Search Results

Search found 4061 results on 163 pages for 'secure government'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 58/163 | < Previous Page | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >

  • The Perfect Desktop - Kubuntu 10.04

    <b>Howtoforge:</b> "This tutorial shows how you can set up a Kubuntu 10.04 desktop that is a full-fledged replacement for a Windows desktop, i.e. that has all the software that people need to do the things they do on their Windows desktops. The advantages are clear: you get a secure system without DRM restrictions that works even on old hardware"

    Read the article

  • Installing Ubuntu in EFI mode Cant go beyond GRUB Menu

    - by Vulcan
    I created a LiveUSB of Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS using Pendrive Linux. -Created a separate 30GB partition using Windows 8 Disk Management -Disabled Secure Boot (Didn't find an option to disable EFI boot) -Disabled Fast Startup The laptop starts the GRUB menu shows up but it doesn't go beyond that no matter what option i choose. After choosing any option the screen goes blank but the power is still on i can see the power light. My laptop is HP-n012tx processor- Intel i5 4200U Video Card- 2GBnVidia 740M The GRUB menu i see http://i.stack.imgur.com/buEAn.png

    Read the article

  • Preinstalled Windows 8 Not showing up on Grub 2, Ubuntu 12.10

    - by ise
    http://paste.ubuntu.com/1522276/ Hi There, I've scoured everywhere & I'm still all very confused. Since I'm a total noob, I don't really want to touch too many files... I have an Acer M5 with Windows 8 preinstalled. I installed Ubuntu 12.10 in secure boot, but Grub does not recognize my Windows 8. I tried boot-repair, to no avail. Here are my specs: http://paste.ubuntu.com/1522276/ Please help?

    Read the article

  • Implementing One-way Encryption in PHP

    <b>Webreference:</b> "To demonstrate one-way encryption in PHP, this article describes how to start building a secure online diary application. The one-way encryption will allow the diary to log a user in and generally encrypt the contents of the file that it loads."

    Read the article

  • SOA 11g ??????????·?????? OracleDB 11g ??????

    - by katsumii
    ??????????????????????? Fusion Middleware ? DB11g ???????????????????????????????????Oracle Fusion Middleware MAA Best PracticesOracle Fusion Middleware SOA 11g Release 1: Using Secure Files??????????????????DB11g??????SecureFiles ????????????????????PDF?????????SOA?????????????????????????????·???????????????????? Enterprise Manager 12c ?????1???????????????????????SOA Suite????????SOA??????????????????????????????  

    Read the article

  • PHP-FPM and APC for shared hosting?

    - by Tiffany Walker
    We are looking into finding a way to get APC to only create one cache per account / site. This can be done with Fastcgi (last update 2006…) but with Fastcgid APC will have to create multiple caches for multiple processes run by the same account. To get around this problem, we have been looking into PHP-FPM PHP process manager allows multiple PHP processes to share a single APC cache. But from what I have read (I hope I'm wrong) , even if you create a pool per process, all sites accross all pools will share the same APC cache. This brings us back to the same problem as with shared Memcached: it's not secure ! On php-fpm's site I read that you can chroot php-fpm pools and define a specific UID and GID per pool… if this is the case then shouldn't APC have to use this user and not have access to other pools cache ? An article here (in 2011) suggests that you would need to run one process per pool creating multiple launchers on different ports and different config files with one pool per config file : http://groups.drupal.org/node/198168 Is this still neceessary ? If so what would be the impact of running say 800 processes of php-fpm ? Would it be mainly memory ? If so how can I work out what the memory impact would be ? I guess that it would be better to run 800 times php-fpm then to have accounts creating multiple APC caches for a single site ? If on average an account creates a 50MB cache and creates 3 caches per account that makes 150Mb per account which makes 120GB… However if each account uses on average only 50Mb that would make 40GB We will have at least 128GB of ram on our next server so 40GB is acceptable if running 800 x PHP-FPM does not create an overhead of more than 20GB ! What do you think is PHP-FPM the best way to go to provide secure APC cache on shared hosting with a server that has a decent amount of memory ? Or should I be looking at another system ? Thanks !

    Read the article

  • QoS for Cisco Router to Prioritize Voice and Interactive Traffic

    - by TJ Huffington
    I have a Cisco 891W NATing Voice and Data to the internet over a 10mbit/2mbit connection. Voice traffic gets degraded when I upload large files. Pings time out as well. I tried to configure a QoS policy but it's basically not doing anything. Voice traffic still degrades when upload bandwidth gets saturated. Here is my current configruation: class-map match-any QoS-Transactional match protocol ssh match protocol xwindows class-map match-any QoS-Voice match protocol rtp audio class-map match-any QoS-Bulk match protocol secure-nntp match protocol smtp match protocol tftp match protocol ftp class-map match-any QoS-Management match protocol snmp match protocol dns match protocol secure-imap class-map match-any QoS-Inter-Video match protocol rtp video class-map match-any QoS-Voice-Control match access-group name Voice-Control policy-map QoS-Priority-Output class QoS-Voice priority percent 25 set dscp ef class QoS-Inter-Video bandwidth remaining percent 10 set dscp af41 class QoS-Transactional bandwidth remaining percent 25 random-detect dscp-based set dscp af21 class QoS-Bulk bandwidth remaining percent 5 random-detect dscp-based set dscp af11 class QoS-Management bandwidth remaining percent 1 set dscp cs2 class QoS-Voice-Control priority percent 5 set dscp ef class class-default fair-queue interface FastEthernet8 bandwidth 1024 bandwidth receive 20480 ip address dhcp ip nat outside ip virtual-reassembly duplex auto speed auto auto discovery qos crypto map mymap max-reserved-bandwidth 80 service-policy output QoS-Priority-Output crypto map mymap 10 ipsec-isakmp set peer 1.2.3.4 default set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address 110 qos pre-classify ! fa8 is my connection to the internet. Voice traffic goes over a VPN ("mymap") to the SIP server. That's why I specified "qos pre-classify" which I believe is the way to classify traffic over the VPN. However even when I ping a public IP while saturating upload bandwidth, the latency is exceptionally high. Is this configuration correct? Are there any suggestions that might make this work for my setup? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • QoS for Cisco Router to Prioritize Voice and Interactive Traffic

    - by TJ Huffington
    I have a Cisco 891W NATing Voice and Data to the internet over a 10mbit/2mbit connection. Voice traffic gets degraded when I upload large files. Pings time out as well. I tried to configure a QoS policy but it's basically not doing anything. Voice traffic still degrades when upload bandwidth gets saturated. Here is my current configruation: class-map match-any QoS-Transactional match protocol ssh match protocol xwindows class-map match-any QoS-Voice match protocol rtp audio class-map match-any QoS-Bulk match protocol secure-nntp match protocol smtp match protocol tftp match protocol ftp class-map match-any QoS-Management match protocol snmp match protocol dns match protocol secure-imap class-map match-any QoS-Inter-Video match protocol rtp video class-map match-any QoS-Voice-Control match access-group name Voice-Control policy-map QoS-Priority-Output class QoS-Voice priority percent 25 set dscp ef class QoS-Inter-Video bandwidth remaining percent 10 set dscp af41 class QoS-Transactional bandwidth remaining percent 25 random-detect dscp-based set dscp af21 class QoS-Bulk bandwidth remaining percent 5 random-detect dscp-based set dscp af11 class QoS-Management bandwidth remaining percent 1 set dscp cs2 class QoS-Voice-Control priority percent 5 set dscp ef class class-default fair-queue interface FastEthernet8 bandwidth 1024 bandwidth receive 20480 ip address dhcp ip nat outside ip virtual-reassembly duplex auto speed auto auto discovery qos crypto map mymap max-reserved-bandwidth 80 service-policy output QoS-Priority-Output crypto map mymap 10 ipsec-isakmp set peer 1.2.3.4 default set transform-set ESP-3DES-SHA match address 110 qos pre-classify ! fa8 is my connection to the internet. Voice traffic goes over a VPN ("mymap") to the SIP server. That's why I specified "qos pre-classify" which I believe is the way to classify traffic over the VPN. However even when I ping a public IP while saturating upload bandwidth, the latency is exceptionally high. Is this configuration correct? Are there any suggestions that might make this work for my setup? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Gmail: security warning icon

    - by Notetaker
    Hello, I just enabled some Gmail Labs programs in my Gmail account, and then I noticed the orange triangle icon with an exclamation mark in it at the end of the address bar of my Google Chrome browser. Clicking on it brought forth a "Security Information' dialog box, with the following messages: "--mail.google.com The identity of website has been verified by Thawlte SGC CA. --Your connection to mail.google.com is encrypted with 128-bit encryption. However, this page includes other resources which are not secure. These resources can be viewed by others while in transit, and can be modified by an attacker to change the look or behavior of the page." I then logged into two of my other Gmail accounts, one of which has no Gmail Labs programs enabled, and the other with 1 program enabled quite some time ago, both with the same result as above (i.e., with the appearance of the orange triangle warning sign in the address bar). I don't remember seeing the orange triangle before, but I'm not sure if it has ever appeared or not. I have "Always use https" enabled for my Gmail accounts. My questions are: Is there a way to identify and remove these un-secure "resources"? (Could enabling Gmail Labs programs have brought these on?) Meanwhile, are my Gmail accounts compromised and unsafe to use? If so, what should I being doing about that now? After this problem is solved, would I need to reset the password to my Gmail accounts, and/or take any other measures to restore their security? Many thanks for answering my questions!

    Read the article

  • How to securely enable file sharing over PPTP on Windows 2008 Server

    - by Damage
    I have set up a Windows SBS 2003 domain (LAN) and a stand-alone Windows 2008 Server (web server) at another location (workgroup). I established PPTP VPN connection (SBS dials web server) over which users from LAN should be able to access web server. On web server I enabled TCP/IPv4 and File and Printer sharing protocol. It has a few external addresses (one of them is default) AND one local address (192.x.x.x) assigned to network adapter. Firewall allows port 445 for file sharing. There's the problem - I can not enable web server file shares to be visible to LAN users and ONLY to LAN users: From SBS I can access webserver but I cannot access webserver from LAN workstations (XP, Vista). I have had same configuration - I have just replaced old (web server) Windows 2003 server with 2008 so SBS settings are the same (static route, DNS etc.). How can I enable file sharing on web server for LAN workstations? Now I have opened File and printer sharing to the internet which is of course totaly unsecure. I tried to secure the tunnel so I moved RAS (VPN) connection (Network Center) on web server to "Private" profile and moved firewall port 445 to "Private" profile but suddenly file sharing does not work and I cannot telnet webserver on port 445. How can I secure file sharing so I do not have to open it to the internet?

    Read the article

  • Any Recommendations for a Web Based Large File Transfer System?

    - by Glen Richards
    I'm looking for a server software product that: Allows my users to share large files with: The general public securely to 1 or more people (notification via email, optionally with a token that gives them x period of time to download) Allows anyone in the general public to share files with my users. Perhaps by invitation. Has to be user friendly enough to allow my users to use this with out having to bug me as the admin. It needs to be a system that we can install on our own server (we don't want shared data sitting on anyone else's server) A web based solution. Using some kind or secure comms channel would be good too, eg, ssh Files to share could be over 1 GB. I found the question below. WebDav does not sound user friendly enough: http://serverfault.com/questions/86878/recommendations-for-a-secure-and-simple-dropbox-system I've done a lot of searching, but I can't get the search terms right. There are too many services that provide this, but I want something we can install on our own server. A last resort would be to roll my own. Any ideas appreciated. Glen EDIT Sorry Tom and Jeff but Glen specifically says that he's looking for a 'product' so given that I specialise in this field thought that my expertise in this area may have been of use to him. I don't see how him writing services is going to be easy for him to maintain going forward (large IT admin overhead) or simple for his users and the general public to work with.

    Read the article

  • Chroot jail of Nginx and php

    - by sqren
    I'm hosting multiple websites on one VPS, and want to chroot each website, eg. /chroot/website1 /chroot/website2 I'm using makejail, which is a highlevel tool, for creating the jails, and copying the libraries and dependencies. Easy peasy. Each website will need nginx, php and mysql. For php I'm using php5-fpm which actually supports chroot by configuration, however I'm not using this (maybe I should?) My question is which approach of the following three is the better: 1) Every website will have its own seperated instance of nginx, php and mysql. The downside is, that each webserver + php has to listen to a different port. I also need a "master" nginx web server in front of them, reverse proxying to the chrooted servers behind it. Probably most secure, but also most advanced. 2) I don't make any chroot jails manually. I setup one nginx web server, that proxies php requests to php-fpm, on different ports. I can have multiple php-fpm configurations each with is own chroot'ed folder. This is quite managable - however only php will be chrooted. Not the actual webserver. Is this secure enough. Also, I tried this option out, and it seems I will need to use TCP instead of sockets for connecting to MySQL. 3) You tell me ;) I'm quite new to chroot jailing, so please correct me if I'm wrong in my assumptions. I've been reading all the tutorials I could find, however, I find the market for chroot guides very scarce. Any help or inputs much appreciated!

    Read the article

  • NIS: which mechanism hides shadow.byname for unpriviledged users?

    - by Mark Salzer
    On some Linux box (SLES 11.1) which is a NIS client I can do as root: ypcat shadow.byname and get output, i.e. some lines with the encrypted passwords, amongst other information. On the same Linux box, if I run the same command as unpriviledged user, I get No such map shadow.byname. Reason: No such map in server's domain Now I am surprised. My good old knowlege says that shadow passwords in NIS are absurd because there is no access control or authentication in the protocol and thus every (unpriviledged) user can access the shadow map and thereby obtain the encrypted passwords. Obviously we have a different picture here. Unfortunately I don't have access to the NIS server to figure out what is happening. My only guess is that the NIS master gives the map only to clients conection from a priviledged port (1024), but this is only an uneducated guess. What mechanisms are there in current NIS implementations to lead to a behavior like the above? How "secure" are they? Can the be circumvented easily? Or are shadow passwords in NIS as secure as the good old shadow files?

    Read the article

  • Firefox and Chrome keeps forcing HTTPS on Rails app using nginx/Passenger

    - by Steve
    I've got a really weird problem here where every time I try to browse my Rails app in non-SSL mode Chrome (v16) and Firefox (v7) keeps forcing my website to be served in HTTPS. My Rails application is deployed on a Ubuntu VPS using Capistrano, nginx, Passenger and a wildcard SSL certificate. I have set these parameters for port 80 in the nginx.conf: passenger_set_cgi_param HTTP_X_FORWARDED_PROTO http; passenger_set_cgi_param HTTPS off; The long version of my nginx.conf can be found here: https://gist.github.com/2eab42666c609b015bff The ssl-redirect.include file contains: rewrite ^/sign_up https://$host$request_uri? permanent ; rewrite ^/login https://$host$request_uri? permanent ; rewrite ^/settings/password https://$host$request_uri? permanent ; It is to make sure those three pages use HTTPS when coming from non-SSL request. My production.rb file contains this line: # Enable HTTP and HTTPS in parallel config.middleware.insert_before Rack::Lock, Rack::SSL, :exclude => proc { |env| env['HTTPS'] != 'on' } I have tried redirecting to HTTP via nginx rewrites, Ruby on Rails redirects and also used Rails view url using HTTP protocol. My application.rb file contains this methods used in a before_filter hook: def force_http if Rails.env.production? if request.ssl? redirect_to :protocol => 'http', :status => :moved_permanently end end end Every time I try to redirect to HTTP non-SSL the browser attempts to redirect it back to HTTPS causing an infinite redirect loop. Safari, however, works just fine. Even when I've disabled serving SSL in nginx the browsers still try to connect to the site using HTTPS. I should also mention that when I pushed my app on to Heroku, the Rails redirect work just fine for all browsers. The reason why I want to use non-SSL is that my homepage contains non-secure dynamic embedded objects and a non-secure CDN and I want to prevent security warnings. I don't know what is causing the browser to keep forcing HTTPS requests.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65  | Next Page >