Search Results

Search found 15914 results on 637 pages for 'physical security'.

Page 71/637 | < Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >

• Network authentication + roaming home directory - which technology should I look into using?

  - by Brian

  I'm looking into software which provides a user with a single identity across multiple computers. That is, a user should have the same permissions on each computer, and the user should have access to all of his or her files (roaming home directory) on each computer. There seem to be many solutions for this general idea, but I'm trying to determine the best one for me. Here are some details along with requirements: The network of machines are Amazon EC2 instances running Ubuntu. We access the machines with SSH. Some machines on this LAN may have different uses, but I am only discussing machines for a certain use (running a multi-tenancy platform). The system will not necessarily have a constant amount of machines. We may have to permanently or temporarily alter the amount of machines running. This is the the reason why I'm looking into centralized authentication/storage. The implementation of this effect should be a secure one. We're unsure if users will have direct shell access, but their software will potentially be running (under restricted Linux user names, of course) on our systems, which is as good as direct shell access. Let's assume that their software could potentially be malicious for the sake of security. I have heard of several technologies/combinations to achieve my goal, but I'm unsure of the ramifications of each. An older ServerFault post recommended NFS & NIS, though the combination has security problems according to this old article by Symantec. The article suggests moving to NIS+, but, as it is old, this Wikipedia article has cited statements suggesting a trending away from NIS+ by Sun. The recommended replacement is another thing I have heard of... LDAP. It looks like LDAP can be used to save user information in a centralized location on a network. NFS would still need to be used to cover the 'roaming home folder' requirement, but I see references of them being used together. Since the Symantec article pointed out security problems in both NIS and NFS, is there software to replace NFS, or should I heed that article's suggestions for locking it down? I'm tending toward LDAP because another fundamental piece of our architecture, RabbitMQ, has a authentication/authorization plugin for LDAP. RabbitMQ will be accessible in a restricted manner to users on the system, so I would like to tie the security systems together if possible. Kerberos is another secure authentication protocol that I have heard of. I learned a bit about it some years ago in a cryptography class but don't remember much about it. I have seen suggestions online that it can be combined with LDAP in several ways. Is this necessary? What are the security risks of LDAP without Kerberos? I also remember Kerberos being used in another piece of software developed by Carnegie Mellon University... Andrew File System, or AFS. OpenAFS is available for use, though its setup seems a bit complicated. At my university, AFS provides both requirements... I can log in to any machine, and my "AFS folder" is always available (at least when I acquire an AFS token). Along with suggestions for which path I should look into, does anybody have any guides which were particularly helpful? As the bold text pointed out, LDAP looks to be the best choice, but I'm particularly interested in the implementation details (Keberos? NFS?) with respect to security.

  Read the article

• Booby Traps and Locked-in Kids: An Interview with a Safecracker

  - by Jason Fitzpatrick

  While most of our articles focus on security of the digital sort, this interview with a professional safecracker is an interesting look the physical side of securing your goods. As part of their Interviews with People Who Have Interesting or Unusual Jobs series over at McSweeney’s, they interviewed Ken Doyle, a professional a locksmithing and safecracking veteran with 30 years of industry experience. The interview is both entertaining and an interesting read. One of the more unusual aspects of safecracking he highlights: Q: Do you ever look inside? A: I NEVER look. It’s none of my business. Involving yourself in people’s private affairs can lead to being subpoenaed in a lawsuit or criminal trial. Besides, I’d prefer not knowing about a client’s drug stash, personal porn, or belly button lint collection. When I’m done I gather my tools and walk to the truck to write my invoice. Sometimes I’m out of the room before they open it. I don’t want to be nearby if there is a booby trap. Q: Why would there be a booby trap? A: The safe owner intentionally uses trip mechanisms, explosives or tear gas devices to “deter” unauthorized entry into his safe. It’s pretty stupid because I have yet to see any signs warning a would-be culprit about the danger. HTG Explains: Why Linux Doesn’t Need Defragmenting How to Convert News Feeds to Ebooks with Calibre How To Customize Your Wallpaper with Google Image Searches, RSS Feeds, and More

  Read the article

• How to create real-life robots?

  - by Click Upvote

  Even before I learnt programming I've been fascinated with how robots could work. Now I know how the underlying programming instructions would be written, but what I don't understand is how those intructions are followed by the robot. For example, if I wrote this code: object=Robot.ScanSurroundings(300,400); if (Objects.isEatable(object)) { Robot.moveLeftArm(300,400); Robot.pickObject(object); } How would this program be followed by the CPU in a way that would make the robot do the physical action of looking to the left, moving his arm, and such? Is it done primarily in binary language/ASM? Lastly, where would i go if I wanted to learn how to create a robot?

  Read the article

• WCF client encrypt message to JAVA WS using username_token with message protection client policy

  - by Alex

  I am trying to create a WCF client APP that is consuming a JAVA WS that uses username_token with message protection client policy. There is a private key that is installed on the server and a public certificate file was exported from the JKS keystore file. I have installed the public key into certificate store via MMC under Personal certificates. I am trying to create a binding that will encrypt the message and pass the username as part of the payload. I have been researching and trying the different configurations for about a day now. I found a similar situation on the msdn forum: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en/wcf/thread/ce4b1bf5-8357-4e15-beb7-2e71b27d7415 This is the configuration that I am using in my app.config <customBinding> <binding name="certbinding"> <security authenticationMode="UserNameOverTransport"> <secureConversationBootstrap /> </security> <httpsTransport requireClientCertificate="true" /> </binding> </customBinding> <endpoint address="https://localhost:8443/ZZZService?wsdl" binding="customBinding" bindingConfiguration="cbinding" contract="XXX.YYYPortType" name="ServiceEndPointCfg" /> And this is the client code that I am using: EndpointAddress endpointAddress = new EndpointAddress(url + "?wsdl"); P6.WCF.Project.ProjectPortTypeClient proxy = new P6.WCF.Project.ProjectPortTypeClient("ServiceEndPointCfg", endpointAddress); proxy.ClientCredentials.UserName.UserName = UserName; proxy.ClientCredentials.ClientCertificate.SetCertificate(StoreLocation.CurrentUser, StoreName.My, X509FindType.FindByThumbprint, "67 87 ba 28 80 a6 27 f8 01 a6 53 2f 4a 43 3b 47 3e 88 5a c1"); var projects = proxy.ReadProjects(readProjects); This is the .NET CLient error I get: Error Log: Invalid security information. On the Java WS side I trace the log : SEVERE: Encryption is enabled but there is no encrypted key in the request. I traced the SOAP headers and payload and did confirm the encrypted key is not there. Headers: {expect=[100-continue], content-type=[text/xml; charset=utf-8], connection=[Keep-Alive], host=[localhost:8443], Content-Length=[731], vsdebuggercausalitydata=[uIDPo6hC1kng3ehImoceZNpAjXsAAAAAUBpXWdHrtkSTXPWB7oOvGZwi7MLEYUZKuRTz1XkJ3soACQAA], SOAPAction=[""], Content-Type=[text/xml; charset=utf-8]} Payload: <s:Envelope xmlns:s="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:u="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-utility-1.0.xsd"><s:Header><o:Security s:mustUnderstand="1" xmlns:o="http://docs.oasis-open.org/wss/2004/01/oasis-200401-wss-wssecurity-secext-1.0.xsd"><o:UsernameToken u:Id="uuid-5809743b-d6e1-41a3-bc7c-66eba0a00998-1"><o:Username>admin</o:Username><o:Password>admin</o:Password></o:UsernameToken></o:Security></s:Header><s:Body xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"><ReadProjects xmlns="http://xmlns.dev.com/WS/Project/V1"><Field>ObjectId</Field><Filter>Id='WS-Demo'</Filter></ReadProjects></s:Body></s:Envelope> I have also tryed some other bindings but with no success: <basicHttpBinding> <binding name="basicHttp"> <security mode="TransportWithMessageCredential"> <message clientCredentialType="Certificate"/> </security> </binding> </basicHttpBinding> <wsHttpBinding> <binding name="wsBinding"> <security mode="Message"> <message clientCredentialType="UserName" negotiateServiceCredential="false" /> </security> </binding> </wsHttpBinding> Your help will be greatly aprreciatted! Thanks!

  Read the article

• VLC (Server) re-stream Security Camera Feed

  - by Aaron

  I purchased a Swann Home Security DVR system and was hoping for some help on how to duplicate the streaming video on my server. In order to get their web view (streaming video in the browser) to work, I had to install the following plugins: HiDvrPlugin.dmg for mac. Hidvrocx.cab for Windows. I was originally thinking it was a sign of some form of DRM? Maybe. Maybe not. HTML wise, the following code is in the source of the safari version of the web view: <embed pluginspage="SurveilClient.dmg" width="10px" height="10px" type="application/x-scplugin" id="MacDiv" style="height: 592px; width: 720px; left: 278px; top: 61px; "> It seems to be the main display area. Using wireshark, I am able to see that the video stream is on port 9000. However, I have no idea what type of stream it is. I've tried opening it in VLC with no such luck. http://dvr_ip:9000 tcp://dvr_ip:9000 My hope was to do the following to redistribute the feed vlc dvr_ip:9000 --sout h264-version-on-localhost:3000 TLDR; Trying to re-distribute a stream from a security camera (can't tell the format) using vlc (re-distribute via h.264 / HTML5). Not sure how to accomplish this. Is it possible that the software has some type of DRM that only the plugins can decode?

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2003 R2 Terminal Server : Internet Explorer Enhanced Security won't disable for Users

  - by Tubs

  The Internet Explorer Enhanced Security (IEES) won't disable using the normal method of disabling it from the Add/Remove Programs/Windows components. This came to light immediately after testing. IEES was disabled after Terminal Services were installed for admin and users, and after IE8 was installed. My initial thoughts were that there was some clash between IE8 and IE6 (which is the default on 2003 R2), so I uninstalled IE8 and reverted back to IE6. The same symptoms were displayed, when a normal user logged on Internet Explorer Enhnaced Security was enforced. I then thought it could be a problem that Terminal Server wasn't recognising the removal as IEES was on when initially installed. I uninistalled the Terminal Server Componants using the server roles, and then reactivated and deavtived IEES. Windows Server 2003 R2 allows a limited number of users to connect to RDP by default, so I logged on as a normal user, and IEES was disabled. I then reinstalled Terminal Server, and logged on as a normal user. IEES was back enabled. Why is this?

  Read the article

• Cisco ASA Act as a Hardware Security Module?

  - by Derek

  Hello, We have a partner that is requiring us to get a HSM for a web application that we host for them. This is something new for us, we've always installed our SSL certificates on our web servers and never needed a hardware device. We currently have 2 Cisco ASA 5510 firewalls in an active/standby configuration. Both ASAs have a ASA-SSM-10 security module installed in them. The web application is a standard HTTPS webpage with no authentication required. I was wondering if we could use our Cisco ASAs to meet this requirement or if we'll have to buy another device. I was doing some searching and read about Cisco's clientless webvpn feature. It sounds like it might work, but I'm not sure. We basically want the ASA to handle the SSL and proxy the connection to our web servers. We do not want to prompt for a username or password to connect or show any portals, just display the web page. If the ASA cannot do this, does any one have any recommendations for network attached hardware security modules? We are using VMware vCenter, so we'd rather have an external device attached to the network, rather than buying HSM cards for every ESXi host. Thanks, Derek

  Read the article

• Cannot Change "Log on through Terminal Services" in Local Security Policy XP from Server 2008 GP

  - by Campo

  This is a mixed AD environment, Server 2003 R2 and 2008 R2 I have a 2003 AD R2 and a 2008 R2 AD. GPO is usually managed from the 2008 R2 machine. I have a RD Gateway on another server as well. I setup the CAP and RAP to allow a normal user to log on to the departments workstation. I also adjusted the GPO for that OU to allow Log on trhough Remote Desktop Gateway for the user group. This worked on my windows 7 workstation. But unfortunately the policy is a different name in XP "allow log on through Terminal Services" I can get through right into the machine but when the log on actually happens to the local machine i get the "Cannot log on interactively" error. This is set in (for the local machine) Secpol.msc Local Security Policy "user rights assignment" but is controlled by the GPO in Computer Configuration Policies Security Settings Local Policies "User Rights Assignment" Do I simply need to adjust the same setting on the same GPO but with a server 2003 GP editor? Feel like that could cause issues... Looking for some direction. Or if anyone has run into this issue yet. UPDATE Should this work? support.microsoft.com/kb/186529 Still seems like I will have the issue as the actual GP settings for Log on through Terminal Services is still different between Server 2008 R2 and 2003 R2.... Another Thought: Should I delete the GPO made for the department and remake it with the 2003 R2 server? I have no 2008 specific settings as the whole department runs XP other than myself. If that's a solution I will move my computer out of the department as a solution... Thoughts?

  Read the article

• make an http post from server using user credentials - integrated security

  - by opensas

  I'm trying to make a post, from an asp classic server side page, using the user credentials... I'm using msxml2.ServerXMLHTTP to programatically make the post I've tried with several configurations in the IIS 5.1 site, but there's no way I can make IIS run with a specified account... I made a little asp page that runs whoami to verify what account the iis process i using... with IIS 5.1, using integrated security the process uses: my_machine\IWAM_my_machine I disable integrated security, and leave a domain account as anonymous access, and I get the same (¿?) to test the user I do the following private function whoami() dim shell, cmd set shell = createObject("wscript.shell") set cmd = shell.exec( server.mapPath( "whoami.exe" ) ) whoami = cmd.stdOut.readAll() set shell = nothing: set cmd = nothing end function is it because I'm issuing a shell command? I'd like to make http post calls, to another site that works with integrated security... So I need some way to pass the credentials, or at least to run with a specified account, and then configure the remote site to thrust that account... I thought that just setting the site to work with integrated security would be enough... How can I achieve such a thing? ps: with IIS6,happens the same but if I change the pool canfiguration I get the following info from whoami NT AUTHORITY\NETWORK SERVICE NT AUTHORITY\LOCAL SERVICE NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM if I set a domain account, I get a "service unavailable" message... edit: found this http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/WindowsServer2003/Library/IIS/275269ee-1b9f-4869-8d72-c9006b5bd659.mspx?mfr=true it says what I supossed, "If an authenticated user makes a request, the thread token is based on the authenticated account of the user", but somehow I doesn't seem to work like that... what could I possibly be missing? edit: well the whoami thing is obviously fooling me, I tried with the following function private function whoami_db( serverName, dbName ) dim conn, data set conn = server.createObject("adodb.connection") conn.open "Provider=SQLOLEDB.1;Integrated Security=SSPI;" & _ "Initial Catalog=" & dbName & ";Data Source=" & serverName set data = conn.execute( "select suser_sname() as user_name" ) whoami_db = data("user_name") data.close: conn.close set data = nothing: set conn = nothing end function and everything seemed to be working fine... but how can I make msxml2.ServerXMLHTTP work with the user credentials???

  Read the article

• Error processing response in .net web service with WSE3 mutualCertificate10Security Assertion

  - by Maeloc

  I am securing a .net web service (framework 2.0) with WSE3 mutualCertificate10Security Assertion. When request are valid all is fine and the response is wellformed, but when the request is invalid (cause a invalid signature, failed check, or soapexception thrown), the web server isn't able to process the response to send to the client. The error in application event log is: An error occured processing an outgoing fault response. Details of the error causing the processing failure: System.InvalidOperationException: Send security filter on the server could not retrieve the operation protection requirements from the operation state. en Microsoft.Web.Services3.Security.SecureConversationServiceSendSecurityFilter.SecureMessage(SoapEnvelope envelope, Security security) en Microsoft.Web.Services3.Security.SendSecurityFilter.ProcessMessage(SoapEnvelope envelope) en Microsoft.Web.Services3.Pipeline.ProcessOutputMessage(SoapEnvelope envelope) en Microsoft.Web.Services3.WseProtocol.GetFilteredResponseEnvelope(SoapEnvelope outputEnvelope) All certificate permissions are OK (when request is OK the web service is able to sign the response). Error occurs only if a soapFault must be returned in the response. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• How do access a secure website within a sharepoint webpart?

  - by Bill

  How do access a secure website within a sharepoint webpart? The following code works fine as a console application but if you run it in a webpart, you will get a access violation WebRequest request = WebRequest.Create("https://somesecuresite.com"); WebResponse firstResponse = null; try { firstResponse = request.GetResponse(); } catch (WebException ex) { writer.WriteLine("Error: " + ex.ToString()); return; } if you access a non secure site, it also works. Any ideas? Error: System.Net.WebException: The underlying connection was closed: An unexpected error occurred on a receive. --- System.AccessViolationException: Attempted to read or write protected memory. This is often an indication that other memory is corrupt. at System.Net.UnsafeNclNativeMethods.NativePKI.CertVerifyCertificateChainPolicy(IntPtr policy, SafeFreeCertChain chainContext, ChainPolicyParameter& cpp, ChainPolicyStatus& ps) at System.Net.PolicyWrapper.VerifyChainPolicy(SafeFreeCertChain chainContext, ChainPolicyParameter& cpp) at System.Net.Security.SecureChannel.VerifyRemoteCertificate(RemoteCertValidationCallback remoteCertValidationCallback) at System.Net.Security.SslState.CompleteHandshake() at System.Net.Security.SslState.CheckCompletionBeforeNextReceive(ProtocolToken message, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartSendBlob(Byte[] incoming, Int32 count, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.ProcessReceivedBlob(Byte[] buffer, Int32 count, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartReadFrame(Byte[] buffer, Int32 readBytes, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartReceiveBlob(Byte[] buffer, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.CheckCompletionBeforeNextReceive(ProtocolToken message, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartSendBlob(Byte[] incoming, Int32 count, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.ProcessReceivedBlob(Byte[] buffer, Int32 count, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartReadFrame(Byte[] buffer, Int32 readBytes, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartReceiveBlob(Byte[] buffer, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.CheckCompletionBeforeNextReceive(ProtocolToken message, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartSendBlob(Byte[] incoming, Int32 count, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.ProcessReceivedBlob(Byte[] buffer, Int32 count, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartReadFrame(Byte[] buffer, Int32 readBytes, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartReceiveBlob(Byte[] buffer, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.CheckCompletionBeforeNextReceive(ProtocolToken message, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.StartSendBlob(Byte[] incoming, Int32 count, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.ForceAuthentication(Boolean receiveFirst, Byte[] buffer, AsyncProtocolRequest asyncRequest) at System.Net.Security.SslState.ProcessAuthentication(LazyAsyncResult lazyResult) at System.Net.TlsStream.CallProcessAuthentication(Object state) at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.runTryCode(Object userData) at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.RuntimeHelpers.ExecuteCodeWithGuaranteedCleanup(TryCode code, CleanupCode backoutCode, Object userData) at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.RunInternal(ExecutionContext executionContext, ContextCallback callback, Object state) at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.Run(ExecutionContext executionContext, ContextCallback callback, Object state) at System.Net.TlsStream.ProcessAuthentication(LazyAsyncResult result) at System.Net.TlsStream.Write(Byte[] buffer, Int32 offset, Int32 size) at System.Net.PooledStream.Write(Byte[] buffer, Int32 offset, Int32 size) at System.Net.ConnectStream.WriteHeaders(Boolean async) --- End of inner exception stack trace --- at System.Net.HttpWebRequest.GetResponse()

  Read the article

• Creating security permissions for a non-domain-member user in Windows Server 2008

  - by Overhed

  Hello everyone, I apologize in advance for incorrect use of terminology, as I'm not an IT person by trade. I'm doing some remote work via a VPN for a client and I need to add some DCOM Service security permissions for my remote user. Even though I'm on the VPN, the request for access to the DCOM service is using my PCs native user (and since I'm running Vista Home Premium it looks something like: PC-NAME\Username). The request for access comes back with access denied and I can not add this user to the security permissions as it "is not from a domain listed in the Select Location dialog box, and is therefore not valid". I'm pretty stuck and have no clue what kind of steps I need to do here. Any help would be appreciated, thanks in advance. EDIT: I have no control over what credentials are being passed in to the server by my computer. This scenario is occurring in an installation wizard that has a section which requests you point it to the machine running the "server" version of the software I'm installing (it then tries to invoke the relevant COM service, but my user does not have "Remove Activation Permissions" on that service, so I get request denied).

  Read the article

• SQL SERVER – Difference Between GRANT and WITH GRANT

  - by pinaldave

  This was very interesting question recently asked me to during my session at TechMela Nepal. The question is what is the difference between GRANT and WITH GRANT when giving permissions to user. Let us first see syntax for the same. GRANT: USE master; GRANT VIEW ANY DATABASE TO username; GO WITH GRANT: USE master; GRANT VIEW ANY DATABASE TO username WITH GRANT OPTION; GO The difference between both of this option is very simple. In case of only GRANT – username can not grant the same permission to other users. In case, of the option of WITH GRANT – username will be able to give the permission it has received to other users. This is very basic definition of the subject. I would like to request my readers to come up with working script to prove this scenario. If can submit your script to me by email (pinal ‘at’ sqlauthority.com) or in comment field. Reference : Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Security, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology Tagged: SQL Permissions

  Read the article

• Letöltheto az Oracle Database Firewall 5.0

  - by Lajos Sárecz

  2010 május 20-án jelentettük be, hogy megvettük az adatbázis tuzfal megoldást fejleszto Secerno céget. Azóta viszonylag keveset lehetett hallani errol a termékrol, idehaza egyedül az oszi ITBN konferencián tartott róla eloadást Stuart Sharp szuk fél órában. Ráadásul a felvásárlás óta a terméket sem lehetett megvásárolni, hiszen a merge után folyó fejlesztések még nem voltak készen. Január 11. óta azonban letötlheto az Oracle Database Firewall 5.0 telepítoje az Oracle edelivery oldaláról az Oracle Database Product Pack-en belül Linux x86 platformra. A Database Firewall az adatbázis védelem elso vonalának tekintheto. Valós idoben monitorozza az adatbázis aktivitását a hálózaton. SQL nyelvi elemzojével rendkívül pontosan képes detektálni a külso és belso támadásokat, a jogosultatlanul, támadó szándékkal végrehajtott tranzakciókat. Az SQL nyelvi elemzojének kifinomultsága lehetové teszi a szurés közel 100%-os pontosságát és megbízhatóságát, ami azért rendkívül fontos, mert nem elég minden támadó tranzakciót kiszurni, de fontos hogy a normál üzletmenetnek megfelelo tranzakciók közül egyet se szurjön, hiszen az is komoly üzleti károkat okozhat. Az adatbázis tuzfalról több részletet tudhat meg mindenki, aki regisztrál és ellátogat a január 27-i Oracle Security Summit rendezvényünkre, ahol a tervek szerint ismét Stuart Sharp tart majd eloadást, viszont ezúttal 1 órában sokkal több részletet tud megosztani a magyar ügyfelekkel és partnerekkel. A Database Firewall eloadást megelozoen egyébként én tartok egy kb. félórás áttekintést az Oracle Database biztonsági megoldásairól.

  Read the article

• Is knowledge of hacking mechanisms required for an MMO?

  - by Gabe

  Say I was planning on, in the future (not now! There is alot I need to learn first) looking to participating in a group project that was going to make a massively multiplayer online game (mmo), and my job would be the networking portion. I'm not that familiar with network programming (I've read a very basic book on PHP, MYSQL and I messed around a bit with WAMP). In the course of my studying of PHP and MYSQL, should I look into hacking? Hacking as in port scanning, router hacking, etc. In MMOs people are always trying to cheat, bots and such, but the worst scenario would be having someone hack the databases. This is just my conception of this, I really don't know. I do however understand networking fairly well, like subnetting/ports/IP's (local/global)/etc. In your professional opinion, (If you understand the topic, enlighten me) Should I learn about these things in order to counter the possibility of this happening? Also, out of the things I mentioned (port scanning, router hacking) Is there anything else that pertains to hacking that I should look into? I'm not too familiar with the malicious/Security aspects of Networking. And a note: I'm not some kid trying to learn how to hack. I just want to learn as much as possible before I go to college, and I really need to know if I need to study this or not.

  Read the article

• Implications on automatically "open" third party domain aliasing to one of my subdomains

  - by Giovanni

  I have a domain, let's call it www.mydomain.com where I have a portal with an active community of users. In this portal users cooperate in a wiki way to build some "kind of software". These software applications can then be run by accessing "public.mydomain.com/softwarename" I then want to let my users run these applications from their own subdomains. I know I can do that by automatically modifying the.htaccess file. This is not a problem. I want to let these users create dns aliases to let them access one specific subdomain. So if a user "pippo" that owns "www.pippo.com" wants to run software HelloWorld from his own subdomains he has to: Register to my site Create his own subdomain on his own site, run.pippo.com From his DNS control panel, he creates a CNAME record "run.pippo.com" pointing to "public.mydomain.com" He types in a browser http://run.pippo.com/HelloWorld When the software(that is physically run on my server) is called, first it checks that the originating domain is a trusted one. I don't do any other kind of check that restricts software execution. From a SEO perspective, I care about Google indexing of www.mydomain.com but I don't care about indexing of public.mydomain.com What are the possible security implications of doing this for my site? Is there a better way to do this or software that already does this that I can use?

  Read the article

• An adequate message authentication code for REST

  - by Andras Zoltan

  My REST service currently uses SCRAM authentication to issue tokens for callers and users. We have the ability to revoke caller privileges and ban IPs, as well as impose quotas to any type of request. One thing that I haven't implemented, however, is MAC for requests. As I've thought about it more, for some requests I think this is needed, because otherwise tokens can be stolen and before we identify this and deactivate the associated caller account, some damage could be done to our user accounts. In many systems the MAC is generated from the body or query string of the request, however this is difficult to implement as I'm using the ASP.Net Web API and don't want to read the body twice. Equally importantly I want to keep it simple for callers to access the service. So what I'm thinking is to have a MAC calculated on: the url, possibly minus query string the verb the request ip (potentially is a barrier on some mobile devices though) utc date and time when the client issues the request. For the last one I would have the client send that string in a request header, of course - and I can use it to decide whether the request is 'fresh' enough. My thinking is that whilst this doesn't prevent message body tampering it does prevent using a model request to use as a template for different requests later on by a malicious third party. I believe only the most aggressive man in the middle attack would be able to subvert this, and I don't think our services offer any information or ability that is valuable enough to warrant that. The services will use SSL as well, for sensitive stuff. And if I do this, then I'll be using HMAC-SHA-256 and issuing private keys for HMAC appropriately. Does this sound enough? Have I missed anything? I don't think I'm a beginner when it comes to security, but when working on it I always. am shrouded in doubt, so I appreciate having this community to call upon!

  Read the article

• Trigger IP ban based on request of given file?

  - by Mike Atlas

  I run a website where "x.php" was known to have vulnerabilities. The vulnerability has been fixed and I don't have "x.php" on my site anymore. As such with major public vulnerabilities, it seems script kiddies around are running tools that hitting my site looking for "x.php" in the entire structure of the site - constantly, 24/7. This is wasted bandwidth, traffic and load that I don't really need. Is there a way to trigger a time-based (or permanent) ban to an IP address that tries to access "x.php" anywhere on my site? Perhaps I need a custom 404 PHP page that captures the fact that the request was for "x.php" and then that triggers the ban? How can I do that? Thanks! EDIT: I should add that part of hardening my site, I've started using ZBBlock: This php security script is designed to detect certain behaviors detrimental to websites, or known bad addresses attempting to access your site. It then will send the bad robot (usually) or hacker an authentic 403 FORBIDDEN page with a description of what the problem was. If the attacker persists, then they will be served up a permanently reccurring 503 OVERLOAD message with a 24 hour timeout. But ZBBlock doesn't do quite exactly what I want to do, it does help with other spam/script/hack blocking.

  Read the article

• Implicit OAuth2 endpoint vs. cookies

  - by Jamie

  I currently have an app which basically runs two halves of an API - a restful API for the web app, and a synchronisation API for the native clients (all over SSL). The web app is completely javascript based and is quite similar to the native clients anyway - except it currently does not work offline. What I'm hoping to do is merge the fragmented APIs into a single restful API. The web app currently authenticates by issuing a cookie to the client whereas the native clients work using a custom HMAC access token implementation. Obviously a public/private key scenario for a javascript app is a little pointless. I think the best solution would be to create an OAuth2 endpoint on the API (like Instagram, for example http://instagram.com/developer/authentication/) which is used by both the native apps and the web app. My question is, in terms of security how does an implicit OAuth2 flow compare (storing the access token in local storage) to "secure" cookies? Presumably although SSL solves man in the middle attacks, the user could theoretically grab the access token from local storage and copy it to another machine?

  Read the article

• PHP safe_mode is a pain, looking for advice (Ubuntu 12.04 server, public webserver)

  - by user73279

  Maybe askUbuntu isn't the right forum or I haven't provided the right search query but I haven't seen anything in my searching of askUbuntu on PHP safe_mode. I get lots of Windows Safe Mode and Ubuntu Safe Mode results but not PHP safe_mode. So I keep running into one issue after another regarding PHP safe_mode. (I write a lot of my own PHP code for various site maintenance tools and such.) I know safe_mode is going away in the next version of PHP but I still see a fair amount of advice recommending that you leave it enabled. I've recently consolidated from 3 servers down to 1 and at least one of those old servers had safe_mode disabled without any issues. (The lack of issues may have simply been a matter of good luck.) None of the previous 3 gave me this much trouble so I'm guessing so additional php.ini/PHP safe_mode setting was turned on for the new server. I primarily run WordPress for my websites with a few MediaWiki sites sprinkled in. And I am currently running into an issue using WordPress's auto update feature as it doesn't seem to be able to use fopen. WordPress is not relaying the actual error message to me but since I was just able to update the plugins I'm using this is a safe_mode problem. I've had a lot of safe_mode issues since consolidating to this new server. Long story short, the advice I'd seen to use safe_mode was all at least 2 years old. Do I really need it? If I disable PHP safe_mode are there a good set of security measures I should implement - i.e. chmod 640 /var/www/..., add this to your .htaccess, etc - to protect my server/sites? Thanks

  Read the article

• Disallow robots.txt from being accessed in a browser but still accessible by spiders?

  - by Michael Irigoyen

  We make use of the robots.txt file to prevent Google (and other search spiders) from crawling certain pages/directories in our domain. Some of these directories/files are secret, meaning they aren't linked (except perhaps on other pages encompassed by the robots.txt file). Some of these directories/files aren't secret, we just don't want them indexed. If somebody browses directly to www.mydomain.com/robots.txt, they can see the contents of the robots.txt file. From a security standpoint, this is not something we want publicly available to anybody. Any directories that contain secure information are set behind authentication, but we still don't want them to be discoverable unless the user specifically knows about them. Is there a way to provide a robots.txt file but to have it's presence masked by John Doe accessing it from his browser? Perhaps by using PHP to generate the document based on certain criteria? Perhaps something I'm not thinking of? We'd prefer a way to centrally do it (meaning a <meta> tag solution is less than ideal).

  Read the article

• How do I dissuade users from using the same password with similar systems?

  - by Resorath

  I'm building a web application that connects to other web services (using strictly anonymous binding, so no user passwords are being used). However the web application maintains its own users itself, and is required to ask certain details such as e-mail addresses and public linking information to these other web services (for example, a username but not a password). I want to deter or prevent users from reusing passwords in my application that they have also used in the applications I'm linking to. For example, if I ask for their e-mail and provide me with their gmail address, I don't want them using their gmail password for my system. Another example would be reusing a password to a linked system in which they also gave me their username. One idea I had was to simply try using the information they gave me, along with the password they are trying to store and log in to these external web applications to test the password - then immediately unbind if I was successful and ask the user to use a different password. However I suspect there is a host of morale and legal issues there. The reason this is a big deal to me is accountability. My application is simply not funded enough to invest properly in security around user passwords. A salted, hashed password in a public SQL-like database is as secure as it gets. So if passwords and linked usernames or e-mails get out, I don't want my userbase compromised.

  Read the article

• What to do if you find a vulnerability in a competitor's site?

  - by user17610

  While working on a project for my company, I needed to build functionality that allows users to import/export data to/from our competitor's site. While doing this, I discovered a very serious security exploit that could, in short, perform any script on the competitor's website. My natural feeling is to report the issue to them in the spirit of good-will. Exploiting the issue to gain advantage crossed my mind, but I don't want to go down that path. So my question is, would you report a serious vulnerability to your direct competition, in order to help them? Or would you keep your mouth shut? Is there a better way of going about this, perhaps to gain at least some advantage from the fact that I'm helping them by reporting the issue? Update (Clarification): Thanks for all your feedback so far, I appreciate it. Would your answers change if I were to add that the competition in question is a behemoth in the market (hundreds of employees in several continents), and my company only started a few weeks ago (three employees)? It goes without saying, they most definitely will not remember us, and if anything, only realize that their site needs work (which is why we entered this market in the first place). I confess this is one of those moral vs. business toss-ups, but I appreciate all the advice.

  Read the article

• Is full partition encryption the only sure way to make Ubuntu safe from external access?

  - by fred.bear

  (By "external access", I mean eg. via a Live CD, or another OS on the same dual-boot machine) A friend wants to try Ubuntu. He's fed up with Vista grinding to a crawl (the kids? :), so he likes the "potential" security offered by Ubuntu, but because the computer will be multi-booting Ubuntu (primary) and 2 Vistas (one for him, if he ever needs it again, and the other one for the kids to screw up (again). However, he is concerned about any non-Ubuntu access to the Ubuntu partitions (and also to his Vista partition)... I believe TrueCrypt will do the job for his Vista, but I'd like to know what the best encryption system for Ubuntu is... If TrueCrypt works for Ubuntu, it may be the best option for him, as it would be the same look and feel for both. Ubuntu will be installed with 3 partitions; 1) root 2) home 3) swap.. Will Ubuntu's boot loader clash with TrueCrypt's encrypted partition? PS.. Is encryption a suitable solution?

  Read the article

• What tools do I have to disuade users from using the same password with similar systems?

  - by Resorath

  I'm building a web application that connects to other web services (using strictly anonymous binding, so no user passwords are being used). However the web application maintains its own users itself, and is required to ask certain details such as e-mail addresses and public linking information to these other web services (for example, a username but not a password). I want to deter or prevent users from reusing passwords in my application that they have also used in the applications I'm linking to. For example, if I ask for their e-mail and provide me with their gmail address, I don't want them using their gmail password for my system. Another example would be reusing a password to a linked system in which they also gave me their username. One idea I had was to simply try using the information they gave me, along with the password they are trying to store and log in to these external web applications to test the password - then immediately unbind if I was successful and ask the user to use a different password. However I suspect there is a host of morale and legal issues there. The reason this is a big deal to me is accountability. My application is simply not funded enough to invest properly in security around user passwords. A salted, hashed password in a public SQL-like database is as secure as it gets. So if passwords and linked usernames or e-mails get out, I don't want my userbase compromised.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >