Search Results

Search found 3358 results on 135 pages for 'ssl'.

Page 61/135 | < Previous Page | 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  | Next Page >

  • IIS FTP 7.5 Data Channel Problem (SSL)

    - by user59050
    Hey there I wonder if anyone can get me in the right direction. I am setting up both a FTPS Client and Server, FTPS Server using Microsoft’s iis FTP 7.5. On the client side it will be running on Linux and I am using M2crypto for the openssl wrapping (python). I am worried the problem is on the server side (iis7.5) due to the following discovery : If I host using Filezilla with BOTH the control and data channel being forced to be encrypted it works 100% (100% file transmission), if i use iis as the server everything works up to the point when the data channel takes over... i.e. all data of the retrieved file is already received correctly in my basket! The ftp server just won't send the final '226 Transfer complete.' on the cmd socket. Why? If i force the client or server to close the connection the file is 100% intact....If i use iis 7.5 with forced encryption on control channel all works 100% as long as i don’t force data channel... Here are some screenshots to demo this... Client View after Kill Client : pics @ http://forums.iis.net/p/1172936/1960994.aspx#1960994 Summary : We can establish the connection, do directory listings, start the upload, see the file (0bytes) created on the server but then the client hangs. If we terminate the client, the uploaded file on the server suddenly jumps up to full size.

    Read the article

  • Host couldn't be reached by domain name, only by IP: Apache's fault?

    - by MaxArt
    I have this Windows Server 2003 R2 32 bit machine running Apache 2.4.2 with OpenSSL 1.0.1c and PHP 5.4.5 via mod_fcgid 2.3.7. This config worked just fine for some hours, but then the site couldn't be reached with its domain name, say www.example.com, but it could be still reached by its IP address. In particular, while https://www.example.com/ yielded a connection error, http://123.1.2.3/ worked just fine. Yes, first https then http. Error and access logs were clean, i.e. they showed no signs of problems. Just the usual messages, that were interrupted while the site couldn't be reached. After some investigation, a simple restart of Apache solved the problem. Unfortunately, I didn't have the chance to test if https://123.1.2.3/ worked as well, or if http://www.example.com/ was still redirected to https as usual. So, has anyone have any idea of what happened? Before I get tired of Apache and ditch it in favor of Nginx? Edit: Some log informations. The last line of sslerror.log is from 90 minutes before the problem occurred, so I guess it's not important. ssl_request.log shows nothing interesting, too: these are the last two lines before the problem: [28/Aug/2012:17:47:54 +0200] x.x.x.x TLSv1.1 ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA "GET /login HTTP/1.1" 1183 [28/Aug/2012:17:47:45 +0200] y.y.y.y TLSv1 ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA "POST /upf HTTP/1.1" 73 The previous lines are all the same and don't seem interesting, except 4 lines like these 30-40 seconds before the problem: [28/Aug/2012:17:47:14 +0200] z.z.z.z TLSv1 ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA "-" - These are the corrisponding lines from sslaccess.log: z.z.z.z - - [28/Aug/2012:17:47:14 +0200] "-" 408 - ... x.x.x.x - - [28/Aug/2012:17:47:54 +0200] "GET /login HTTP/1.1" 200 1183 y.y.y.y - - [28/Aug/2012:17:47:45 +0200] "POST /upf HTTP/1.1" 200 73

    Read the article

  • Exchange - inbound email only works from some servers

    - by Kryptonite
    I am having a problem where inbound mail from outside only works when sent from certain hosts. For example, when I send myself an email from my personal gmail account all is well, as the logs show: 2012-09-05 18:14:16 209.85.223.175 mail-ie0-f175.google.com SMTPSVC1 MAILSVR 192.168.1.79 0 EHLO 250 - - 2012-09-05 18:14:16 209.85.223.175 mail-ie0-f175.google.com SMTPSVC1 MAILSVR 192.168.1.79 0 STARTTLS 220 - - 2012-09-05 18:14:16 209.85.223.175 mail-ie0-f175.google.com SMTPSVC1 MAILSVR 192.168.1.79 0 STARTTLS 220 - - 2012-09-05 18:14:16 209.85.223.175 mail-ie0-f175.google.com SMTPSVC1 MAILSVR 192.168.1.79 0 EHLO 250 - - 2012-09-05 18:14:16 209.85.223.175 mail-ie0-f175.google.com SMTPSVC1 MAILSVR 192.168.1.79 0 MAIL 250 - - 2012-09-05 18:14:16 209.85.223.175 mail-ie0-f175.google.com SMTPSVC1 MAILSVR 192.168.1.79 0 RCPT 250 - - 2012-09-05 18:14:48 209.85.223.175 mail-ie0-f175.google.com SMTPSVC1 MAILSVR 192.168.1.79 0 QUIT 240 - - However, if I sent from my personal Yahoo account, I get this response: Sorry, we were unable to deliver your message to the following address. <[email protected]>: Remote host said: 530 5.7.0 Must issue a STARTTLS command first [MAIL_FROM] (NB: Nothing appeared in the smtp log for this message.) Any suggestions where to start looking? EDIT ---- I don't know if it matters, but the certificate I am using for TLS is self signed.

    Read the article

  • Root certificate authority works windows/linux but not mac osx - (malformed)

    - by AKwhat
    I have created a self-signed root certificate authority which if I install onto windows, linux, or even using the certificate store in firefox (windows/linux/macosx) will work perfectly with my terminating proxy. I have installed it into the system keychain and I have set the certificate to always trust. Within the chrome browser details it says "The certificate that Chrome received during this connection attempt is not formatted correctly, so Chrome cannot use it to protect your information. Error type: Malformed certificate" I used this code to create the certificate: openssl genrsa -des3 -passout pass:***** -out private/server.key 4096 openssl req -batch -passin pass:***** -new -x509 -nodes -sha1 -days 3600 -key private/server.key -out server.crt -config ../openssl.cnf If the issue is NOT that it is malformed (because it works everywhere else) then what else could it be? Am I installing it incorrectly? Update I tried changing the certificate attributes, but to no avail: openssl genrsa -des -passout pass:***** -out private/server.key 2048 openssl req -batch -passin pass:***** -new -x509 -nodes -sha256 -days 3600 -key private/server.key -out server.crt -config ../openssl.cnf

    Read the article

  • Port-forwarding HTTPS web server

    - by James Moore
    I have port forwarded our front-facing IP to an internal HTTPS server. The browser does not connect. A wget command determines that the certificate is self-signed for the internal IP. Hence why the browser is refusing to display the page properly. What is the best-practice scenario for this sort of stuff? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Add "secure" in cookie by httpd server

    - by Abhishek
    How do I have to configure my httpd server to add "Secure" in the cookies? I tried the one in the below link, http://blog.modsecurity.org/2008/12/fixing-both-missing-httponly-and-secure-cookie-flags.html but this did not seem to be working. I inspected the cookie via firebug and found that the cookies have "HttpOnly" but not "Secure". I double checked the configurations and they the same as mentioned in the link. I also noticed that the server response time goes bit high when doing it by mod_security. Is there a better way to do it? Any ideas or pointers to configurations would be helpful

    Read the article

  • How would you secure a home router with a self-signed certificate?

    - by jldugger
    littleblackbox is publishing "private keys" that are accessible on publicly available firmwares. Debian calls these "snake-oil" certs. Most of these routers are securing their HTTPS certs with these, and as I think about it, I've never seen one of these internal admin websites with certs that wasn't self signed. Given a webserver on IP 192.168.1.1, how do you secure it to the point that Firefox doesn't offer warnings (and is still secured)?

    Read the article

  • How would you secure a home router with a self-signed certificate?

    - by jldugger
    littleblackbox is publishing "private keys" that are accessible on publicly available firmwares. Debian calls these "snake-oil" certs. Most of these routers are securing their HTTPS certs with these, and as I think about it, I've never seen one of these internal admin websites with certs that wasn't self signed. Given a webserver on IP 192.168.1.1, how do you secure it to the point that Firefox doesn't offer warnings (and is still secured)?

    Read the article

  • mod_ssl RPM conflict

    - by 0A0D
    I build Apache httpd into an RPM using these sites: http://erikwebb.net/blog/compile-and-install-apache-24-red-hat-enterprise-linux-rhel-6-or-centos-6 http://ramblin-dude.blogspot.com/2013/04/compiling-rpm-for-httpd-on-rhel-57.html I was successful at building apr* and httpd*. However, when I try to install httpd using rpm -Uvh httpd-devel-2.2.25-1.x86_64.rpm httpd-2.2.25-1.x86_64.rpm mod_ssl-2.2.25-1.x86_64.rpm I get the following error: package mod_ssl-2.2.3-82.el5_9.x86_64 (which is newer than mod_ssl-2.2.25-1.x86_64) is already installed. I have httpd 2.2.3-82 installed. Do I need to remove it first? Seems counterintuitive.

    Read the article

  • How to generate new CSRs for TLS use in sendmail?

    - by Mikey B
    SendMail 8.13.8 | CentOS 5.x Hi Guys, I'm using ca-signed TLS certificates on my sendmail server and they are up for renewal soon. Our new CA doesn't like our old CSR so I need to generate a new CSR. Can someone point me to the procedure for doing this (without affecting the production certs that are already in use)? I'm paranoid of overwriting the old TLS certs in the process of generating a CSR. Most of the instructions I've found are for implementing self-signed TLS certs -- which isn't an option for me at this time. I'm thinking it would something like: openssl req -new -nodes -out new-tls.csr -keyout new-tls-private.key But I wasn't sure if I was missing some options there such as the -x509 option... -M

    Read the article

  • Our company claims that the DLP system can even monitor the contents of HTTPS traffic, how is this possible?

    - by Ryan
    There is software installed on all client machines for DLP (Data Loss Prevention) and HIPAA compliance. Supposedly it can read HTTPS data clearly. I always thought that between the browser and the server, this was encrypted entirely. How can software sneak in and grab this data from the browser prior to it is encrypted or after it is decrypted? I am just curious as to how this could be possible. I would think that a browser wouldn't be considered very secure if this was possible.

    Read the article

  • IIS 6.0 mitigating BEAST

    - by D3l_Gato
    Recently, my PCI assessor informed me that my servers are vulnerable to BEAST and failed me. I did my homework and I want to change our webservers to prefer RC4 ciphers over CBC. I followed every guide I could find... I changed my reg keys for my weaker than 128bit encryption to Enabled = 0. completely removed the reg keys for the weaker encryptions. I downloaded IISCrypto and unchecked everything but RC4 128 ciphers and triple DES 168. My webserver still prefers AES-256SHA. Is there a trick in IIS 6.0 to get your webservers to prefer RC4 ciphers that I am not figuring out? It seems like in IIS 7 they made this very easy to fix but that doesn't help me now!

    Read the article

  • How can I persist certificates in Java's cacerts?

    - by Alan Spark
    We need to have a certificate in Java's cacerts keystore for one of our servers that is authenticated by LDAP. We are using Ubuntu server. We have successfully done this by updating the cacerts file in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk-amd64/jre/lib/security but occasionally a Java update is installed and the cacerts file seems to be getting replaced by a default one that doesn't contain our changes. This doesn't happen very often but it is becoming a bit of a pain when it does happen. Is there a better way of adding things to cacerts so that they don't get lost when a Java update happens? Thanks, Alan

    Read the article

  • Encrypt client connection with squid forward proxy using SSL

    - by Twisted Whisper
    I'm setting up a Squid forward proxy and I'm wondering if I could configure Squid in such a way that the connection from my web browser to squid is https regardless of whether the connection from squid to the destination website is http or https. In other words, I want my connection from my web browser to my forward proxy to be encrypted even though I'm just surfing normal http website through that proxy. Can it be done?

    Read the article

  • Opening firewall to incoming port 443

    - by jrdioko
    I recently set up the ufw firewall on a Linux machine so that outgoing connections are allowed, incoming connections are denied, and denied connections are logged. This seems to work fine for most cases, but I see many denied connections that are incoming on port 443 (many with IPs associated with Facebook). I can open that port to incoming connections, but first wanted to ask what these could be. Shouldn't HTTPS requests be initiated by me and be treated as outbound, not inbound connections? Is it typical to open incoming port 443 on consumer firewalls?

    Read the article

  • Need advise on linking apache and tomcat

    - by hsnm
    I have been searching this for hours with no luck. I have a web server that uses https on Apache2. I also have installed tomcat7 on the same server to run some Java webapp on it. I need to keep my https port 443 on Apache but forward the requests to the Java webapp to tomcat. I tried to use mod_jk to redirect the requests to tomcat but I failed. Most tutorials talk about redirecting plain http requests not https. I also could not let tomcat use https on 8443. I'm following the steps here but facing errors. The question: Can I redirect https traffic to tomcat without installing https on tomcat? Is there a good tutorial you can recommend to me?

    Read the article

  • I am not able to open gmail and some other sites.

    - by pam
    Last day my system got hanged so I restarted and recovered windows to the the date of 1 day before. Now I am not able to open gmail, orkut and some other sites. When I try to open these sites I receive this message: This Connection is Untrusted www.google.com uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is not trusted because it is self-signed. The certificate is only valid for 78-159-121-94.local (Error code: sec_error_untrusted_issuer)

    Read the article

  • Windows 2003 Server, can't connect to an SSL Site from IE.

    - by JL
    I am trying to connect to connect to www.czebox.cz using internet explorer on Windows 2003 server. If you have a server to test from please do, and you'll notice that it does not connect instead returns - Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage. From Firefox it works fine on the server. From Windows 7 it works fine in Internet Explorer. How can I get it to work in Windows 2003 Server using IE?

    Read the article

  • Two virtual host one with Domain name one with internal ip#?

    - by Abhishek
    Is it possible to have two virtual host configurations for the same server - one with internal ip address and one with domain name? Something like <VirtualHost {{internal-ipaddress}}:80> ....... </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost {{domain-name}}:80> ....... </VirtualHost> Note that the internal IP address and the domain name belong to the same server or same server instance. I am asking this to restrict some URLs for external users, redirect to https all external access and allow everything for internal users(without https)..

    Read the article

  • Setting up a subdomain SSL with custom port

    - by Webnet
    I'm setting up a subdomain on a dedicated server that I'm going to use for SVN services. The SVN server is up and running I just need to setup the subdomain. The https has been switched to a custom port because there's a confliction with a port forward pointing to another server. Should I do this through GoDaddy or Apache?

    Read the article

  • IIRF - Redirecting all traffic to the http equivalent

    - by GordonB
    I'm using IIRF and having some trouble getting it to redirect all traffic to the secure version of my sites. So... I have a website with about 20 apps in virtual directories in IIS6. The website takes 80 and 443 traffic. I want to use IIRF to redirect all port 80 traffic EG; http://myserver/app1/page1/param1 http://myserver/app2/ http://myserver To the secure equivalent (https). Here's my config so far; # Iirf.ini # # ini file for IIRF # RewriteLogLevel 1 RewriteLog D:\Websites\Apptemetry\IirfLogs RewriteEngine ON StatusInquiry ON IterationLimit 5 RewriteLogLevel 3 RewriteCond %{HTTPS} off RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} ^80$ RedirectRule ^http(.*)$ https$1 Can anyone advise the correct configuration to use, to redirect all traffic?

    Read the article

  • ssl_prefer_server_cipers unknown directive

    - by trobrock
    I just compiled nginx v1.2.3 from source on a CentOS 6.3 server and am trying to use the ssl_prefer_server_ciphers directive, but I am getting an error nginx: [emerg] unknown directive "ssl_prefer_serfver_cipers" in /etc/nginx/sites-enabled/application:5 I am not seeing anywhere that this directive depends on any specific versions of other libraries, or even specific versions of nginx. What could I be doing wrong here?

    Read the article

  • Apache: serving SSL only

    - by elect
    I have a website that I want to be access only by https://myurl.com. A normal typing myurl.com should be forwarded to the https. I tried different things such as: RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80 RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://myurl.com/$1 [R,L] (rewrite mod ON) or NameVirtualHost *:80 <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName mysite.example.com DocumentRoot /usr/local/apache2/htdocs Redirect permanent /secure https://mysite.example.com/secure </VirtualHost> But they didnt work, which is the right way to do it? Debian & Apache 2

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  | Next Page >