Search Results

Search found 15646 results on 626 pages for 'port 80'.

Page 77/626 | < Previous Page | 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  | Next Page >

  • Cherrypy web application won't communicate outside localhost via VPN

    - by Geoffrey Shea
    I'm trying to run a Python2.7/Cherrypy web server on Win 7 which is connected to a VPN to establish a dedicate IP address. (If I run the exact same application on Win XP connected to the VPN it works fine.) On Win 7 I tried configuring it to use port 8080, 8005, or 80 with no improvements. I turned off Windows Firewall altogether to test and there was no improvement. If I run Apache on the Win 7 machine on port 80 it works fine so I'm pretty sure it's not the VPN service or router. If I go to WhatismyIP.com it shows that I have the IP address being provided by the VPN. Here is the Python code, but I suspect the problem is the network configuration: import cherrypy class HelloWorld: def index(self): return "Hello world!3" index.exposed = True cherrypy.root = HelloWorld() cherrypy.config.update({"global":{ "server.environment": "production", "server.socketPort": 8005 } }) cherrypy.server.start() This will return a web page if I go to localhost:8005, but not if I go to the VPN IP address:8005 from another machine. As I said, if I run Apache on the Win 7 machine on port 80 I can see it at localhost:80 AND at the VPN IP address:80 from another machine. Thanks for any light you can shed! Geoffrey

    Read the article

  • Running Multiple sites with multiple domains apache

    - by PsychoData
    I am having a rough time running apache and using multiple domain names here is a snippet of my config file. I keep getting a error saying that NameVirtualHost has no VirtualHosts. I want them both running on the same IP and I'm not sure why this doesn't work. I've been digging through the documentation for VirtualHosts, NameVirtualHost, and apache's page about name based virtual hosting. That example in the name based page is almost exactly my config! What am I doing wrong? Listen *:80 NameVirtualHost *:80 <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName www.sample1.net DocumentRoot /var/www/sample1-net </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName www.example2.net DocumentRoot /var/www/example2-net </VirtualHost>

    Read the article

  • Setting up WAMP to run on a LAN

    - by Steve
    I've installed WAMP on a Windows 7 PC, and it is running fine locally, as localhost. I want PCs on the LAN to be able to view the local server. When they load my PC's IP address in their browser, they receive a "You don't have permission to access / on this server" error. I followed this guide, but the issue remains. To recap: I've added an inbound exception to Windows Firewall for port 80 for Private and Domain connections. I've edited Apache's httpd.conf to include: Listen 80 Listen 192.168.0.5:80 < Directory "c:/wamp/www/wordpress/" allow from all < /Directory I've edited httpd-vhosts.conf to include: < VirtualHost 192.168.0.5:80 DocumentRoot "C:/wamp/www/wordpress" < /VirtualHost Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Apache can't get viewed from outside of my LAN

    - by Javier Martinez
    I fixed it in PORTS TRIGGER menu of my router. Thanks you anyway I have a weird problem related with (i think) my cable-router and my configured vhosts in Apache2. The point is I can't access from outside of my LAN to any of my configured vhosts if I set the http port of Apache to 80 and i add a NAT rule for it. Otherwise, if I set my Apache port to 81 (or any else) with its respective NAT rule on my router it works. My router is an ARRIS TG952S and I am using Apache/2.2.22 (Debian) ports.conf NameVirtualHost *:80 Listen 80 vhost1.mydomain.net.conf <VirtualHost *:80> ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost ServerName vhost1.mydomain.net ServerAlias vhost1.mydomain.net www.vhost1.mydomain.net vhost2.mydomain.net.conf <VirtualHost *:80> ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost ServerName vhost2.mydomain.net ServerAlias vhost2.mydomain.net www.vhost2.mydomain.net DNS records (using FreeDNS) are: mydomain.net --> pointing to another server vhost1.mydomain.net --> pointing to my server vhost2.mydomain.net --> pointing to my server iptables -L -n Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination fail2ban-apache-noscript tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 multiport dports 80,443 fail2ban-apache tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 multiport dports 80,443 fail2ban-ssh tcp -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 multiport dports 22 Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination Chain fail2ban-apache (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain fail2ban-apache-noscript (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Chain fail2ban-ssh (1 references) target prot opt source destination RETURN all -- 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 Thanks you

    Read the article

  • Setting up virtualbox for outside access

    - by Morgan Green
    I have a computer running a server that my subdomain on my shared hosting account points to. IE subdomain.mydomain.org goes to my home server. Now then; what I'm wanting to do is be able to access my VirtualBox servers through that subdomain and a different port. E.G Ubuntu Virtual Box Server 1 Username:Ubuntuhost1 Password:MyUbuntuHost1 Port:4000 Internal IP: 192.168.1.60 External IP: 24.29.138.45 Ubuntu Virtual Box Server 2 Username:UbuntuHost2 Password:MyUbuntuHost2 Port:4001 Internal IP: 192.168.1.61 External IP: 24.29.138.45 Now I want to be able to access RDP number 1 through Port 4000, but if I access Port 4001 it will connect to the server on port 4001; both using the same subdomain. The next issue is the fact that even though I know what the IP addresses are on the router for the virtualbox hosts through ifconfig it doesn't change the fact that they don't show up on the router. If anyone knows how to configure this to work please help me out because I've been racking my brain to the highest extent I can. Alright; here's an edit to clarify more; Sorry. My ports on the router are edited to forward Port 4000 on Internal IP 192.168.1.63 (My Ubuntu Internal IP address) Now when I go to my Router Home Page my VirtualBox Internal IP Address doesn't show on the attached device listings, so I set up port forwarding anyways to the VirtualBox Internal IP. My end goal is when I connect to mydomain.org and I connect through port 3389 it takes me to my host computers server, but if I put in mydomain.org and go through port 4000 it's going to redirect to my VirtualBox server; Is this even possible? Sorry; I'm trying to clarify the most I think I can I just don't know how else to explain my issue.

    Read the article

  • Motherboard warning lights when plugging in a display port cord to graphics card?

    - by rllr
    Earlier today, my computer spontaneously shut itself off and refused to turn back on. I tested my PSU and it's operating fine. I unplugged everything and let it sit for a while and it started to make a high pitched coil whine/hiss. When I came back an hour later and plugged in only the power cord, it turned on without any issues. After some troubleshooting, I noticed my motherboard (Intel D975XBX2) has a red CPU led and VR led that come on whenever I plug my monitor into my graphics card via display port. DVI does not cause a similar issue. I was running three monitors off the card, so I need both DVI ports and the display port working. Is it likely my graphics card needs to be replaced, or should I be looking elsewhere to resolve this issue?

    Read the article

  • What type of security problems are mitigated by this .NET architecture?

    - by Jonno
    Given the following physical layout for a .NET web application: DB (sql server, windows) - No public route (no table access, only stored procs) Web Service DAL (iis, windows) - No public route (can be accessed by web server via port 80 and 443) Web Server (iis, windows) - Public route (only via port 80 and 443) What type(s) / examples of attack could be used to compromise the public web server but would be blocked by the Web Service DAL? i.e. can you think of concrete attack types that the DAL stops? Please note, I am interested only in the security aspect, not scaling / fault tolerance / performance / etc. In my mind if the web server has been compromised using an attack over port 80/443, then the same attack would work over port 80/443 to the Web Service DAL box.

    Read the article

  • Best way to deploy my node.js app on a Varnish/Nginx server

    - by Saif Bechan
    I am about to deploy a brand new node.js application, and I need some help setting this up. The way my setup is right now is as follows. I have Varnish running on external_ip:80 I have Nginx behind running on internal_ip:80 Both are listening on port 80, one internal port, one external. NOTE: the node.js app runs on WebSockets Now I have the my new node.js application that will listen on port 8080. Can I have varnish set up that it is in front of both nginx and node.js. Varnish has to proxy the websocket to port 8080, but then the static files such as css, js, etc has to go trough port 80 to nignx. Nginx does not support websockets out of the box, else I would so a setup like: varnish - nignx - node.js

    Read the article

  • windows 2003 - why can't serial port be accessed remotely?

    - by Danny Staple
    we have recently installed the updates on some of our servers, which have a bit of hardware attached via USB that presents itself as a serial (COM) port. The strange behaviour is that if I start a cmd shell on the server via VNC, I can open the serial port. If I run a service and start it from there (telnet, jenkins) then I receive a "not found" error for it. IE: C:\Documents and Settings\some_user>echo 1 >COM4: C:\Documents and Settings\some_user> on the local cmd will work, and on the remote telnet will give: C:\Documents and Settings\some_user>echo 1 >COM4: The system cannot find the file specified. C:\Documents and Settings\some_user> I cannot see any security settings on the Device manager settings panel for this device.

    Read the article

  • Thin web server - single or multiple instances per IP address:port?

    - by wchrisjohnson
    I'm deploying a rack/sinatra/web socket app onto several servers and will use thin as the web server (http://code.macournoyer.com/thin/). There are almost no views to show, so I am not front-ending it with a traditional web server like Apache or nginx. In general, you see thin started and the underlying config file for it has the number of server instances to start, say 3, and the port to start with, say 5000. So, in my example, when thin starts, it starts up three instances on a range of ports, starting on port 5000. If I have a series of virtual machines, say 3, 6, 9, etc. that I treat as a cluster, would/should I choose to start a single thin instance on each VM, or multiple instances on each VM? Why? Thanks - Chris

    Read the article

  • unicorn and nginx, went wrong

    - by achempion
    I try to deploy my app via capistrano. It was done, but when I start to nginx and show my site in the browser I see 'We're sorry, but something went wrong.' It is bad. I use unicorn. See my configs https://gist.github.com/3904032 I try to start server via rails s -e prodiction and it's work! I think that this error may be because I can't restart server root@li272-194:~# /etc/init.d/nginx restart Restarting nginx: the configuration file /etc/nginx/nginx.conf syntax is ok configuration file /etc/nginx/nginx.conf test is successful [emerg]: bind() to 0.0.0.0:80 failed (98: Address already in use) [emerg]: bind() to 0.0.0.0:80 failed (98: Address already in use) [emerg]: bind() to 0.0.0.0:80 failed (98: Address already in use) [emerg]: bind() to 0.0.0.0:80 failed (98: Address already in use) [emerg]: bind() to 0.0.0.0:80 failed (98: Address already in use) [emerg]: still could not bind() nginx. any ideas? nginx log 2012/10/17 02:57:41 [error] 3271#0: *1 could not find named location "@myapp", client: 91.192.62.77, server: 178.79.153.194, request: "GET / HTTP/1.1", host: "178.79.153.194" 2012/10/17 02:19:08 [crit] 2448#0: *8 connect() to unix:/srv/zarcon/shared/unicorn.sock failed (2: No such file or directory) while connecting to upstream, client: 91.192.62.77, server: zarkon, request: "GET / HTTP/1.1", upstream: "http://unix:/srv/zarcon/shared/unicorn.sock:/", host: "178.79.153.194"

    Read the article

  • wamp can't put offline!!

    - by user343570
    when i wana put it offline it say: "Could not execute menu item (internal error) [Exception] Could not perform service action: The service has not been started." all froums said to me:u must under Apache open the httpd.conf and change the lines #Listen 12.34.56.78:80 Listen 80 to #Listen 12.34.56.78:80 Listen 8080 save the file and you are done. but my httpd.conf is blank!!!i need it

    Read the article

  • How can I port forward over a VPN NAT?

    - by Charlie
    I have a multi-site VPN currently running with pfSense boxes and currently using OpenVPN. However I can change the OS and VPN type if need be. The main router has a 10.13.0.0/16 subnet and a series of public IPs For example, a branch has a 10.12.1.0/24 subnet How can I port forward NAT traffic on a public IP of the main router to a server behind the NAT of the second? So for instance port 95 on a public IP assigned to the main router forwards to 10.12.1.102 on the other router. Is this even possible? Currently my setup works great but only for intertnal traffic

    Read the article

  • iptables: Allow only HTTP access for web browsing

    - by user1448260
    Have a linux box, want it locked down but just be able to surf internet on it. Why is this script blocking http too? #!/bin/sh # # iptables -F # #Set default policies for INPUT, FORWARD and OUTPUT chains # iptables -P INPUT DROP iptables -P FORWARD DROP iptables -P OUTPUT DROP # # Allow TCP connections on tcp port 80 # iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 80 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # # Set access for localhost # iptables -A INPUT -i lo -j ACCEPT # # List rules # iptables -L -v

    Read the article

  • Apache Virtual Hosts behind Cisco Router

    - by Theo
    I'm setting up an Apache 2.2 Ubuntu web server for internal services that is also supposed to be accessed from outside our LAN. Our LAN has a single external IP that is the external IP of our RV042 Cisco router. We have set up several A records on our external DNS server that point to this IP. Our internal DNS server resolve the same records to the internal IP of our web server, so computers from inside the network can access them using the same address as if they were outside. We forwarded the router's external 80 port to our web server's 80 port. I have set up one Virtual Host for each domain name in our list, and my httpd.conf is something like this: ServerName web.domain.com NameVirtualHost *:80 <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName alfresco.domain.com <Proxy *> Order deny,allow Allow from all </Proxy> ProxyPass /alfresco http://localhost:8080/alfresco ProxyPassReverse /alfresco http://localhost:8080/alfresco ProxyPass /share http://localhost:8080/share ProxyPassReverse /share http://localhost:8080/share </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName crm.domain.com DocumentRoot /var/www/sugarcrm </VirtualHost> Now, this works if we are in our LAN. However, if we are outside of our LAN we reach our web server's default page saying: It Works! This is the default web page for this server. But we can't reach the virtual hosts, as if the domain name is not being preserved when the router forward the packets to the web server. Am I doing something wrong? How can I check what is going on? What should be the settings to make this work from outside?

    Read the article

  • Apache Virtual host Subdomains points to same directory

    - by Jakobud
    I have setup subdomains using Apache before and have never really ran into any big problems. But with this (I believe Centos) server that is one of my clients, I'm not understanding what I'm doing wrong. Here is the .conf that apache is loading: Listen 80 NameVirtualHost *:80 <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName www.thedomain.com DocumentRoot /u1/thedomain.com/public RailsEnv production </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName subdomain.thedomain.com DocumentRoot /u1/subdomain.thedomain.com/public_html </VirtualHost> When I access either the primary or subdomain addresses, they both point to the primary www.thedomain.com content. Any thoughts? UPDATE: Yes I did a configtest and graceful after making the changes.

    Read the article

  • Proxmox: VMs and different public IPs

    - by Raj
    I have a server which has two NICs and both are directly connected to internet. I have five different public IP addresses available for the VMs. The host machine (Proxmox) doesn't need to use any (it'll use a private IP and that's all) but will have internet connection. I've gone through the Proxmox documentation and I'm not able to understand the big picture to set up the right network configuration for my needs. In short, what I have is: One server (Proxmox, host machine) On that server, 5 VMs are created 5 public IP addresses available (one for each VM), let's say: 80.123.21.1, 80.123.21.2, 80.123.21.3, 80.123.21.4, 80.123.21.5 What I have now for the host is the following: auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto eth0 iface eth0 inet manual auto eth1 iface eth1 inet manual auto vmbr0 iface vmbr0 inet static address 192.168.1.101 netmask 255.255.255.0 bridge_ports eth0 bridge_stp off bridge_fd 0 auto vmbr1 iface vmbr1 inet manual It can be reached from the internal network, so that's OK. It has internet connection, which is also OK. vmbr1 is going to be used by the VMs. Each VM will have its own IP on his network interfaces configuration file. For some reason, VMs will not have internet and they won't be able to have public IP address. If I use NAT, it will work correctly, but they will not use the public allocated IP addresses for them. Am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • Setting up a transparent proxy with only one box.

    - by Scott Chamberlain
    I am playing around with transparent proxies, unfortunately I do not have two machines to test it out with. The current way I am doing things is the program makes a request to a computer on port 80, I use iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p tcp --destination-port 80 -j REDIRECT --to-port 1234 to redirect to my proxy that I am playing with. the proxy will send out a request to port 81 (as all outbound port 80 are being fed back in to the proxy so I want to do something like iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p tcp --destination-port 81 -j DNAT --to-destination xxxx:80 The problem lies with the xxxx part. How do I change the destination port without changing changing the destination ip? Or am I doing this setup completely wrong, I am learning after all and constructive criticism is definitely appreciated. The machine I am using is pretty low end so I would like not not have to create a VM with a second box unless absolutely necessary.

    Read the article

  • Uploads fail with shorewall enabled

    - by JamesArmes
    I have an Ubuntu 8.04 server with shorewall 4.0.6 installed. When I try to upload files using FTP, SCP, or cURL the file upload stalls almost immediatly and eventually times out. If I turn off shorewall then the uploads work fine. I don't have any rules that specifically allow FTP and I'm not too concerned with it, but I do need to be able to upload via 22 (SCP) and 80 & 443 (cURL). This is what my rules look like: COMMENT Allow Server to respond to any web (80) and SSL (443) requests ACCEPT net $FW tcp 80 ACCEPT $FW net tcp 80 ACCEPT net $FW tcp 443 ACCEPT $FW net tcp 443 COMMENT Allow Server to respond to SNMPD (161) requests ACCEPT net $FW udp 161 COMMENT Allow Server to respond to MySQL (3306) requests (for MySQL Graphing) ACCEPT net $FW tcp 3306 COMMENT Allow Server to respond to any SSH connection attempts, and to SSH out. SSH/ACCEPT net $FW SSH/ACCEPT $FW net COMMENT Allow Server to make DNS Requests out. DNS/ACCEPT $FW net COMMENT Default "close" anything else. Ping/REJECT net $FW ACCEPT $FW net icmp #LAST LINE -- ADD YOUR ENTRIES BEFORE THIS ONE -- DO NOT REMOVE I expected the top four ACCEPT lines to allow inbound and outbound traffic over 80 and 443 and I expected the two SSH/ACCEPT lines to allow inbound and outbound trffic over 22, including SCP. Any help is greatly appreciated. /etc/shorewall/policy contains the following (all lines above are commented out): # # Allow all connection requests from teh firewall to the internet # $FW net ACCEPT # # Policies for traffic originating from the Internet zone (net) # Drop (ignore) all connection requests from the Internet to the firewall # net all DROP info # THE FOLLOWING POLICY MUST BE LAST # Reject all other connection requests all all REJECT info #LAST LINE -- ADD YOUR ENTRIES ABOVE THIS LINE -- DO NOT REMOVE

    Read the article

  • Safe to use high port numbers? (re: obscuring web services)

    - by sofakng
    I have a small home network and I'm trying to balance the need for security versus convenience. The safest way to secure internal web servers is to only connect using VPNs but this seems overkill to protect a DVRs remote web interface (for example). As a compromise, would it be better to use very large ports numbers? (eg. five digits up to 65531) I've read that port scanners typically only scan the first 10,000 ports so using very high port numbers is a bit more secure. Is this true? Are there better ways to protect web servers? (ie. web guis for applications)

    Read the article

  • Safe to use high port numbers? (re: obscuring web services)

    - by sofakng
    I have a small home network and I'm trying to balance the need for security versus convenience. The safest way to secure internal web servers is to only connect using VPNs but this seems overkill to protect a DVRs remote web interface (for example). As a compromise, would it be better to use very large ports numbers? (eg. five digits up to 65531) I've read that port scanners typically only scan the first 10,000 ports so using very high port numbers is a bit more secure. Is this true? Are there better ways to protect web servers? (ie. web guis for applications)

    Read the article

  • How do I map a friendly name (e.g. www.example.com) to 127.0.0.1:port# on Mac OS X

    - by Fred Finkle
    I am trying to create a demo for a class of mine and I want to configure "fake" domain names on my laptop. A previous question "Can I specify a port in an entry in my /etc/hosts on OS X?" contained an answer indicating that to do it you must use /etc/hosts plus changes to the iptables "If OS X uses iptables you could point xyz.com to some ip in the hosts file like 157.166.226.25 and then: sudo iptables -t nat -A OUTPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -d 157.166.226.25 -j DNAT --to-destination 127.0.0.1:3000 " Since OS X doesn't use iptables, how do I do the equivalent using the tools available on OS X? (the original "asker" seemed to know how to do this, so it wasn't explained). Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • IIS7.5 website (mostly) inaccessible from the outside world

    - by Force Flow
    On the network firewall, I opened up port 80 and forwarded it to the Windows Server 2008 R2 running IIS 7.5. Port 80 is open in the Windows firewall. On the LAN, the website is accessible without any trouble. When accessed from the outside, I can access it only 3 times every few hours before access to it cuts out from the outside. There aren't any access limits in IIS or the network's firewall as far as I can tell. IIS is running PHP 5.3. The default website has been deleted. The bindings for the website's domain are set for mydomain.com *:80 and mydomain.com 192.168.0.3:80

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  | Next Page >