rather than “Match All” then this option won’t work.  However, I find that 95% of all rules that I write use “Match All” and therefore, being the lazy administrator that I am I like this simple solution that only requires adding a single condition to a rule.  The caveat is that if you use “Match Any” then you must consider one of the next two options. Enough with the preamble.  Here’s how it works.  Add a condition that checks for {CACHE_URL} with a pattern of “^(.+)://” like so: How you have a back-reference to the part before the ://, which is our treasured HTTP or HTTPS.  In URL Rewrite 2.0 or greater you can check the “Track capture groups across conditions”, make that condition the first condition, and you have yourself a back-reference of {C:1}. The “Redirect to www” example with support for maintaining the protocol, will become: <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions trackAllCaptures="true"> <add input="{CACHE_URL}" pattern="^(.+)://" /> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{C:1}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> It’s not as easy as it would be if Microsoft gave us a built-in {HTTP_PROTOCOL} variable, but it’s pretty close. I also like this option since I often create rule examples for other people and this type of rule is portable since it’s self-contained within a single rule. Option 2 – Using a Rewrite Map For a safer rule that works for both “Match Any” and “Match All” situations, you can use the Rewrite Map solution that Jeff proposed.  It’s a perfectly good solution with the only drawback being the ever so slight extra effort to set it up since you need to create a rewrite map before you create the rule.  In other words, if you choose to use this as your sole method of handling the protocol, you’ll be safe. After you create a Rewrite Map called MapProtocol, you can use “{MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}” for the protocol within any rule action.  Following is an example using a Rewrite Map. <rewrite> <rules> <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> </rules> <rewriteMaps> <rewriteMap name="MapProtocol"> <add key="on" value="https" /> <add key="off" value="http" /> </rewriteMap> </rewriteMaps> </rewrite> Option 3 – CACHE_URL, Multi-rule If you have many rules that will use the protocol, you can create your own server variable which can be used in subsequent rules. This option is no easier to set up than Option 2 above, but you can use it if you prefer the easier to remember syntax of {HTTP_PROTOCOL} vs. {MapProtocol:{HTTPS}}. The potential issue with this rule is that if you don’t have access to the server level (e.g. in a shared environment) then you cannot set server variables without permission. First, create a rule and place it at the top of the set of rules.  You can create this at the server, site or subfolder level.  However, if you create it at the site or subfolder level then the HTTP_PROTOCOL server variable needs to be approved at the server level.  This can be achieved in IIS Manager by navigating to URL Rewrite at the server level, clicking on “View Server Variables” from the Actions pane, and added HTTP_PROTOCOL. If you create the rule at the server level then this step is not necessary.  Following is an example of the first rule to create the HTTP_PROTOCOL and then a rule that uses it.  The Create HTTP_PROTOCOL rule only needs to be created once on the server. <rule name="Create HTTP_PROTOCOL"> <match url=".*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{CACHE_URL}" pattern="^(.+)://" /> </conditions> <serverVariables> <set name="HTTP_PROTOCOL" value="{C:1}" /> </serverVariables> <action type="None" /> </rule>   <rule name="Redirect to www" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="{HTTP_PROTOCOL}://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> Option 4 – Multi-rule Just to be complete I’ll include an example of how to achieve the same thing with multiple rules. I don’t see any reason to use it over the previous examples, but I’ll include an example anyway.  Note that it will only work with the “Match All” setting for the conditions. <rule name="Redirect to www - http" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> <add input="{HTTPS}" pattern="off" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="http://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> <rule name="Redirect to www - https" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="(.*)" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^localtest\.me$" /> <add input="{HTTPS}" pattern="on" /> </conditions> <action type="Redirect" url="https://www.localtest.me/{R:1}" /> </rule> Conclusion Above are four working examples of methods to call the protocol (HTTP or HTTPS) from the action of a URL Rewrite rule.  You can use whichever method you most prefer.  I’ve listed them in the order that I favor them, although I could see some people preferring Option 2 as their first choice.  In any of the cases, hopefully you can use this as a reference for when you need to use the protocol in the rule’s action when writing your URL Rewrite rules. Further information: Viewing all Server Variable for a site. URL Parts available to URL Rewrite Rules Further URL Rewrite articles

    Read the article

  • IIS7.5 Windows Authentication missing providers menu item (ntlm)

    - by Alex
    Hello, I'm trying to enable NTLM authentication on a Windows Server 2008 R2 machine with IIS 7.5 for a specific file in my web root. I've been following these instructions http://docs.moodle.org/en/NTLM_authentication#IIS_Configuration In the IIS Manager I open the Authentication module, disable anonymous authentication and enable Windows Authentication however according to every post I can find on the matter I should have a 'providers' option appear but I don't. I've double checked in Server Manager that the 'Windows Authentication' security feature is enabled for IIS. Any help anyone can offer would be great, Thank you!

    Read the article

  • How to debug ssh authentication failures with gssapi-with-mic

    - by Arthur Ulfeldt
    when i ssh to DOMAIN\user@localhosts-name authentication works fine through gssapi-with-mic: debug3: remaining preferred: gssapi,publickey,keyboard-interactive,password debug3: authmethod_is_enabled gssapi-with-mic debug1: Next authentication method: gssapi-with-mic debug2: we sent a gssapi-with-mic packet, wait for reply debug3: Wrote 112 bytes for a total of 1255 debug1: Delegating credentials debug3: Wrote 2816 bytes for a total of 4071 debug1: Delegating credentials debug3: Wrote 80 bytes for a total of 4151 debug1: Authentication succeeded (gssapi-with-mic). when I connect to a different machine It just seems to stop half way through the gssapi-with-mic authentication: debug1: Next authentication method: gssapi-with-mic debug2: we sent a gssapi-with-mic packet, wait for reply debug3: Wrote 112 bytes for a total of 1255 debug1: Delegating credentials debug3: Wrote 2816 bytes for a total of 4071 <----- ???? debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey,gssapi-keyex,gssapi-with-mic,password,keyboard-interactive How should I go about finding out what happened differently the second time. How can I find out if/why the auth was rejected by kerberos?

    Read the article

  • IIS7.5 Windows Authentication missing providers menu item (ntlm)

    - by Alex Bilbie
    I'm trying to enable NTLM authentication on a Windows Server 2008 R2 machine with IIS 7.5 for a specific file in my web root. I've been following these instructions http://docs.moodle.org/en/NTLM_authentication#IIS_Configuration In the IIS Manager I open the Authentication module, disable anonymous authentication and enable Windows Authentication however according to every post I can find on the matter I should have a 'providers' option appear but I don't. I've double checked in Server Manager that the 'Windows Authentication' security feature is enabled for IIS. Any help anyone can offer would be great, Thank you!

    Read the article

  • NTLM Authentication fails when behind Proxy server

    - by Jan Petersen
    Hi All, I've seen a number of post about consuming Web Services from behind a proxy server, but none that seams to address this problem. I'm building a desktop application, using Java, JAX-WS in NetBeans. I have a working prototype, that can query the server for authentication mode, successfully authenticate and retrieve a list of web site. However, if I run the same app from a network that is behind a proxy server (the proxy does not require authentication), then I'm running into trouble. I have sniffed the traffic, and noticed the following: Behind Proxy # Result Protocol Host URL 1 200 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Authentication.asmx 2 401 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx 3 401 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx 4 401 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx 5 401 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx Without Proxy # Result Protocol Host URL 1 200 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Authentication.asmx 2 401 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx 3 401 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx 4 401 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx 5 401 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx 6 200 HTTP host.domain.com /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx When running the code from a network without a proxy server, I successfully Authentication with the server, but when I'm behind the proxy server, the traffic is cut-off at the 5th message, and thus don't succeed. I know from the Java docs that On Microsoft Windows platforms, NTLM authentication attempts to acquire the user credentials from the system without prompting the user's authenticator object. If these credentials are not accepted by the server then the user's authenticator will be called. Given that my Authentication code is called only ones, and only as the 5th attempt, it appears as if the connection is dropped when behind the proxy server before my Authentication object is used. Is there any way I can control the behavior of Authentication module, to not have it use the system credentials? I have put the source text java class files of a demo app up, showing the issue at the following urls (it's a bit to long even in the short demo form to post here). link text Br Jan

    Read the article

  • HTTP 2.0 serait bloqué par l'ajout de SPDY de Google, un ingénieur de FreeBSD traite le projet de « fiasco » et demande son abandon pour HTTP 3.0

    HTTP 2.0 serait bloqué par l'intégration de SPDY de Google Un ingénieur de FreeBSD traite le projet de « fiasco »et demande son abandon au profit de HTTP 3.0Le groupe de travail de l'IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) sur la version 2.0 de la norme HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) fait face à une crise qui pourrait entrainer un retard de la publication de celle-ci.Pour rappel, HTTP 2.0 est conçu pour permettre aux navigateurs de charger des pages Web plus rapidement. La sortie de la version...

    Read the article

  • Sending Parameters with the BizTalk HTTP Adapter

    - by Christopher House
    I've never had occaison to use the BizTalk HTTP adapter since I've always needed SOAP rather than just POX (plain old XML).  Yesterday we decided that we're going to expose some data via a Java servlet that will accept an HTTP post and respond with POX.  I knew BizTalk had an HTTP adapter but I had no idea what it's capabilities were. After a quick read through the BizTalk docs, it was apparent that the HTTP send adapter does in fact do posts.  The concern I had though was how we were going to supply parameters to the servlet.  The examples I had seen using the HTTP adapter all involved posting an XML message to some HTTP location.  Our Java guy, however didn't want to take that approach.  He wanted us to provide a query string via post, much like you'd expect to see on an HTTP get.  I decided to put together a little test scenario and see what I could come up with.  We didn't have a test servlet I could go against and my Java experience is virtually nill, so I decided to put together an ASP.Net project to act as the servlet.  It didn't need to be fancy, just one HttpHandler that accepts a post, reads a parameter and returns XML.  With the HttpHandler done, I put together a simple orchestration to send a message to the handler.  I started by having the orch send a message of type System.String to see what it would look like when the handler received it. I set a breakpoint in my handler and kicked off the orchestration.  Below is what I saw: As I suspected, because of BizTalk's XML serialization, System.String was not going to work.  I thought back to my BizTalk 2004 days and I project I worked on that required sending HTML formatted emails via the SMTP adapter.  To acomplish that, I had used a .Net class with a custom serialization formatter that I got from a Microsoft sample.  The code for the class, RawString can be found here. I created a new class library with the RawString class as well as a static factory class, referenced that in my orchestration project and changed my message type from System.String to RawString.  Below is what the code in my message construction looks like: After deploying the updated orchestration, I fired it off again and checked the breakpoint in my HttpHandler.  This is what I saw: And there you have it.  The RawString message type allowed me to pass a query string in the HTTP post without wrapping it in XML.

    Read the article

  • Distribution upgrade problem "No new release found"

    - by fefe
    I'm using Ubuntu 11.04. The update manager once found the new release 'oneiric', and still shows up this screen when I log on use ssh: Welcome to Ubuntu 11.04 (GNU/Linux 2.6.38-14-generic x86_64) * Documentation: https://help.ubuntu.com/ 0 packages can be updated. 0 updates are security updates. New release 'oneiric' available. Run 'do-release-upgrade' to upgrade to it. Last login: Wed Apr 25 16:22:48 2012 from *** But I didn't upgrade then, and change my apt sources. And now I cannot upgrade to 'oneiric'. do-relase-upgrade shows: $ sudo do-release-upgrade Checking for a new ubuntu release No new release found $ And apt-get dist-upgrade shows: $ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Calculating upgrade... Done 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. $ I can successfully update all my packages. File contents of source.list: $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list ## See sources.list(5) for more information, especialy # Remember that you can only use http, ftp or file URIs deb http://mirrors.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/ubuntu/ natty main universe restricted multiverse deb-src http://mirrors.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/ubuntu/ natty main universe restricted multiverse deb http://mirrors.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/ubuntu/ natty-security universe main multiverse restricted deb-src http://mirrors.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/ubuntu/ natty-security universe main multiverse restricted deb http://mirrors.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/ubuntu/ natty-updates universe main multiverse restricted deb-src http://mirrors.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/ubuntu/ natty-updates universe main multiverse restricted deb http://mirrors.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/ubuntu/ natty-backports universe main multiverse restricted deb-src http://mirrors.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/ubuntu/ natty-backports universe main multiverse restricted # deb http://ubuntu.dormforce.net/ubuntu/ lucid main universe restricted multiverse # deb-src http://ubuntu.dormforce.net/ubuntu/ lucid main universe restricted multiverse # deb http://ubuntu.dormforce.net/ubuntu/ lucid-security universe main multiverse restricted # deb-src http://ubuntu.dormforce.net/ubuntu/ lucid-security universe main multiverse restricted # deb http://ubuntu.dormforce.net/ubuntu/ lucid-updates universe main multiverse restricted # deb-src http://ubuntu.dormforce.net/ubuntu/ lucid-updates universe main multiverse restricted # CDROMs are managed through the apt-cdrom tool. # deb http://archive.canonical.com lucid partner # deb http://archive.canonical.com lucid-security partner # deb http://archive.canonical.com lucid-updates partner # deb-src http://archive.canonical.com lucid partner # deb-src http://archive.canonical.com lucid-security partner # deb-src http://archive.canonical.com lucid-updates partner #medibuntu repo # deb http://packages.medibuntu.org/ lucid free non-free # deb-src http://packages.medibuntu.org/ lucid free non-free # deb http://extras.ubuntu.com/ubuntu maverick main #Third party developers repository deb http://mirrors.sohu.com/ubuntu/ natty main restricted multiverse universe deb-src http://mirrors.sohu.com/ubuntu/ natty main universe restricted multiverse #Added by software-properties deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ natty-security universe main multiverse restricted deb-src http://mirrors.sohu.com/ubuntu/ natty-security universe main multiverse restricted deb http://mirrors.sohu.com/ubuntu/ natty-updates universe main multiverse restricted deb-src http://mirrors.sohu.com/ubuntu/ natty-updates universe main multiverse restricted File contents of /etc/update-manager/meta-release: $ cat /etc/update-manager/meta-release # default location for the meta-release file [METARELEASE] URI = http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/meta-release URI_LTS = http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/meta-release-lts URI_UNSTABLE_POSTFIX = -development URI_PROPOSED_POSTFIX = -proposed What may be the problem of this?

    Read the article

  • How do i force www subdomain on both https and http

    - by Brian Perin
    For whatever reason I can't seem to get this right, I've looked at many examples on here and apache's website. I'm trying to force www.domain.com instead of domain.com on EITHER http or https but I am not trying to force https over http. the following code seems to work for all https connections but http will not redirect to www. RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTPS} on RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www\.domain\.com$ [NC] RewriteRule ^ https://www.domain.com%{REQUEST_URI} [R=301] RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTPS} off RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www\.domain\.com$ [NC] RewriteRule ^ http://www.domain.com%{REQUEST_URI} [R=301]

    Read the article

  • http-equiv=content-language alternative - the way of specifying document language

    - by tugberk
    Lots of web sites uses following meta tag to specify the default language of the document: <meta http-equiv="content-language" content="es-ES"> When I go to w3c site: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html-markup-20110113/meta.http-equiv.content-language.html#meta.http-equiv.content-language I get this: Using the meta element to specify the document-wide default language is obsolete. Consider specifying the language on the root element instead. What is the way of specifying document language now?

    Read the article

  • Err http://extras.ubuntu.com precise Release.gpg

    - by bell
    updating gives the ff: Ign cdrom://Ubuntu 11.10 _Oneiric Ocelot_ - Release amd64 (20111012) oneiric InRelease Ign cdrom://Ubuntu 11.10 _Oneiric Ocelot_ - Release amd64 (20111012) dists/oneiric/main/binary- / InRelease Ign cdrom://Ubuntu 11.10 _Oneiric Ocelot_ - Release amd64 (20111012) dists/oneir Err http://archive.canonical.com oneiric Release.gpg Unable to connect to archive.canonical.com:http Err http://security.ubuntu.com precise-security/universe Translation-en_US Unable to connect to security.ubuntu.com:http:

    Read the article

  • Google Analytics HTTP vs HTTPS

    - by Pelangi
    I want to use Google Analytics on a website that uses both HTTP and HTTPS that works as explained below: Secure pages accessed through https://mydomain.com/secure/* are always on HTTPS. Any access to these pages through HTTP will be redirected to HTTPS. Any other pages will be accessible through both HTTP and HTTPS I have a Google Analytics profile with URL using HTTPS. Will I cover all traffic? Do I need to create another profile using HTTP and how should I apply the other profile?

    Read the article

  • Opening the Internet Settings Dialog and using Windows Default Network Settings via Code

    - by Rick Strahl
    Ran into a question from a client the other day that asked how to deal with Internet Connection settings for running  HTTP requests. In this case this is an old FoxPro app and it's using WinInet to handle the actual HTTP connection. Another client asked a similar question about using the IE Web Browser control and configuring connection properties. Regardless of platform or tools used to do HTTP connections, you can probably configure custom connection and proxy settings in your application to configure http connection settings manually. However, this is a repetitive process for each application requires you to track system information in your application which is undesirable. Often it's much easier to rely on the system wide proxy settings that Windows provides via the Internet Settings dialog. The dialog is a Control Panel applet (inetcpl.cpl) and is the same dialog that you see when you pop up Internet Explorer's Options dialog: This dialog controls the Windows connection properties that determine how the Windows HTTP stack connects to the Internet and how Proxy's are used if configured. Depending on how the HTTP client is configured - it can typically inherit and use these global settings. Loading the Settings Dialog Programmatically The settings dialog is a Control Panel applet with the name of: inetcpl.cpl and you can use any Shell execution mechanism (Run dialog, ShellExecute API, Process.Start() in .NET etc.) to invoke the dialog. Changes made there are immediately reflected in any applications that use the default connection settings. In .NET you can simply do this to bring up the Internet Settings dialog with the Connection tab enabled: Process.Start("inetcpl.cpl",",4"); In FoxPro you can simply use the RUN command to execute inetcpl.cpl: lcCmd = "inetcpl.cpl ,4" RUN &lcCmd Using the Default Connection/Proxy Settings When using WinInet you specify the Http connect type in the call to InternetOpen() like this (FoxPro code here): hInetConnection=; InternetOpen(THIS.cUserAgent,0,; THIS.chttpproxyname,THIS.chttpproxybypass,0) The second parameter of 0 specifies that the default system proxy settings should be used and it uses the settings from the Internet Settings Connections tab. Other connection options for HTTP connections include 1 - direct (no proxies and ignore system settings), 3 - explicit Proxy specification. In most situations a connection mode setting of 0 should work. In .NET HTTP connections by default are direct connections and so you need to explicitly specify a default proxy or proxy configuration to use. The easiest way to do this is on the application level in the config file: <configuration> <system.net> <defaultProxy> <proxy bypassonlocal="False" autoDetect="True" usesystemdefault="True" /> </defaultProxy> </system.net> </configuration> You can do the same sort of thing in code specifying the proxy explicitly and using System.Net.WebProxy.GetDefaultProxy(). So when making HTTP calls to Web Services or using the HttpWebRequest class you can set the proxy with: StoreService.Proxy = WebProxy.GetDefaultProxy(); All of this is pretty easy to deal with and in my opinion is a way better choice to managing connection settings than having to track this stuff in your own application. Plus if you use default settings, most of the time it's highly likely that the connection settings are already properly configured making further configuration rare.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2011Posted in Windows  HTTP  .NET  FoxPro   Tweet (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Hiding a HTTP Auth-Realm by sending 404 to non-known IPs?

    - by zhenech
    I have an Apache (2.2) serving a web-app on example.com. That web-app has a debug-page reachable via example.com/debug. /debug is currently protected with a HTTP basic auth. As there is only a very small user-base who has access to the debug-page, I would like to hide it based on IP address and return 404 to clients not accessing from our VPN. Serving a 404 based on IP-address only is easy and is described in http://serverfault.com/a/13071. But as soon I add authentication, the users see a 401 instead of a 404. Basically, what I need is: if ($REMOTE_ADDR ~ 10.11.12.*): do_basic_auth (aka return 401) else: return 404

    Read the article

  • WinInet Apps failing when Internet Explorer is set to Offline Mode

    - by Rick Strahl
    Ran into a nasty issue last week when all of a sudden many of my old applications that are using WinInet for HTTP access started failing. Specifically, the WinInet HttpSendRequest() call started failing with an error of 2, which when retrieving the error boils down to: WinInet Error 2: The system cannot find the file specified Now this error can pop up in many legitimate scenarios with WinInet such as when no Internet connection is available or the HTTP configuration (usually configured in Internet Explorer’s options) is misconfigured. The error typically means that the server in question cannot be found or more specifically an Internet connection can’t be established. In this case the problem started suddenly and was causing some of my own applications (old Visual FoxPro apps using my own wwHttp library) and all Adobe Air applications (which apparently uses WinInet for its basic HTTP stack) along with a few more oddball applications to fail instantly when trying to connect via HTTP. Most other applications – all of my installed browsers, email clients, various social network updaters all worked just fine. It seems it was only WinInet apps that were failing. Yet oddly Internet Explorer appeared to be working. So the problem seemed to be isolated to those ‘classic’ applications using WinInet. WinInet’s base configuration uses the Internet Explorer options dialog. To check this out I typically go to the Internet Explorer options and find the Connection tab, and check out the LAN Setup. Make sure there are no rogue proxy settings or configuration scripts that are invalid. Trying with Auto-configuration on and off also can often fix ‘real’ configuration errors. This time however this wasn’t a problem – nothing in the LAN configuration was set (all default). I also played with the Automatic detection of settings which also had no effect. I also tried to use Fiddler to see if that would tell me something. Fiddler has a few additional WinInet configuration options in its configuration. Running Fiddler and hitting an HTTP request using WinInet would never actually hit Fiddler – the failure would occur before WinInet ever fired up the HTTP connection to go through the Fiddler HTTP proxy. And the Culprit is: Internet Explorer’s Work Offline Option The culprit in this situation was Internet Explorer which at some point, unknown to me switched into Offline Mode and was then shut down: When this Offline mode is checked when IE is running *or* if IE gets shut down with this flag set, all applications using WinInet by default assume that it’s running in offline mode. Depending on your caching HTTP headers and whether the page was cached previously you may or may not get a response or an error. For an independent non-browser application this will be highly unpredictable and likely result in failures getting online – especially if the application forces requests to always reload by disabling HTTP caching (as I do on most of my dynamic HTTP clients). What makes this especially tricky is that even when IE is in offline mode in the browser, you can still browse around the Web *if* you have a connection. IE will try to load anything it has cached from the local cache, but as soon as you hit a URL that isn’t cached it will automatically try to access that URL and uncheck the Work Offline option. Conversely if you get knocked off the Internet and browse in IE 9, IE will automatically go into offline mode. I never explicitly set offline mode – it just automatically sets itself on and off depending on the connection. Problem is if you’re not using IE all the time (as I do – rarely and just for testing so usually a few commonly used URLs) and you left it in offline mode when you exit, offline mode stays set which results in the above head scratcher. Ack. This isn’t new behavior in IE 9 BTW – this behavior has always been there, but I think what’s different is that IE now automatically switches between online and offline modes without notifying you at all, so it’s hard to tell when you are offline. Fixing the Issue in your Code If you have an application that is using WinInet, there’s a WinInet option called INTERNET_OPTION_IGNORE_OFFLINE. I just checked this out in my own applications and Internet Explorer 9 and it works, but apparently it’s been broken for some older releases (I can’t confirm how far back though) – lots of posts seem to suggest the flag doesn’t work. However, in IE 9 at least it does seem to work if you call InternetSetOption before you call HttpOpenRequest with the Http Session handle. In FoxPro code I use: DECLARE INTEGER InternetSetOption ;    IN WININET.DLL ;    INTEGER HINTERNET,;    INTEGER dwFlags,;    INTEGER @dwValue,;    INTEGER cbSize lnOptionValue = 1   && BOOL TRUE pass by reference   *** Set needed SSL flags lnResult=InternetSetOption(this.hHttpSession,;    INTERNET_OPTION_IGNORE_OFFLINE ,;  && 77    @lnOptionValue ,4)   DECLARE INTEGER HttpOpenRequest ;    IN WININET.DLL ;    INTEGER hHTTPHandle,;    STRING lpzReqMethod,;    STRING lpzPage,;    STRING lpzVersion,;    STRING lpzReferer,;    STRING lpzAcceptTypes,;    INTEGER dwFlags,;    INTEGER dwContextw     hHTTPResult=HttpOpenRequest(THIS.hHttpsession,;    lcVerb,;    tcPage,;    NULL,NULL,NULL,;    INTERNET_FLAG_RELOAD + ;    IIF(THIS.lsecurelink,INTERNET_FLAG_SECURE,0) + ;    this.nHTTPServiceFlags,0) …  And this fixes the issue at least for IE 9… In my FoxPro wwHttp class I now call this by default to never get bitten by this again… This solves the problem permanently for my HTTP client. I never want to see offline operation in an HTTP client API – it’s just too unpredictable in handling errors and the last thing you want is getting unpredictably stale data. Problem solved but this behavior is – well ugly. But then that’s to be expected from an API that’s based on Internet Explorer, eh?© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2011Posted in HTTP  Windows  

    Read the article

  • MOSS Search Error: Authentication failed because the remote party has closed the transport stream

    - by Cherie Riesberg
    http://support.microsoft.com/?id=962928 To resolve this issue, follow these steps: Stop the Office SharePoint Services Search service. To do this, follow these steps: Click Start, click Run, type cmd , and then click OK. At the command prompt, type net stop osearch, and then press ENTER. Type exit to exit the command prompt. Download and install the IIS 6.0 Resource Kit Tools. To obtain the IIS 6.0 Resource Kit Tools, visit the following Microsoft Web site: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=56FC92EE-A71A-4C73-B628-ADE629C89499 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=56FC92EE-A71A-4C73-B628-ADE629C89499) On each server in the farm that has Office SharePoint 2007 installed, follow these steps: Click Start, click Run, type cmd , and then click OK. Navigate to the location of the IIS 6.0 Resource Kit Tools (default location is: C:\Program Files\IIS Resources\SelfSSL) At the command prompt, type selfssl /s:951338967 /v:1000, and then press ENTER. Notes For 64 bit Server, 951338967 is the default ID of the Office Server Web Services certificate. For 32 bit Server, 1720207907 is the default ID of the Office Server Web Services certificate. You can check the ID of Office Server Web Services from IIS. 1000 is the number of days that the certification will be valid. You need to execute the selfssl command on each MOSS Server in the farm which is running a "Office Server Web Services" site. SharePoint partly uses SSL name resolution in the background between farm servers, which users generally do not need to be aware of. Start the Office SharePoint Services Search service. To do this, follow these steps: At the command prompt, type net start osearch, and then press ENTER. Type exit to exit the command prompt. Download and install the following update to the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1. For more information, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 959209  (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/959209/ ) An update for the .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 is available

    Read the article

  • Properly force SSL with .htaccess, no double authentication

    - by cwd
    I'm trying to force SSL with .htaccess on a shared host. This means there I only have access to .htaccess and not the vhosts config. I know you can put a rule in the VirtualHost config file to force SSL which will be picked up there (and acted upon first), preventing double authentication, but I can't get to that. Here's the progress I've made: Config 1 This works pretty well but it does force double authentication if you visit http://site.com - once for http and then once for https. Once you are logged in, it automatically redirects http://site.com/page1.html to the https coutnerpart just fine: RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTPS} !=on RewriteRule ^ https://%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} [L,R=301] RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !(^www\.site\.com*)$ RewriteRule (.*) https://www.site.com$1 [R=301,L] AuthName "Locked" AuthUserFile "/home/.htpasswd" AuthType Basic require valid-user Config 2 If I add this to the top of the file, it works a lot better in that it will switch to SSL before prompting for the password: SSLOptions +StrictRequire SSLRequireSSL SSLRequire %{HTTP_HOST} eq "site.com" ErrorDocument 403 https://site.com It's clever how it will use the SSLRequireSSL option and the ErrorDocument403 to redirect to the secure version of the site. My only complaint is that if you try and access http://site.com/page1.html it will redirect to https://site.com/ So it is forcing SSL without a double-login, but it is not properly forwarding non-SSL resources to their SSL counterparts. Regarding the first config, Insyte mentioned "using mod_rewrite to perform a simple redirect is a bit of overkill. Use the Redirect directive instead. It's possible this may even fix your problem, as I believe mod_rewrite rules are some of the last directives to be processed, just before the file is actually grabbed from the filesystem" I have not had no such luck on finding a force-ssl config option with the redirect directive and so have been unable to test this theory.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >