Search Results

Search found 1208 results on 49 pages for 'proxied authorization'.

Page 6/49 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • git pull gives error: 401 Authorization Required while accessing https://git.foo.com/bar.git

    - by spuder
    My macbook pro is able to clone/push/pull from the company git server. My cent 6.3 vm gets a 401 error git clone https://git.acme.com/git/torque-setup "error: The requested URL returned error: 401 Authorization Required while accessing https://git.acme.com/git/torque-setup/info/refs As a work around, I've tried creating a folder, with an empty repository, then setting the remote to the company server. I get the same error when trying a git pull The remotes are identical between the machines MacBook Pro (working) git --version git version 1.7.10.2 (Apple Git-33) git remote -v origin https://git.acme.com/git/torque-setup (fetch) origin https://git.acme.com/git/torque-setup (push) Cent 6.3 (not working) yum install -y git git --version git version 1.7.1 git remote -v origin https://git.acme.com/git/torque-setup (fetch) origin https://git.acme.com/git/torque-setup (push) The git server only allows https. Not git or ssh connections. Why is the macbook pro able to do a git pull, while the cent os machine can't? Solution Update 2013-5-15 As jku mentioned, the culprit is the old version of git installed on the cent box. Unfortunately, 1.7.1 is what you get when you run yum install git The work around is to manually install a newer version of git, or simply add the username to the repo git clone https://[email protected]/git/torque-setup

    Read the article

  • Cannot add Authorization field to HttpsUrlConnection in order to complete Basic authentication

    - by ES
    Hi, I'm using the Sun API HttpsURLConnection class, and have been trying for a day now to get it to send a simple request: URL url = new URL("https://thirdpartyserver.com/somelocation"); connection = (HttpsURLConnection)url.openConnection(); connection.setDoOutput(true); connection.setRequestMethod("POST"); if (doAuthorization) { Base64Converter converter = new Base64Converter(); connection.setRequestProperty("Authorization", "Basic " + converter.encode("username:password")); } OutputStreamWriter writer = new OutputStreamWriter(connection.getOutputStream()); writer.write("param1=100&param2=hello"); writer.flush(); writer.close(); I keep getting 401 from the third part server. When I look at the connection through the debugger, the method shows up as GET even though I set it to POST; the collection of request properties shows up as null. If I print the values out, the method shows up as POST, but the request parameters collection is still empty. I would love to be able to print the request and understand what's going on, but I could not figure out how to print the content of an output buffer. Any ideas? Thanks! ES

    Read the article

  • Uploading to google Docs - Unknown authorization header Error 401 - PLease Help

    - by Ali
    Hi guys I'm trying to upload a document to google docs but I'm getting an error namely an Unknown authorization header Error 401 to be exact.. I'm developing for google apps marketplace here - my code for uploading is: $client = getGoogleClient(); $docs = new Zend_Gdata_Docs($client); uploadDocument($docs, true, $FILES['file']['name'], $FILES['file']['tmp_name']); function getGoogleClient() { $options = array( 'requestScheme' => Zend_Oauth::REQUEST_SCHEME_HEADER, 'version' => '1.0', 'signatureMethod' => 'HMAC-SHA1', 'consumerKey' => $CONSUMER_KEY, 'consumerSecret' => $CONSUMER_SECRET ); $consumer = new Zend_Oauth_Consumer($options); $token = new Zend_Oauth_Token_Access(); $httpClient = $token->getHttpClient($options); return $httpClient; } function uploadDocument($docs, $html, $originalFileName, $temporaryFileLocation) { $fileToUpload = $originalFileName; if ($temporaryFileLocation) { $fileToUpload = $temporaryFileLocation; } $newDocumentEntry = $docs->uploadFile($fileToUpload, $originalFileName, null, Zend_Gdata_Docs::DOCUMENTS_LIST_FEED_URI); // this function never executes completely I get the error $alternateLink = ''; foreach ($newDocumentEntry->link as $link) { if ($link->getRel() === 'alternate') { $alternateLink = $link->getHref(); } } return $alternateLink; } ANy ideas ?

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio 2005 - OleDbConnection throws "Invalid authorization specification" in Form Designer,

    - by Jason Dagit
    I have a form with an OleDbConnection object on it. This form fails to load in the Form Designer with the message: One or more errors encountered while loading the designer. The errors are listed below. Some errors can be fixed by rebuilding your project, while others may require code changes. Invalid authorization specification at ADODB.ConnectionClass.Open(String ConnectionString, String UserID, String Password, Int32 Options) ... (stack trace continues into user code) I've tracked this down to the OleDbConnection string. If I hardcode in the server IP, username/password/dbinstance into the constructor of the GUI form then the form will load in the designer. At run-time it is not an issue because we require the user to provide the login details. The question: Is it possible to use the OleDbConnection and the Form designer without supplying the database credentials in the source code of the form? For example, is there a property of the OleDbConnection or Form that I can set so that it doesn't need to access the database during Form design? My concern is that if we ever move the database server or change the login that the code will stop working in the designer.

    Read the article

  • How can I limit asp.net control actions based on user role?

    - by Duke
    I have several pages or views in my application which are essentially the same for both authenticated users and anonymous users. I'd like to limit the insert/update/delete actions in formviews and gridviews to authenticated users only, and allow read access for both authed and anon users. I'm using the asp.net configuration system for handling authentication and roles. This system limits access based on path so I've been creating duplicate pages for authed and anon paths. The solution that comes to mind immediately is to check roles in the appropriate event handlers, limiting what possible actions are displayed (insert/update/delete buttons) and also limiting what actions are performed (for users that may know how to perform an action in the absence of a button.) However, this solution doesn't eliminate duplication - I'd be duplicating security code on a series of pages rather than duplicating pages and limiting access based on path; the latter would be significantly less complicated. I could always build some controls that offered role-based configuration, but I don't think I have time for that kind of commitment right now. Is there a relatively easy way to do this (do such controls exist?) or should I just stick to path-based access and duplicate pages? Does it even make sense to use two methods of authorization? There are still some pages which are strictly for either role so I'll be making use of path-based authorization anyway. Finally, would using something other than path-based authorization be contrary to typical asp.net design practices, at least in the context of using the asp.net configuration system?

    Read the article

  • declarative_authorization permissions on roles

    - by William
    Hey all, I'm trying to add authorization to a rather large app that already exists, but I have to obfuscate the details a bit. Here's the background: In our app we have a number or roles that are hierarchical, roughly like this: BasicUser -> SuperUser -> Admin -> SuperAdmin For authorization each User model instance has an attribute 'role' which corresponds to the above. We have a RESTful controller "Users" that is namespaced under Backoffice. So in short it's Backoffice::UsersController. class Backoffice::UsersController < ApplicationController filter_access_to :all #... RESTful actions + some others end So here's the problem: We want users to be able to give permissions for users to edit users but ONLY if they have a 'smaller' role than they currently have. I've created the following in authorization_rules.rb authorization do role :basic_user do has_permission_on :backoffice_users, :to => :index end role :super_user do includes :basic_user has_permission_on :backoffice_users, :to => :edit do if_attribute :role => is_in { %w(basic_user) } end end role :admin do includes :super_user end role :super_admin do includes :admin end end And unfortunately that's as far as I got, the rule doesn't seem to get applied. If I comment the rule out, nobody can edit If I leave the rule in you can edit everybody I've also tried a couple of variations on the if_attribute: if_attribute :role => is { 'basic_user' } if_attribute :role => 'basic_user' and they get the same effect. Does anybody have any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Windows file server access control by device

    - by Ori Shavit
    I'm trying to build a system where access to certain resources (file shares) in Windows Server, is limited not only by the username (in a Active Directory domain), but also by the client machine. So far, I haven't found a good way to do this; adding the computer account to the DACL is apparently not the way to do it. Windows Server 2012 supports this with Dynamic Access Control, but this method requires all clients to be Windows 8, it seems, with no way to use this with Windows 7 clients. Is there a supported way to do this? (or alternatively, add support for device authorization with Windows 7).

    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

  • Active Directory problems while trying to perfom compare operation

    - by Alex
    I have CentOs 5.5 with Apache 2.2 and SVN installed. Also I have Windows 2003 R2 with Active Directory. I'm trying to authorize users via AD so each user have access to repo if he is a member of corespondent group in AD. Here is my apache config: LoadModule dav_svn_module modules/mod_dav_svn.so LoadModule authz_svn_module modules/mod_authz_svn.so LDAPVerifyServerCert off ServerName svn.mydomain.com DocumentRoot /var/www/svn.mydomain.com/htdocs RewriteEngine On [Location /] AuthType basic AuthBasicProvider ldap AuthzLDAPAuthoritative on AuthLDAPURL ldaps://comp1.mydomain.com:636/DC=mydomain,DC=com?sAMAccountName?sub?(objectClass=*) AuthLDAPBindDN [email protected] AuthLDAPBindPassword binduserpassword [/Location] [Location /repos/test] DAV svn SVNPath /var/svn/repos/test AuthName "SVN repository for test" Require ldap-group CN=test,CN=ProjectGroups,DC=mydomain,DC=com [/Location] When I'm using "Require valid-user" everything goes fine, "Require ldap-user" also works. But as soon as I use "Require ldap-group" authorization fails. Trere are no errors in apache logs, but Active Directory shows folowing error: Event Type: Information Event Source: NTDS LDAP Event Category: LDAP Interface Event ID: 1138 Date: 10/9/2010 Time: 1:28:52 PM User: MYDOMAIN\binduser Computer: COMP1 Description: Internal event: Function ldap_compare entered. Event Type: Error Event Source: NTDS General Event Category: Internal Processing Event ID: 1481 Date: 10/9/2010 Time: 1:28:52 PM User: MYDOMAIN\binduser Computer: COMP1 Description: Internal error: The operation on the object failed. Additional Data Error value: 2 0000208D: NameErr: DSID-031001CD, problem 2001 (NO_OBJECT), data 0, best match of: 'DC=mydomain,DC=com' I'm confused by this problem. What I'm doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Ruby on rails: Image downloads with Authentication/Authorization/Time outs

    - by ak1dnar
    Hi Guys, I'm having few doubts on implementing file downloads. I'm creating an app where I use attachment_fu with Amazon s3 to upload files. Things are working pretty well so far on uploading side. Now its the time to start the file downloads. Here is what I need, a logged in user search and browse for Images and they should able to add the files in to a download basket (Let's say its a Download Shopping Cart). Finally the user should be able to download these file(s) from S3 probably as a zipped file. Is there any plugin/gem where I can use for this?

    Read the article

  • Twitter oauth authorization in a pop-up instead of in main browser window

    - by niyogi
    I feel incredibly stupid for even asking this since the answer might already be under my nose but here it goes: TweetMeme has a Re-tweet twitter widget that publishers can place on their blogs. When a user clicks on the widget, it pops open a window which allows the user to authenticate themselves with twitter and then re-tweet. This seems to use some special Twitter oauth popup form factor - unless there is something fancier happening under the surface to authenticate the user. The pop-up window looks like this: http://twitpic.com/1kepcr I'd rather handle an authentication via a pop-up rather than send the user to a brand new page (for the app I'm working on) and they seem to have the most graceful solution. Thoughts on how they did this?

    Read the article

  • Facebook Graph API - authorization types?

    - by Alex Cook
    I'm struggling with the new Facebook Graph API, perhaps someone here can help. Here is what I want to do: provide a ‘login w/ FB’ button, throw to /authorize, get a code, throw to /access_token, get an access_token, and be able to hit https://graph.facebook.com/me for info about the user. When I try to use type=client_cred in the /authorize call, I get an access_token that lets me hit URLs with userIDs or names, but not /me. I receive an error stating I need a valid token. If I can't hit /me, how do I figure out who the current user is? What exactly should I use in the type param if I want a website to access a users data? I've seen posts with type=web_server, etc, but I can't seem to find a sure fire way to do, what I think, is pretty simple... Thanks ahead of time for any help thats provided...

    Read the article

  • Setting up sendgrid for rails..returning Authorization error

    - by Trip
    The emails now send from my local, but do not send from my box. I am returned this error. Anyone know what this might be? Net::SMTPAuthenticationError (535 5.7.8 Error: authentication failed: authentication failure ): My environments/production.rb ActionMailer::Base.delivery_method = :smtp ActionMailer::Base.smtp_settings = { :address => "smtp.sendgrid.net", :port => '25', :domain => "mydomain.com", :authentication => :plain, :user_name => "[email protected]", :password => "password1234" } /etc/ssmtp/ssmtp.conf : root=postmaster mailhub=smtp.sendgrid.net [email protected] AuthPass=password1234 AuthMethod=LOGIN rewriteDomain=mydomain.com FromLineOverride=YES UseSTARTTLS=NO

    Read the article

  • Facebook Developer Toolkit doesn't redirect after authorization

    - by Mika Kolari
    I have a small facebook test app (iframe) based on sample http://blogs.claritycon.com/blogs/kevin_marshall/archive/2009/10/06/facebook-developer-toolkit-3-0-asp-net-mvc-sample.aspx public class HomeController : Controller { public ActionResult Index() { var api = this.GetApi(); var userId = api.Session.UserId; return View(); } // redirects to Index // which doesn't redirect back here [FacebookAuthorization(IsFbml = false)] public ActionResult About() { var api = this.GetApi(); // goes here without FacebookAuthorization // but userId = 0 var userId = api.Session.UserId; return View(); } } When I try to go to 'About' page, FacebookAuthorizationAttribute redirects to 'Index' for authentication. The problem is, it never redirects back to 'About'. What am I doing wrong here?

    Read the article

  • Securing Files over Web: Fine Grained Authorization Based File Access

    - by Nishant
    I have a system where employees can upload files. There are three ways Upload to my account in public, private or protected mode Upload to department account in public, private or protected mode Upload to organization account in public, private or protected mode where public is visible to anyone, private to the group or person only and protected to anyone in the organization. All the files for an organization are stored in a directory say, /files/<organizationId>/, on file server like files +-- 234809 | +img1.jpg | +doc1.pdf +-- 808234 | +doc2.pdf I am storing file-path and privacy level in DB. So, I can control whether to show link to a file URL to an user -- on a given page. The problem is, I do not have any control over file's URL... so, if some one types the URL to img1.jpg in his browser's address bar, there is no way to know whether a logged in user is eligible to see img1.jpg. Any suggestion? Thanks Nishant

    Read the article

  • NAnt authorization access issue

    - by Luís Custódio
    I'm having a problem trying to move a file through my network, I want to transfer the release from my continuos integration virtual machine to the host of this VM. but i get this: System.UnauthorizedAccessException: Access to the path '\\192.168.0.36\E$\WebApps\MyProgram' is denied. at System.IO.__Error.WinIOError(Int32 errorCode, String maybeFullPath) at System.IO.Directory.InternalCreateDirectory(String fullPath, String path, DirectorySecurity dirSecurity) at System.IO.Directory.CreateDirectory(String path, DirectorySecurity directorySecurity) at NAnt.Core.Tasks.MoveTask.DoFileOperations() at NAnt.Core.Tasks.CopyTask.ExecuteTask() at NAnt.Core.Task.Execute() at NAnt.Core.Target.Execute() at NAnt.Core.Project.Execute(String targetName, Boolean forceDependencies) at NAnt.Core.Project.Execute() at NAnt.Core.Project.Run() I'm trying to transfer from a Windows Server 2003 R2 to a Windows Server 2008 R2.

    Read the article

  • Rails user authorization

    - by Zachary
    I am currently building a Rails app, and trying to figure out the best way to authenticate that a user owns whatever data object they are trying to edit. I already have an authentication system in place (restful-authentication), and I'm using a simple before_filter to make sure a user is logged in before they can reach certain areas of the website. However, I'm not sure the best way to handle a user trying to edit a specific piece of data - for example lets say users on my site can own Books, and they can edit the properties of the book (title, author, pages, etc), but they should only be able to do this for Books that -they- own. In my 'edit' method on the books controller I would have a find that only retrieved books owned by the current_user. However, if another user knew the id of the book, they could type in http://website.com/book/7/edit , and the controller would verify that they are logged in, then show the edit page for that book (seems to bypass the controller). What is the best way to handle this? Is it more of a Rails convention routing issue that I don't understand (being able to go straight to the edit page), or should I be adding in a before_find, before_save, before_update, etc callbacks to my model?

    Read the article

  • rpcbind authorization problems

    - by Milan
    Hy, I am using rpcbind (SunRPC) on Arch linux and python rpc.py (wich use standard python socket module) interface for comunication with it, but every time I try to send request for registration or unregistration to rpcbind I get message that I am rejected for security reasons. Only situation when everything works is that when I call rpcbind in insecure mode (rpcbind -i) but I realy want to make everything works in secure mode.I found information from rpcbind datasheet that i can make request in secure mode only from loopback address, but I have tried every aproach i had knew to make such socket and everything fall down. Please help me. Thank you

    Read the article

  • How to secure authorization of methods

    - by Kurresmack
    I am building a web site in C# using MVC.Net How can I secure that no unauthorized persons can access my methods? What I mean is that I want to make sure that only admins can create articles on my page. If I put this logic in the method actually adding this to the database, wouldn't I have business logic in my data layer? Is it a good practise to have a seperate security layer that is always in between of the data layer and the business layer to make? The problem is that if I protect at a higher level I will have to have checks on many places and it is more likely that I miss one place and users can bypass security. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Authorization and Jquery dialog problem.

    - by bbrepols
    Hi, I have a little problem with a Jquery dialog for an action that requires a role. In my example, the user can click on a delete button and must confirm the action. In my controller, the Delete action requires a role, if the user is in the required role, the object is deleted. The problem: How to alert the user if * the element was deleted (redirect to the Index view) * there was an error (alert with the message) * he doesn't have the rights to delete (alert with the message) Before using the authorize filter, the delete action returned a JSON with a Boolean that indicates if there was an error, an URL to redirect on success and a message to alert on error. As I can't return a JSON from my filter, I created an other method with the authorize filter that returns a partial view with the confirm content. If the user doesn't have the rights, the filter returns a partial view with an unauthorized exception content. The problem: How to distinct which partial view was returned. When I create the dialog, I need to know for the buttons function. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • google oauth doesn't redirect to callback after authorization

    - by dstywho
    I can't seem to get google to redirect to the callback url after obtaining the auth token. By redirecting the user to the following url, the user can click grant or deny access. After that the user clicks on one of the choices, the user is not redirected back to the callback url. https://www.google.com/accounts/OAuthAuthorizeToken?oauth_token=4%2F5ETLZ84rGmRxE_yx0b-_IFDReUxe&oauth_callback=http://blahblahblah.com/user_sessions/create&oauth_version=1.0&hd=default I'm wondering if anyone knows what the problem might be. Also does google require I use something like openssl.

    Read the article

  • Good way to make Authentication and Authorization information available between application layers

    - by DutrowLLC
    I have a web application running on Google App Engine (GAE) for JAVA. I'm authenticating the client at the Servlet layer but would like to make the client information available to my business and data layers without having to pass the client object through the arguments of every single function. I'm considering setting up a "session" type object using ThreadLocal. That way any function can just say something like: CurrentUser.getRoles(); Is this a good way to do this or is there something else that is a more accepted solution? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Rails - Seeking a Dry authorization method compatible with various nested resources

    - by adam
    Consensus is you shouldn't nest resources deeper than 1 level. So if I have 3 models like this (below is just a hypothetical situation) User has_many Houses has_many Tenants and to abide by the above i do map.resources :users, :has_many => :houses map.resorces :houses, :has_many => :tenants Now I want the user to be able edit both their houses and their tenants details but I want to prevent them from trying to edit another users houses and tenants by forging the user_id part of the urls. So I create a before_filter like this def prevent_user_acting_as_other_user if User.find_by_id(params[:user_id]) != current_user() @current_user_session.destroy flash[:error] = "Stop screwing around wiseguy" redirect_to login_url() return end end for houses that's easy because the user_id is passed via edit_user_house_path(@user, @house) but in the tenents case tenant house_tenent_path(@house) no user id is passed. But I can get the user id by doing @house.user.id but then id have to change the code above to this. def prevent_user_acting_as_other_user if params[:user_id] @user = User.find(params[:user_id] elsif params[:house_id] @user = House.find(params[:house_id]).user end if @user != current_user() #kick em out end end It does the job, but I'm wondering if there is a more elegant way. Every time I add a new resource that needs protecting from user forgery Ill have to keep adding conditionals. I don't think there will be many cases but would like to know a better approach if one exists.

    Read the article

  • Authentication and authorization for RESTfull API (java jersery)

    - by abovesun
    Hi, implementing service something similar with tinyurl or bit.ly, I'm would like to expose service as API, I'm using java and jersey as RESTfull service implementation. I'm looking for simplest way for authentification of users who use API, OAuth is first thing coming in mind, but the problem is I don't need this 3 iteration calls with request token query, than access token query with callback url passing. I just need to give user ability to invoke api with no additional security calls to my server.

    Read the article

  • Authorization error in facebook aplication

    - by bhaskaragr29
    require_login($required_permissions = 'email,photo_upload'); $auth= $facebook-do_get_session($_GET['auth_token']); $facebook-set_user($s['uid'], $s['session_key'], $s['expires'], $s['secret']) ? when ever i tries to login into my app it just refreshed and refresh with wih different auth_tokens. please help

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >