Search Results

Search found 6525 results on 261 pages for 'restful authentication'.

Page 59/261 | < Previous Page | 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66  | Next Page >

• IIS7.5 Domain Account Application Pool Identity for SQL Server Authentication

  - by user38652

  In Windows Server 2003/IIS6 land we typically create an app pool that runs as the identity of an AD account created with minimal privileges simply for that purpose. This same domain user would also be granted access to SQL Server so that any ASP.NET application in that app pool would be able to connect to SQL Server with Integrated Security=SSPI. We are making a brave move to the world of Windows Server 2008 R2/IIS7.5 and are looking to replicate this model, but I am struggling with how to make the application pool in IIS7.5 run as the identity of an AD account? I know this sounds simple and hopefully it is, but my attempts so far have been fruitless. Should the application pool identity be a 'Custom account' for a domain account? Does the domain account need to be added to any groups?

  Read the article

• Sudo asks for password twice with LDAP authentication

  - by Gnudiff

  I have Ubuntu 8.04 LTS machine and Windows 2003 AD domain. I have succesfully set up that I can log in with domain username and password, using domain prefix, like "domain+username". Upon login to machine it all works first try, however, for some reason when I try to sudo my logged in user, it asks for the password twice every time when I try sudo. It accepts the password after 2nd time, but not the first time. Once or twice I might think I just keep entering wrong pass the first time, but this is what happens always, any ideas of what's wrong? pam.conf is empty pam.d/sudo only includes common-auth & common-account, and common-auth is: auth sufficient pam_unix.so nullok_secure auth sufficient pam_winbind.so auth requisite pam_deny.so auth required pam_permit.so

  Read the article

• Windows, Apache and MSSQL Authentication

  - by user1114330

  I have a create database script written in perl. I remember it working just fine another machine. A couple years later using a Vista machine I am trying to use it again and it keeps failing. The main difference is that now I am using Apache instead of IIS. In the script the IUSR account is granted permissions as it needs to write to the database as a part of another program. IIS has been uninstalled on this machine but the IUSR account still exists. The NT AUTHORITY\IUSR is also seen in the logins drop down in MSSQL(2012). The machine is running Vista Home Edition. However when running the script I get errors that say that NT AUTHORITY\IUSR cannot be found. I tried also with COMPUTERNAME\IUSR just for the heck of it and of course it was not found. I also tried with IUSR alone and for some reason the user isn't being "found"? Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Nginx proxy with SSL Authentication

  - by Dustin Oprea

  I need to proxy an SSL-authenticated connection to another server that requires an SSL authenticated connection. I realize that the incoming and outgoing connections of the proxy may have different certificates, but is it possible to call proxy_pass and tell it to use a certificate/private key for connection to the proxied system? Based on the documentation, it doesn't seem possible. Maybe with another module?

  Read the article

• GIT server with username and password authentication

  - by Giorgio

  I would like to set a GIT server and let my developers to login using username and password in order to commit and make changes to the projects. I need also to manage developer access to projects (I think I should use gitolite for this). How can I do that? I am used to SVN which is easy because you can set username and password for each developer, which can easily access the repository without having the generate an ssh key and put it on the server. Thanks

  Read the article

• Authentication through mod_auth_kerb should provide website with no user if no TGT provided

  - by loomi

  Users are authenticated by mod_auth_kerb which works great. Therefore I need to set Require valid-user If there is no valid user Apache fails with an 401 Authorization Required. I would like Apache to deliver the website anyway but not providing a remote_user to the underlying script. This is related to How to tell mod_auth_kerb to do its job despite no "require valid-user". But with the important difference that on a whole subdirectory on every url a kerberos negotation should be initiated, and if it fails it should deliver the content anyway.

  Read the article

• iPhone: How to Get Basic Authentication to HTTPS Web Service Using NSURLCredential

  - by ian1971

  I am trying to call an https web service (RESTful) using basic authentication. It works fine if I put the credentials in the url itself but I would rather add it to the request so that the password does not appear, for instance in an exception. I am using the following code: NSURLCredential *credential = [NSURLCredential credentialWithUser:@"myuser" password:@"mypassword" persistence:NSURLCredentialPersistenceForSession]; NSURLProtectionSpace *protectionSpace = [[NSURLProtectionSpace alloc] initWithHost:@"example.com" port:443 protocol:@"https" realm:nil authenticationMethod:NSURLAuthenticationMethodHTTPBasic]; [[NSURLCredentialStorage sharedCredentialStorage] setDefaultCredential:credential forProtectionSpace:protectionSpace]; NSURLConnection *theConnection = [NSURLConnection connectionWithRequest:theRequest delegate:self]; but it does not work. The didReceiveAuthenticationChallenge delegate method gets called and I can add a credential there but ideally I would send it with the request. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Should we develop a custom membership provider in this case?

  - by Allen

  I'll be adding a bounty to this, probably 200, more if you guys think its appropriate. I wont accept an answer until I can add a bounty so feel free to go ahead and answer now Summary Long story short, we've been tasked with gutting the authentication and authorization parts of a fairly old and bloated asp.net application that previously had all of these components written from scratch. Since our application isn't a typical one, and none of us have experience in asp.net's built in membership provider stuff, we're not sure if we should roll our own authentication and authorization again or if we should try to work within the asp.net membership provider mindset and develop our own membership provider. Our Application We have a fairly old asp.net application that gets installed at customer locations to service clients on a LAN. Admins create users (users do not sign up) and depending on the install, we may have the software integrated with LDAP. Currently, the LDAP integration bulk-imports the users to our database and when they login, it authenticates against LDAP so we dont have to manage their passwords. Nothing amazing there. Admins can assign users to 1 group and they can change the authorization of that group to manage access to various parts of the software. Groups are maintained by Admins (web based UI) and as said earlier, granted / denied permissions to certain functionality within the application. All this was completely written from the ground up without using any of the built in .net authorization or authentication. We literally have IsLoggedIn() methods that check for login and redirect to our login page if they aren't. Our Rewrite We've been tasked to integrate more tightly with LDAP, they want us to tie groups in our application to groups (or whatever types of containers that LDAP uses) in LDAP so that when a customer opt's to use our LDAP integration, they dont have to manage their users in LDAP AND in our application. The new way, they will simply create users in LDAP, add them to Groups in LDAP and our application will see that they belong to the appropriate LDAP group and authenticate and authorize them. In addition, we've been granted the go ahead to completely rip out the User authentication and authorization code and completely re-do it. Our Problem The problem is that none of us have any experience with asp.net membership provider functionality. The little bit of exposure I have to it makes me worry that it was not intended to be used for an application such as ours. Though, developing our own ASP.NET Membership Provider and Role Manager sounds like it would be a great experience and most likely the appropriate thing to do. Basically, I'm looking for advice, should we be using the ASP.NET Membership provider & Role Management API or should we continue to roll our own? I know this decision will be influenced by our requirements so I'm going over them below Our Requirements Just a quick n dirty list Maintain the ability to have a db of users and authenticate them and give admins (only, not users) the ability to CRUD users Allow the site to integrate with LDAP, when this is chosen, they don't want any users stored in the DB, only the relationship between Groups as they exist in our app / db and the Groups/Containers as they exist in LDAP. .net 3.5 is being used (mix of asp.net webforms and asp.net mvc) Has to work in ASP.NET and ASP.NET MVC (shouldn't be a problem I'm guessing) This can't be user centric, administrators need to be the only ones that CRUD (or import via ldap) users and groups We have to be able to Auth via LDAP when its configured to do so I always try to monitor my questions closely so feel free to ask for more info. Also, as a general summary of what I'm looking for in an answer is just. "You should/shouldn't use xyz, here's why". Links regarding asp.net membership provider and role management stuff are very welcome, most of the stuff I'm finding is 5+ years old. Edit: Added some stuff to "Our Rewrite"

  Read the article

• How to stub Restul-authentication's current_user method?

  - by Thiago

  Hi there, I'm trying to run the following spec: describe UsersController, "GET friends" do it "should call current_user.friends" do user = mock_model(User) user.should_receive(:friends) UsersController.stub!(:current_user).and_return(user) get :friends end end My controller looks like this def friends @friends = current_user.friends respond_to do |format| format.html end end The problem is that I cannot stub the current_user method, as when I run the test, I get: Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in 'UsersController GET friends should call current _user.friends' Mock "User_1001" expected :friends with (any args) once, but received it 0 times[0m ./spec/controllers/users_controller_spec.rb:44: current_user is a method from Restful-authentication, which is included in this controller. How am I supposed to test this controller? Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• Authenticating Windows 7 against MIT Kerberos 5

  - by tommed

  Hi There, I've been wracking my brains trying to get Windows 7 authenticating against a MIT Kerberos 5 Realm (which is running on an Arch Linux server). I've done the following on the server (aka dc1): Installed and configured a NTP time server Installed and configured DHCP and DNS (setup for the domain tnet.loc) Installed Kerberos from source Setup the database Configured the keytab Setup the ACL file with: *@TNET.LOC * Added a policy for my user and my machine: addpol users addpol admin addpol hosts ank -policy users [email protected] ank -policy admin tom/[email protected] ank -policy hosts host/wdesk3.tnet.loc -pw MYPASSWORDHERE I then did the following to the windows 7 client (aka wdesk3): Made sure the ip address was supplied by my DHCP server and dc1.tnet.loc pings ok Set the internet time server to my linux server (aka dc1.tnet.loc) Used ksetup to configure the realm: ksetup /SetRealm TNET.LOC ksetup /AddKdc dc1.tnet.loc ksetip /SetComputerPassword MYPASSWORDHERE ksetip /MapUser * * After some googl-ing I found that DES encryption was disabled by Windows 7 by default and I turned the policy on to support DES encryption over Kerberos Then I rebooted the windows client However after doing all that I still cannot login from my Windows client. :( Looking at the logs on the server; the request looks fine and everything works great, I think the issue is that the response from the KDC is not recognized by the Windows Client and a generic login error appears: "Login Failure: User name or password is invalid". The log file for the server looks like this (I tail'ed this so I know it's happening when the Windows machine attempts the login): Screen-shot: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/577250/email/login_attempt.png If I supply an invalid realm in the login window I get a completely different error message, so I don't think it's a connection problem from the client to the server? But I can't find any error logs on the Windows machine? (anyone know where these are?) If I try: runas /netonly /user:[email protected] cmd.exe everything works (although I don't get anything appear in the server logs, so I'm wondering if it's not touching the server for this??), but if I run: runas /user:[email protected] cmd.exe I get the same authentication error. Any Kerberos Gurus out there who can give me some ideas as to what to try next? pretty please?

  Read the article

• IIS 7.5 Basic authorization issue

  - by Alsin

  When I log on using correct user name\password (I always copy-paste them) I get 401.1 error. User name and password are correct (user is created on server locally, not a domain one). I can run program as this user (runas /noprofile /user:tmp notepad.exe). Basic authorization's default domain is a server name, realm is empty. I've saved FailedReqLogFile. AUTH_BASIC_LOGON_FAILED shows ErrorCode="Logon failure: unknown user name or bad password. (0x8007052e)" and MODULE_SET_RESPONSE_ERROR_STATUS shows ModuleName="BasicAuthenticationModule", Notification="AUTHENTICATE_REQUEST", HttpStatus="401", HttpReason="Unauthorized", HttpSubStatus="1", ErrorCode="Logon failure: unknown user name or bad password. (0x8007052e)", ConfigExceptionInfo="" And one more thing - if I use my domain login\password it woks! Basic Authentications is only enabled authentication in application... Could you please suggest me how I can troubleshoot and fix this issue? Maybe somebody hit it before... Best regards, Alex UPDATE: I get 401.1 when I trying to access site from local host. I can actually access files from remote host.

  Read the article

• ASP.NET Website Administration Tool: Unable to connect to SQL Server database

  - by MedicineMan

  I am trying to get authentication and authorization working with my ASP MVC project. I've run the aspnet_regsql.exe tool without any problem and see the aspnetdb database on my server (using the Management Studio tool). my connection string in my web.config is: <connectionStrings> <add name="ApplicationServices" connectionString="data source=MYSERVERNAME;Integrated Security=SSPI;AttachDBFilename=|DataDirectory|aspnetdb.mdf;User Instance=true" providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" /> The error I get is: There is a problem with your selected data store. This can be caused by an invalid server name or credentials, or by insufficient permission. It can also be caused by the role manager feature not being enabled. Click the button below to be redirected to a page where you can choose a new data store. The following message may help in diagnosing the problem: Unable to connect to SQL Server database. In the past, I have had trouble connecting to my database because I've needed to add users. Do I have to do something similar here?

  Read the article

• When I log on to my company desktop, I log on to a domain. How is this domain name installed?

  - by learnerforever

  Hi, When I have to work on my machine in company, I have noticed that I log on to a domain (named on the basis of company name) and not really on that computer. From, what I understand, this has a few advantages, the primary being that I just need one password for the domain and can work through any of the machines in company. My questions are : What software on desktop/network have to be installed so that the desktop recognizes and gives me option of logging into a domain. I would guess that a software can be installed on desktop, and there we can configure the IP address of domain server of company and port number, which handles authentication. Is this correct? This takes me to another question that how are softwares installed on end machines in a company. Going to each machine physically and installing looks very unweildy from administrator point of view. An obvious solution would be to install softwares (and updates) over network. My question on this are: What protocols,keywords come into picture when administrator installs OS,softwares,updates from his administrator machine to end machine through network. Thanks,

  Read the article

• Apache, Tomcat 5 and problem with HTTP basic auth

  - by Juha Syrjälä

  I have setup a Tomcat with a webapp that uses http basic auth in some of its URLs. There is a Apache server in front of the Tomcat. I have setup Apache as a proxy like this (all traffic should go directly to tomcat): /etc/httpd/conf.d/proxy_ajp.conf: LoadModule proxy_ajp_module modules/mod_proxy_ajp.so ProxyPass / ajp://localhost:8009/ ProxyPassReverse / ajp://localhost:8009/ There is a webapp installed to root of Tomcat (ROOT.war), so I should be able to use http://localhost/ to access my webapp. But it is not working with http basic auth. The problem is that everything works until I try to access URL that are protected by the HTTP basic auth. URLs without authentication work just fine. When accessing this url via apache I am getting an error message from Apache. If I access the same URL directly from tomcat, everything works just fine. I am getting this to Apache error log: [Wed Sep 01 21:34:01 2010] [error] proxy: dialog to [::1]:8009 (localhost) failed access log looks like this: ::1 - - [01/Sep/2010:21:34:01 +0300] "GET /protected_path/ HTTP/1.0" 503 360 "-" "w3m/0.5.2" I am using: Fedora release 13 (Goddard) httpd-2.2.16-1.fc13.x86_64 tomcat5-5.5.27-7.4.fc12.noarch The basic auth is implemented in the webapp (not in Apache or Tomcat). The webapp is actually implemented in Scala/Lift, but that shouldn't matter. The auth works if I access the tomcat directly. Error message that I am getting from Apache. It is curious that the title is Unauthorized and not Internal error: Unauthorized The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later. Apache/2.2.16 (Fedora) Server at my.server.name.com Port 80 It could be that Apache is seeing a some thing else than 200 OK response and thinks that it is an error when it actually should pass the received 401 Unauthorized response directly to browser. If this is the problem, how to fix it?

  Read the article

• Identifying mail account used in CRAM-MD5 transaction

  - by ManiacZX

  I suppose this is one of those where the tool for identifying the problem is also the tool used for taking advantage of it. I have a mail server that I am seeing emails that spam is being sent through it. It is not an open relay, the messages in question are being sent by someone authenticating to the smtp with CRAM-MD5. However, the logs only capture the actual data passed, which has been hashed so I cannot see what user account is being used. My suspicion is a simple username/password combo or a user account's password has otherwise been compromised, but I cannot do much about it without knowing what user it is. Of course I can block the IP that is doing it, but that doesn't fix the real problem. I have both the CRAM-MD5 Base64 challenge string and the hashed client auth string containing the username, password and challenge string. I am looking for a way to either reverse this (which I haven't been able to find any information on) or otherwise I suppose I need a dictionary attack tool designed for CRAM-MD5 to run through two lists, one for username and one for password and the constant of the challenge string until it finds a matching result of the authentication string I have logged. Any information on reversing using the data I have logged, a tool to identify it or any alternative methods you have used for this situation would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Authenticate users with Zimbra LDAP Server from other CentOS clients

  - by efesaid

  I'am wondering that how can integrate my database,web,backup etc.. centos servers with Zimbra LDAP Server. Does it require more advanced configuration than standart ldap authentication ? My zimbra server version is [zimbra@zimbra ~]$ zmcontrol -v Release 8.0.5_GA_5839.RHEL6_64_20130910123908 RHEL6_64 FOSS edition. My LDAP Server status is [zimbra@ldap ~]$ zmcontrol status Host ldap.domain.com ldap Running snmp Running stats Running zmconfigd Running I already installed nss-pam-ldapd packages to my servers. [root@www]# rpm -qa | grep ldap nss-pam-ldapd-0.7.5-18.2.el6_4.x86_64 apr-util-ldap-1.3.9-3.el6_0.1.x86_64 pam_ldap-185-11.el6.x86_64 openldap-2.4.23-32.el6_4.1.x86_64 My /etc/nslcd.conf is [root@www]# tail -n 7 /etc/nslcd.conf uid nslcd gid ldap # This comment prevents repeated auto-migration of settings. uri ldap://ldap.domain.com base dc=domain,dc=com binddn uid=zimbra,cn=admins,cn=zimbra bindpw **pass** ssl no tls_cacertdir /etc/openldap/cacerts When i run [root@www ~]# id username id: username: No such user But i am sure that username user exist on ldap server. EDIT : When i run ldapsearch command i got all result with credentials and dn. [root@www ~]# ldapsearch -H ldap://ldap.domain.com:389 -w **pass** -D uid=zimbra,cn=admins,cn=zimbra -x 'objectclass=*' # extended LDIF # # LDAPv3 # base <dc=domain,dc=com> (default) with scope subtree # filter: objectclass=* # requesting: ALL # # domain.com dn: dc=domain,dc=com zimbraDomainType: local zimbraDomainStatus: active . . .

  Read the article

• can't figure out why apache LDAP auth fails

  - by SethG

  Suddenly, yesterday, one of my apache servers became unable to connect to my LDAP (AD) server. I have two sites running on that server, both of which use LDAP to auth against my AD server when a user logs in to either site. It had been working fine two days ago. For reasons unknown, as of yesterday, it stopped working. The error log only says this: auth_ldap authenticate: user foo authentication failed; URI /FrontPage [LDAP: ldap_simple_bind_s() failed][Can't contact LDAP server], referer: http://mysite.com/ I thought perhaps my self-signed SSL cert had expired, so I created a new one for mysite.com, but not for the server hostname itself, and the problem persisted. I enabled debug-level logging. It shows the full SSL transaction with the LDAP server, and it appears to complete without errors until the very end when I get the "Can't contact LDAP server" message. I can run ldapsearch from the commandline on this server, and I can login to it, which also uses LDAP, so I know that the server can connect to and query the LDAP/AD server. It is only apache that cannot connect. Googling for an answer has turned up nothing, so I'm asking here. Can anybody provide insight to this problem? Here's the LDAP section from the apache config: <Directory "/web/wiki/"> Order allow,deny Allow from all AuthType Basic AuthName "Login" AuthBasicProvider ldap AuthzLDAPAuthoritative off #AuthBasicAuthoritative off AuthLDAPUrl ldaps://domain.server.ip/dc=full,dc=context,dc=server,dc=name?sAMAccountName?sub AuthLDAPBindDN cn=ldapbinduser,cn=Users,dc=full,dc=context,dc=server,dc=name AuthLDAPBindPassword password require valid-user </Directory>

  Read the article

• Join ActiveDirectory (Win 2k8R2) to OpenDirectory(Snow Leopard)

  - by Tom O'Connor

  The vast majority of questions and so on regarding the interoperability of Active and Open directories involves getting Mac clients to see an AD and auth against it. What we'd like to do is get a Windows 7 workstation to auth completely against Open Directory. We tried setting it up as an NT4 type PDC, and that doesn't work satisfactorily. We tried using pGina and the LDAP backend, which allows Authentication, but has no support for Authorization, and as a result, if we mount an NFS Share, the user has the rights to do anything they damn well please. Not ideal for security (Totally bloody unacceptable, actually). We tried using a Samba server (newer version than on the Open Directory Server) as an intermediate, so that it knows about the LDAP server on the OD Server, but uses Samba 4 instead of v3. That didn't work either. We could login, but couldn't mount, and if we did, we had the same rights as with pGina. If we right-click the mounted drive in Windows, and have a look at NFS UID, it returns -2, not the correct (mapped) UID. So the final plan I've got is to use an Active Directory, inside a Windows 2008R2 Virtual Machine. What I want to achieve is to have the Active Directory sync it's user data from OpenDirectory (read-only would be fine). That way, we'd have the ability to connect Windows 7 clients to a "virtual domain" which would actually just grab information from OD's LDAP. All the information I've found is about how to go the other way. Does anyone know how we can do this?

  Read the article

• Authenticating Linked Servers - SQL Server 8 to SQL Server 10

  - by jp2code

  We have an old SQL Server 2000 database that has to be kept because it is needed on our manufacturing machines. It also maintains our employee records, since they are needed on these machines for employee logins. We also have a newer SQL Server 10 database (I think this is 2008, but I'm not sure) that we are using for newer development. I have recently learned (i.e. today) that I can link the two servers. This would allow me to access the employee tables in the newer server. Following the SF post SQL Server to SQL Server Linked Server Setup, I tried adding the link. In our SQL Server 2000 machine, I got this error: Similarly, on our SQL Server 10 machine, I got this error: The messages, though worded different, probably say the same thing: I need to authenticate, somehow. We have an Active Directory, but it is on yet another server. What, exactly, should be done here? A guy HERE<< said to check the Security settings, but did not say what else to do. Both servers are set to SQL Server and Windows Authentication mode. Now what?

  Read the article

• Understanding Security Certificates (and thier pricing)

  - by John Robertson

  I work at a very small company so certificate costs need to be absolutely minimal. However for some applications we do Need to have our customers get that warm fuzzy not-using-a-self-signed certificate feeling. Since creating a "certificate authority" with makecert really just means creating a public/private key pair, it seems pretty clear that creating a public/private key pair FROM such a "certificate authority" really just means generating a second public/private key pair and signing both with the private key that belongs to the "certificate authority". Since the keys are signed anyone can verify they came from the certificate authority I created, or if verisign gave me the pair they sign it with one of their own private keys, and anyone can use verisigns corresponding public key to confirm verisign as the source of the keys. Given this I don't understand when I go to verisign or godaddy why they have rates only for yearly plans, when all I really want from them is a single public/private key pair signed with one of their private keys (so that anyone else can use their public keys to confirm that, yes, they gave me that public/private key pair and they confirmed I was who I said I was so you can trust my public/private key pair as belonging to a legitimate third party). Clearly I am misunderstanding something, what is it? Does verisign retire their public/private key pairs periodically so that my verisign signed key pair "expires" and I need new ones? Edit: I learned that the certificate has an internal expiration date and it also maintains an internal value stating whether it can be used to sign other certificates (i.e. sign other private/public key pairs stored as certificates). Can't I get a few (even one) non-signing certificate signed by someone like verisign that I can use for authentication/encryption without a yearly subscription?

  Read the article

• Does Windows 7 Authenticate Cached Credentials on Startup

  - by Farray

  Problem I have a Windows domain user account that gets automatically locked-out semi-regularly. Troubleshooting Thus Far The only rule on the domain that should automatically lock an account is too many failed login attempts. I do not think anyone nefarious is trying to access my account. The problem started occurring after changing my password so I think it's a stored credential problem. Further to that, in the Event Viewer's System log I found Warnings from Security-Kerberos that says: The password stored in Credential Manager is invalid. This might be caused by the user changing the password from this computer or a different computer. To resolve this error, open Credential Manager in Control Panel, and reenter the password for the credential mydomain\myuser. I checked the Credential Manager and all it has are a few TERMSRV/servername credentials stored by Remote Desktop. I know which stored credential was incorrect, but it was stored for Remote Desktop access to a specific machine and was not being used (at least not by me) at the time of the warnings. The Security-Kerberos warning appears when the system was starting up (after a Windows Update reboot) and also appeared earlier this morning when nobody was logged into the machine. Clarification after SnOrfus answer: There was 1 set of invalid credentials that was stored for a terminal server. The rest of the credentials are known to be valid (used often & recently without issues). I logged on to the domain this morning without issue. I then ran windows update which rebooted the computer. After the restart, I couldn't log in (due to account being locked out). After unlocking & logging on to the domain, I checked Event Viewer which showed a problem with credentials after restarting. Since the only stored credentials (according to Credential Manager) are for terminal servers, why would there be a Credential problem on restart when remote desktop was not being used? Question Does anyone know if Windows 7 "randomly" checks the authentication of cached credentials?

  Read the article

• Directory directive: AuthType None but still need an AuthProvider?

  - by Steffen Winkler

  For now I just need the server to let me download files from one specific folder (in my case I chose /opt/myFolder for that task) Distribution is Debian 6.0 *edit_start* Apache version is 2.4, according to their official documentation, the Order/Allow clauses are deprecated and should not be used anymore I'm an idiot: Apache version is 2.2. *edit_end* My directory directives in apache2.conf look like this: <IfModule dir_module> DirectoryIndex index.html index.htm index.php </IfModule> ServerRoot "/etc/apache2" DocumentRoot "/opt/myFolder" <Directory /> Options FollowSymLinks AuthType None AllowOverride None Require all denie </Directory> <Directory "/opt/myFolder/*"> Options FollowSymLinks MultiViews AllowOverride None AuthType None Require all allow </Directory> When I try to access a file inside that folder (http://myserver.de/aTestFile.zip) I get an Internal Server Error. Also Apache writes the following error into it's log: configuration error: couldn't check user. Check your authn provider!: /aTestFile.zip Why would I need an authn provider if I don't want any authentication? Also I hope someone can explain to me what kind of AuthenticationProvider I'd need for that. Everytime I search for those things I get pointed at people asking how to protect files/directories with passwords or restrict access to some IP addresses, which doesn't really help me. ok, since I've Apache version 2.2, here is the error I get when using the Order/Deny/Allow commands instead of AuthType/Require: Invalid command 'Order', perhaps misspelled or defined by a module not included in the server configuration.

  Read the article

• Adding users to Sharepoint when they are not in the same domain

  - by jim-work

  Bear with me as I explain this, I'm working my way through Sharepoint access as I go, but I'll clarify my question as I go along. The Problem We have about 10,000 users who need access to our Sharepoint 2005 based reporting. Because our organization is migrating from one domain to another, we need to add each user twice, once for each domain. For the current domain, this is no problem, we've got a powershell script that I tweaked to add all the users in a given CSV file, this takes about 5 minutes to run. The big problem we're having is with users who are NOT in our currently active domain. Because the sharepoint server cannot authenticate the new users, we can't add them directly. What we're doing is creating a temp user, then using STSADM.EXE to migrate that test user to the proper domain/user_name for each of our 10,000 users. The creation and migration takes about 5 seconds per user, or well over 12 hours to run. The Question Has anyone encountered this before? Is there a way to add users without requiring AD authentication? Why is STSADM.EXE running so slow? Thanks a lot for any advice or direction anyone can give me.

  Read the article

• PostgreSQL pg_hba.conf with "password" auth wouldn't work with PHP pg_connect?

  - by tftd

  I've recently experimented with the settings in pg_hba.conf. I read the PostgreSQL documentation and I though that the "password" auth method is what I want. There are many people that have access to the server PostgreSQL is working on so I don't want the "trust" method. So I changed it. But then PHP stopped working with the database. The message I get is "Warning: pg_connect(): Unable to connect to PostgreSQL server: FATAL: password authentication failed for user "myuser" in /my/path/to/connection/class.php on line 35". It is kind of strange because I can connect via phppgadmin without any problems and also I can connect from my home computer with psql - again without any problems. This is my pg_hba.conf: # TYPE DATABASE USER CIDR-ADDRESS METHOD # "local" is for Unix domain socket connections only local all all password # IPv4 local connections: host all all 127.0.0.1/32 password # IPv6 local connections: host all all ::1/128 password The connection string I'm using with pg_conenct is: $connect_string = "host=localhost port=5432 dbname=mydbname user=auser password=apassword"; $dbConnection = pg_connect($connection_string); Does anybody know why is this happening ? Did I misconfigured something ?

  Read the article

• Postfix SMTP-relay server against Gmail on CentOS 6.4

  - by Alex

  I'm currently trying to setup an SMTP-relay server to Gmail with Postfix on a CentOS 6.4 machine, so I can send e-mails from my PHP scripts. I followed this tutorial but I get this error output when trying to do a sendmail [email protected] Output: tail -f /var/log/maillog Apr 16 01:25:54 ext-server-dev01 postfix/cleanup[3646]: 86C2D3C05B0: message-id=<[email protected]> Apr 16 01:25:54 ext-server-dev01 postfix/qmgr[3643]: 86C2D3C05B0: from=<[email protected]>, size=297, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Apr 16 01:25:56 ext-server-dev01 postfix/smtp[3648]: 86C2D3C05B0: to=<[email protected]>, relay=smtp.gmail.com[173.194.79.108]:587, delay=4.8, delays=3.1/0.04/1.5/0.23, dsn=5.5.1, status=bounced (host smtp.gmail.com[173.194.79.108] said: 530-5.5.1 Authentication Required. Learn more at 530 5.5.1 http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?answer=14257 qh4sm3305629pac.8 - gsmtp (in reply to MAIL FROM command)) Here is my main.cf configuration, I tried a number of different options but nothing seems to work: alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases command_directory = /usr/sbin config_directory = /etc/postfix daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix data_directory = /var/lib/postfix debug_peer_level = 2 html_directory = no inet_interfaces = localhost inet_protocols = ipv4 mail_owner = postfix mailq_path = /usr/bin/mailq.postfix manpage_directory = /usr/share/man mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost myhostname = host.local.domain myorigin = $myhostname newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases.postfix queue_directory = /var/spool/postfix readme_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.6.6/README_FILES relayhost = [smtp.gmail.com]:587 sample_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.6.6/samples sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix setgid_group = postdrop smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd smtp_sasl_security_options = noanonymous smtp_sasl_tls_security_options = noanonymous smtp_sasl_type = cyrus smtp_tls_CAfile = /etc/ssl/certs/ca-bundle.crt smtp_use_tls = yes smtpd_sasl_path = smtpd unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550 In the /etc/postfix/sasl_passwd files (sasl_passwd & sasl_passwd.db) I got the following (removed the real password, and replaced it with "password"): [smtp.google.com]:587 [email protected]:password To create the sasl_passwd.db file, I did that by running this command: postmap hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd Do anybody got an idea why I can't seem to send an e-mail from the server? Kind Regards Alex

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66  | Next Page >