Search Results

Search found 15441 results on 618 pages for 'ssl security'.

Page 80/618 | < Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >

• ubuntu/apt-get update said "Failed to Fetch http:// .... 404 not found"

  - by lindenb

  Hi all, I'm trying to run apt-get update on ubuntu 9.10 I've configured my proxy server and I can access the internet without any problem: /etc/apt# wget "http://www.google.com" Resolving (...) Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 292 [text/html] Saving to: `index.html' 100%[=================================================================================================================================>] 292 --.-K/s in 0s 2010-04-02 17:20:33 (29.8 MB/s) - `index.html' saved [292/292] But when I tried to use apt-get I got the following message: Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic Release.gpg Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic Release.gpg Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic Release Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates Release.gpg Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security Release.gpg Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/multiverse Translation-en_US Ign http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Translation-en_US Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic Release Err http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/main Sources 404 Not Found Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates Release Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security Release Err http://archive.ubuntu.com karmic/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/multiverse Packages Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Sources Ign http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Packages Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/multiverse Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic/universe Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/multiverse Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-updates/universe Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/multiverse Packages 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/restricted Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/main Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Sources 404 Not Found Err http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr karmic-security/universe Packages 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/karmic/main/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/karmic/restricted/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/restricted/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/restricted/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/main/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/universe/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic/universe/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/restricted/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/restricted/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/main/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/universe/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-updates/universe/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/restricted/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/restricted/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/main/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/universe/source/Sources.gz 404 Not Found W: Failed to fetch http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/dists/karmic-security/universe/binary-i386/Packages.gz 404 Not Found apt.conf However I can 'see' those files with firefox. more /etc/apt/apt.conf Acquire::http::proxy "http://www.myproxyname.fr:3128"; I also tried with port '80', or with a blank /etc/apt/apt.conf source.list grep -v "#" /etc/apt/sources.list deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic main restricted multiverse deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic-updates main restricted multiverse deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic universe deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic-updates universe deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic-security main restricted multiverse deb http://ubuntu.univ-nantes.fr/ubuntu/ karmic-security universe does anyone knows how to fix this ? Thanks Pierre

  Read the article

• Problem Disabling Roaming Profiles on Grouped Users

  - by user43207

  I'm having some serious issues getting a group of users to stop using roaming profiles. As expected, I have roaming profiles enabled accross the domain. - But am doing GPO filtering, limiting the scope. I originally had it set to authenticated users for Roaming, but as the domain has branched out to multiple locations, I've limited the scope to only people that are near the central office. The GPO that I have linked filtered to a group I have created that include users that I don't want to have roaming profiles. This GPO is sitting at the root of the domain, with the "Forced" setting enabled, so it should override any setting below it. *On a side note, it is the ONLY GPO that I have set to "Forced" right now. I know the GPO is working, since I can see the original registy settings on a user that logged in under roaming profiles - and then that same user logging in after I made the Group Policy changes, the registry reflects a local profile. But unfortunately, even after making those settings - the user is given a roaming profile on one of the servers. A gpresult of that same user account (after the updated gpo) is listed in the code block below. You can see right at the top of that output, that it is infact dealing with a roaming profile. - And sure enough, on the server that's hosting the file share for roaming profiles, it creates a folder for the user once they log in. For testing purposes, I've deleted all copies of the user's profile, roaming and local. But the problem is still here. - So I'm aparently missing something in the group policy settings on a wider scale. Would anybody be able to point me in the direction of what I'm missing here? *gpresult /r*** Microsoft (R) Windows (R) Operating System Group Policy Result tool v2.0 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp. 1981-2001 Created On 5/15/2010 at 8:59:00 AM RSOP data for ** on * : Logging Mode OS Configuration: Member Workstation OS Version: 6.1.7600 Site Name: N/A Roaming Profile: \\profiles$** Local Profile: C:\Users*** Connected over a slow link?: No USER SETTINGS CN=*****,OU=*****,OU=*****,OU=*****,DC=*****,DC=***** Last time Group Policy was applied: 5/15/2010 at 8:52:02 AM Group Policy was applied from: *****.*****.com Group Policy slow link threshold: 500 kbps Domain Name: USSLINDSTROM Domain Type: Windows 2000 Applied Group Policy Objects ----------------------------- ForceLocalProfilesOnly InternetExplorer_***** GlobalPasswordPolicy The following GPOs were not applied because they were filtered out ------------------------------------------------------------------- DAgentFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSAdmin_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) NetlogonFirewallExceptions Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) NetLogon_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleManualInstall Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleDaily_0300 Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleThu_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) AlternateSSLFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) SNMPFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleSun_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) SQLServerFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleTue_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleSat_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) DisableUAC Filtering: Denied (Security) ICMPFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) AdminShareFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) GPRefreshInterval Filtering: Denied (Security) ServeRAIDFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleFri_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) BlockFirewallExceptions(8400-8410) Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleWed_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) Local Group Policy Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) WSUS_***** Filtering: Denied (Security) LogonAsService_Idaho Filtering: Denied (Security) ReportServerFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) WSUSUpdateScheduleMon_0100 Filtering: Denied (Security) TFSFirewallExceptions Filtering: Denied (Security) Default Domain Policy Filtering: Not Applied (Empty) DenyServerSideRoamingProfiles Filtering: Denied (Security) ShareConnectionsRemainAlive Filtering: Denied (Security) The user is a part of the following security groups --------------------------------------------------- Domain Users Everyone BUILTIN\Users BUILTIN\Administrators NT AUTHORITY\INTERACTIVE CONSOLE LOGON NT AUTHORITY\Authenticated Users This Organization LOCAL *****Users VPNAccess_***** NetAdmin_***** SiteAdmin_***** WSAdmin_***** VPNAccess_***** LocalProfileOnly_***** NetworkAdmin_***** LocalProfileOnly_***** VPNAccess_***** NetAdmin_***** Domain Admins WSAdmin_***** WSAdmin_***** ***** ***** Schema Admins ***** Enterprise Admins Denied RODC Password Replication Group High Mandatory Level

  Read the article

• Retrieving an RSA key from a running instance of Apache?

  - by Nathan Osman

  I created an RSA keypair for an SSL certificate and stored the private key in /etc/ssl/private/server.key. Unfortunately this was the only copy of the private key that I had. Then I accidentally overwrote the file on disk (yes, I know). Apache is still running and still serving SSL requests, leading me to believe that there may be hope in recovering the private key. (Perhaps there is a symbolic link somewhere in /proc or something?) This server is running Ubuntu 12.04 LTS.

  Read the article

• SSH tunnel over http proxy with blocked 443 (SSL)

  - by Evgeny Zhulenev

  Is it possible to create an SSH tunnel over http-proxy when https access is denied? I had such configuration in .ssh\config Host home User root Hostname *my-home-pc-with-ssh-access-allowed* Port 8090 ProxyCommand corkscrew db-isa-01 8080 %h %p ~/.ssh/.corkscrew-db-isa-auth IdentityFile ~/.ssh/id_rsa Where db-isa-01 is my corporate proxy server. Today the admins blocked all https access and allowed it only for few servers on the white list. I used this command to create a tunnel: ssh -D 7070 -o 'GatewayPorts yes' -A -q -g -t root@home and now it doesn't work. As I can understand, that's because our proxy denies all https connections Proxy could not open connnection to ***: Proxy Error ( The specified Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) port is not allowed. Forefront TMG is not configured to allow SSL requests from this port. Most Web browsers use port 443 for SSL requests. ) P.S. I use Windows 7, and corscskrew with cygwin, so Linux solutions not suitable for me.

  Read the article

• SSLCipherSuite - disable weak encryption, cbc cipher and md5 based algorithm

  - by John

  A developer recently ran a PCI Scan with TripWire against our LAMP server. They identified several issues and instructed the following to correct the issues: Problem: SSL Server Supports Weak Encryption for SSLv3, TLSv1, Solution: Add the following rule to httpd.conf SSLCipherSuite ALL:!aNULL:!eNULL:!LOW:!EXP:RC4+RSA:+HIGH:+MEDIUM Problem: SSL Server Supports CBC Ciphers for SSLv3, TLSv1 Solution: Disable any cipher suites using CBC ciphers Problem: SSL Server Supports Weak MAC Algorithm for SSLv3, TLSv1 Solution: Disable any cipher suites using MD5 based MAC algorithms I tried searching google for a comprehensive tutorial on how to construct an SSLCipherSuite directive to meet my requirements, but I didn't find anything I could understand. I see examples of SSLCipherSuite directives, but I need an explanation on what each component of the directive does. So even in the directive SSLCipherSuite ALL:!aNULL:!eNULL:!LOW:!EXP:RC4+RSA:+HIGH:+MEDIUM, I dont understand for example what the !LOW means. Can someone either a) tell me the SSLCipherSuite directive that will meet my needs or b) show me a resource that clearly explains each segment of a SSLCipherSuite is and how to construct one?

  Read the article

• postfix, TLS and rapidssl - "verify error:num=19:unable to get local issuer certificate"

  - by technobuddha

  I have been googeling for days! I have a cert from rapidssl. I read up that the problem with num=20, is that indicates it doesn't know the issuer, or doesn't know the ROOT Cert, right? I run this command: openssl s_client -showcerts -connect smtp.server.com:465 I get this error: verify error:num=19:self signed certificate in certificate chain Here is what i have in my postfix main.cf, and what i have done: smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/smtp.server.com.rsa.key (this is the private key) smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/smtp.server.com.PUBLIC.key (this is the public key given to me by rapidssl) smtpd_tls_CAfile = /etc/postfix/ssl/combo.csr.key This key has both the intermediate keys ON TOP, and the ROOT KEY on the bottom. Here is the Intermediate keys: https://knowledge.geotrust.com/library/VERISIGN/ALL_OTHER/geotrust%20ca/GT_QuickSSL_and_Premium_and_Trial_intermediate_bundle.pem and here is the root CERT: http://www.geotrust.com/resources/root_certificates/certificates/Equifax_Secure_Certificate_Authority.cer anyone know how to use rapidssl certs?

  Read the article

• Sharepoint site settings add on ssl port number?

  - by Mike

  WSS 3.0 IIS6/WinSever2003 CAG We have several WSS sites on a SharePoint WSS box that talk to the outside, all of which are SSL enabled. So you get a CAG(Citrix Access Gateway) to translate the 443 port to the local ssl port on the server. Everything is set up and works fine until you get into the Site Settings and start rooting around, it seems like a very unstable link library. Links will try to use the local ssl port number instead of the 443 standard; it will try to skip the step. Is that the site? Any ideas on how to fix it?

  Read the article

• Enabling spdy in nginx fails spdycheck.org

  - by tulio84z

  I'm trying to enable spdy with nginx 1.6.0 but spdycheck.org is giving me two complaints: And My nginx configuration file is as such: server { listen 80; listen 443 ssl spdy; server_name 54.201.32.118; ssl_certificate /etc/nginx/ssl/tulio.crt; ssl_certificate_key /etc/nginx/ssl/tulio.key; if ($ssl_protocol = "") { rewrite ^ https://$server_name$request_uri? permanent; } root /usr/share/nginx/html; index index.html index.htm; location / { # First attempt to serve request as file, then # as directory, then fall back to displaying a 404. try_files $uri $uri/ =404; # Uncomment to enable naxsi on this location # include /etc/nginx/naxsi.rules } } The other info of spdycheck you can find at: http://spdycheck.org/#54.201.32.118

  Read the article

• OpenSSL without prompt

  - by JP19

  Hi, I am using following code to generate keys: apt-get -qq -y install openssl; mkdir -p /etc/apache2/ssl; openssl genrsa -des3 -out server.key 1024; openssl req -new -key server.key -out server.csr; cp server.key server.key.org; openssl rsa -in server.key.org -out server.key; openssl x509 -req -days 12000 -in server.csr -signkey server.key -out server.crt; mv server.crt /etc/apache2/ssl/cert.pem; mv server.key /etc/apache2/ssl/cert.key; rm -f server.key.orig; rm -f server.csr How can I skip the passphrase prompting? thanks JP

  Read the article

• Sonicwall NSA 3500, public ip for SSL VPN clients is not visible

  - by SlyMcFly

  I have a Sonciwall NSA 3500 and I'm setting up the SSL VPN according to this guide. I get through setting up the Sonicwall router, but then to test it says "Users can now go to the public IP of the sonicwall. Notice the new “click here for SSL login” hyper link". However, when I go to the public ip of the Sonicwall I don't get a web page, it just times out. Is there some other setting that I'm missing in order to make the SSL VPN login page public?

  Read the article

• Apache https configurations

  - by sissonb

  I am trying to setup my domain name with a self signed cert. I created the cert and placed the server.key and server.crt files into C:/apache/config/ Then I updated my httpd.confg host to include the following, <VirtualHost 192.168.5.250:443> DocumentRoot C:/www ServerName mydomain.com:443 ServerAlias www.mydomain.com:443 SSLEngine on SSLCertificateFile C:/apache/conf/server.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile C:/apache/conf/server.key SSLVerifyClient none SSLProxyEngine off SetEnvIf User-Agent ".*MSIE.*" \ nokeepalive ssl-unclean-shutdown \ downgrade-1.0 force-response-1.0 CustomLog logs/ssl_request_log \ "%t %h %{SSL_PROTOCOL}x %{SSL_CIPHER}x \"%r\" %b" </VirtualHost> Now when I go to https://mydomain.com I get the following error. SSL connection error Unable to make a secure connection to the server. This may be a problem with the server, or it may be requiring a client authentication certificate that you don't have. Error 107 (net::ERR_SSL_PROTOCOL_ERROR): SSL protocol error. Can anyone see what I'm doing wrong? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Nginx HTTPS redirects causing loop

  - by Ben Chiappetta

  I've been banging my head against the wall trying to figure this out, so if anyone can help I'd appreciate it. My Nginx conf has three different redirect loops, haven't been able to get any of the three to work right. The three problem areas are: Redirecting memcache directory to SSL Redirecting accounts directory to SSL Redirecting SSL to www if non-www nginx.conf: user nginx; worker_processes 1; error_log /var/log/nginx/error.log warn; pid /var/run/nginx.pid; events { worker_connections 1024; } http { include /etc/nginx/mime.types; default_type application/octet-stream; log_format main '$remote_addr - $remote_user [$time_local] "$request" ' '$status $body_bytes_sent "$http_referer" ' '"$http_user_agent" "$http_x_forwarded_for"'; access_log /var/log/nginx/access.log main; error_log /var/log/nginx/error.log notice; sendfile on; #tcp_nopush on; keepalive_timeout 65; proxy_set_header X-Url-Scheme $scheme; #gzip on; rewrite_log on; include /etc/nginx/conf.d/*.conf; } conf.d/default.conf: server { listen 80; server_name <redacted>.net; rewrite ^(.*) http://www.<redacted>.net$1; } server { listen 80; server_name www.<redacted>.net; set_real_ip_from 192.168.30.4; set_real_ip_from 192.168.30.5; set_real_ip_from 192.168.30.10; real_ip_header X-Forwarded-For; #charset koi8-r; access_log /var/log/nginx/host.access.log main; root /var/www/html; index index.php index.html index.htm; location =/memcache { rewrite ^/(.*)$ https://$server_name$request_uri? permanent; } location /accounts { rewrite ^/(.*)$ https://$server_name$request_uri? permanent; } #error_page 404 /404.html; # redirect server error pages to the static page /50x.html # error_page 500 502 503 504 /50x.html; location = /50x.html { } # pass the PHP scripts to FastCGI server listening on 127.0.0.1:9000 # location ~ \.php$ { fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; fastcgi_index index.php; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME $document_root$fastcgi_script_name; include /etc/nginx/fastcgi_params; try_files $uri = 404; } # deny access to .htaccess files, if Apache's document root # concurs with nginx's one # location ~ /\.ht { deny all; } } conf.d/ssl.conf: # HTTPS server # server { listen 443; server_name <redacted>.net; rewrite ^(.*) https://www.<redacted>.net$1; } server { listen 443 default_server ssl; server_name www.<redacted>.net; set_real_ip_from 192.168.30.4; set_real_ip_from 192.168.30.5; set_real_ip_from 192.168.30.10; real_ip_header X-Forwarded-For; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded_Proto https; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_redirect off; proxy_max_temp_file_size 0; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-Ssl on; set $https_enabled on; ssl_certificate <redacted>.crt; ssl_certificate_key <redacted>.key; ssl_session_timeout 5m; ssl_protocols SSLv2 SSLv3 TLSv1; ssl_ciphers HIGH:!aNULL:!MD5; ssl_prefer_server_ciphers on; root /var/www/html; index index.php index.html index.htm; location /memcache { auth_basic "Restricted"; auth_basic_user_file $document_root/memcache/.htpasswd; } location ~ \.php$ { fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; fastcgi_index index.php; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME $document_root$fastcgi_script_name; fastcgi_param HTTPS on; include /etc/nginx/fastcgi_params; try_files $uri = 404; } }

  Read the article

• can't send with postfix but I can whith one user

  - by CvR_XX

  I have a postfix and dovecot server but when i try to send an email i get an time -out. Im trying to send with the email [email protected]. A telnet session isn't helping much ether. I get a blank screen. Local it's working fine. My smtp service is running on treadity.com:25. The strange thing is that the logs are completely empty with any info regarding sending emails. Receiving is working alright. Another strange thing is that i've send some message's and that it worked. But that is only with one email. I can still send from that account but other emails are failing any idea's? config file: # See /usr/share/postfix/main.cf.dist for a commented, more complete version # Debian specific: Specifying a file name will cause the first # line of that file to be used as the name. The Debian default # is /etc/mailname. #myorigin = /etc/mailname smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP $mail_name (Debian/GNU) biff = no # appending .domain is the MUA's job. append_dot_mydomain = no # Uncomment the next line to generate "delayed mail" warnings #delay_warning_time = 4h readme_directory = no # TLS parameters #smtpd_tls_cert_file=/etc/ssl/certs/ssl-cert-snakeoil.pem #smtpd_tls_key_file=/etc/ssl/private/ssl-cert-snakeoil.key #smtpd_use_tls=yes #smtpd_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtpd_scache #smtp_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtp_scache smtpd_tls_cert_file=/etc/ssl/certs/dovecot.pem smtpd_tls_key_file=/etc/ssl/private/dovecot.pem smtpd_use_tls=yes # See /usr/share/postfix/main.cf.dist for a commented, more complete version # Debian specific: Specifying a file name will cause the first # line of that file to be used as the name. The Debian default # is /etc/mailname. #myorigin = /etc/mailname smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP $mail_name (Debian/GNU) biff = no # appending .domain is the MUA's job. append_dot_mydomain = no # Uncomment the next line to generate "delayed mail" warnings #delay_warning_time = 4h readme_directory = no # TLS parameters #smtpd_tls_cert_file=/etc/ssl/certs/ssl-cert-snakeoil.pem #smtpd_tls_key_file=/etc/ssl/private/ssl-cert-snakeoil.key #smtpd_use_tls=yes #smtpd_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtpd_scache #smtp_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtp_scache smtpd_tls_cert_file=/etc/ssl/certs/dovecot.pem smtpd_tls_key_file=/etc/ssl/private/dovecot.pem smtpd_use_tls=yes # See /usr/share/postfix/main.cf.dist for a commented, more complete version # Debian specific: Specifying a file name will cause the first # line of that file to be used as the name. The Debian default # is /etc/mailname. #myorigin = /etc/mailname smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP $mail_name (Debian/GNU) biff = no # appending .domain is the MUA's job. append_dot_mydomain = no # Uncomment the next line to generate "delayed mail" warnings #delay_warning_time = 4h readme_directory = no # TLS parameters #smtpd_tls_cert_file=/etc/ssl/certs/ssl-cert-snakeoil.pem #smtpd_tls_key_file=/etc/ssl/private/ssl-cert-snakeoil.key #smtpd_use_tls=yes #smtpd_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtpd_scache #smtp_tls_session_cache_database = btree:${data_directory}/smtp_scache smtpd_tls_cert_file=/etc/ssl/certs/dovecot.pem smtpd_tls_key_file=/etc/ssl/private/dovecot.pem smtpd_use_tls=yes smtpd_tls_auth_only = yes #Enabling SMTP for authenticated users, and handing off authentication to Dovecot smtpd_sasl_type = dovecot smtpd_sasl_path = private/auth smtpd_sasl_auth_enable = yes 1,1 Top

  Read the article

• How to add entry for primary and secondary intermediate cert in ssl apache

  - by Huzefa

  I have 1 intermediate certificate with name intermediate.crt But my providing is saying to add 2 certificates primary and secondary. But how to add it in ssl configuration file. Currently I have added only secondary certificate as below SSLCertificateChainFile "/usr/local/apache2/conf/extra/intermediate.crt" But now as my ssl provider is saying to add 2 certificates then what entry i have to do in my ssl.conf file. Or I can also use bundle.pem file which contains both the certificates in 1 file. Let me know how to add bundle.pem file also.

  Read the article

• Allowing users in from an IP address without certificate client authentication

  - by John

  I need to allow access to my site without SSL certificates from my office network and with SSL certificates outside. Here is my configuration: <Directory /srv/www> AllowOverride All Order deny,allow Deny from all # office network static IP Allow from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx SSLVerifyClient require SSLOptions +FakeBasicAuth AuthName "My secure area" AuthType Basic AuthUserFile /etc/httpd/ssl/index Require valid-user Satisfy Any </Directory> When I'm inside network and have certificate - I can access. When I'm inside network and haven't certificate - I can't access, it requires certificate. When I'm outside network and have certificate - I can't access, it shows me basic login screen When I'm outside network and haven't certificate - I can't access, it shows me basic login screen and following configuration works perfectly <Directory /srv/www> AllowOverride All Order deny,allow Deny from all Allow from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx AuthUserFile /srv/www/htpasswd AuthName "Restricted Access" AuthType Basic Require valid-user Satisfy Any </Directory>

  Read the article

• Difference between SSLCertificateFile and SSLCertificateChainFile?

  - by chrisjlee

  Normally with a virtual host an ssl is setup with the following directives: Listen 443 SSLCertificateFile /home/web/certs/domain1.public.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile /home/web/certs/domain1.private.key SSLCertificateChainFile /home/web/certs/domain1.intermediate.crt From: For enabling SSL for a single domain on a server with muliple vhosts, will this configuration work? What is the difference between SSLCertificateFile and SSLCertificateChainFile ? The client has purchased a CA key from GoDaddy. It looks like GoDaddy only provides a SSLCertificateFile (.crt file), and a SSLCertificateKeyFile (.key file) and not at SSLCertificateChainFile. Will my ssl still work without a SSLCertificateChainFile path specified ? Also, is there a canonical path where these files should be placed?

  Read the article

• Apache: Serve http traffic over https

  - by Gatsys

  Using apache. I have a demo of a webapp that usually uses https. However, for the demo, I want all traffic to be on http even if a user hits https. I have added the following entry and it works if you go to http:// AAAA.com:443, but doesn't work if you go to https:// AAAA.com. It gives you this error: SSL received a record that exceeded the maximum permissible length. (Error code: ssl_error_rx_record_too_long) Here is my current setup: <VirtualHost 111.111.111.1:443> ServerName test.AAAA.com DocumentRoot /var/www/AAAA.com </VirtualHost> How do you redirect the https-http without encountering the SSL error. In other words, turn off ssl for https://

  Read the article

• Blackberry Security Wipe

  - by GavinR

  What does a Blackberry "Security Wipe" (Options Security Options Security Wipe "emails, Contacts, etc") do? a) If I have an Enterprise Activation with my employer will a security wipe remove this? b) Will my phone still ring when my number is called or do I have to re-activate with my carrier?

  Read the article

• Can't upgrade ubuntu 9.xx to 12.04

  - by andrej spyk

  I can't upgrade old Ubuntu 9.10 to new, if I check for upgrade it says: Could not download all repository indexes *Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch http://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch tp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch htp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/main/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/restricted/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-security/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/main/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/restricted/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch http://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/universe/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/universe/source/Sources 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/multiverse/binary-i386/Packages 404 Not Found Failed to fetch ttp://cz.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/jaunty-updates/multiverse/source/Sources 404 Not Found Some index files failed to download, they have been ignored, or old ones used instead.* How I can upgrade if I can't burn new CD?

  Read the article

• Is Windows Server 2008R2 NAP solution for NAC (endpoint security) valuable enough to be worth the hassles?

  - by Warren P

  I'm learning about Windows Server 2008 R2's NAP features. I understand what network access control (NAC) is and what role NAP plays in that, but I would like to know what limitations and problems it has, that people wish they knew before they rolled it out. Secondly, I'd like to know if anyone has had success rolling it out in a mid-size (multi-city corporate network with around 15 servers, 200 desktops) environment with most (99%) Windows XP SP3 and newer Windows clients (Vista, and Win7). Did it work with your anti-virus? (I'm guessing NAP works well with the big name anti-virus products, but we're using Trend micro.). Let's assume that the servers are all Windows Server 2008 R2. Our VPNs are cisco stuff, and have their own NAC features. Has NAP actually benefitted your organization, and was it wise to roll it out, or is it yet another in the long list of things that Windows Server 2008 R2 does, but that if you do move your servers up to it, you're probably not going to want to use. In what particular ways might the built-in NAP solution be the best one, and in what particular ways might no solution at all (the status quo pre-NAP) or a third-party endpoint security or NAC solution be considered a better fit? I found an article where a panel of security experts in 2007 say NAC is maybe "not worth it". Are things better now in 2010 with Win Server 2008 R2?

  Read the article

• Is encryption really needed for having network security? [closed]

  - by Cawas

  I welcome better key-wording here, both on tags and title. I'm trying to conceive a free, open and secure network environment that would work anywhere, from big enterprises to small home networks of just 1 machine. I think since wireless Access Points are the most, if not only, true weak point of a Local Area Network (let's not consider every other security aspect of having internet) there would be basically two points to consider here: Having an open AP for anyone to use the internet through Leaving the whole LAN also open for guests to be able to easily read (only) files on it, and even a place to drop files on Considering these two aspects, once everything is done properly... What's the most secure option between having that, or having just an encrypted password-protected wifi? Of course "both" would seem "more secure". But it shouldn't actually be anything substantial. I've always had the feeling using any kind of the so called "wireless security" methods is actually a bad design. I'm talking mostly about encrypting and pass-phrasing (which are actually two different concepts), since I won't even consider hiding SSID and mac filtering. I understand it's a natural way of thinking. With cable networking nobody can access the network unless they have access to the physical cable, so you're "secure" in the physical way. In a way, encrypting is for wireless what building walls is for the cables. And giving pass-phrases would be adding a door with a key. So, what do you think?

  Read the article

• How to disable irritating Office File Validation security alert?

  - by Rabarberski

  I have Microsoft Office 2007 running on Windows 7. Yesterday I updated Office to the latest service pack, i.e. SP3. This morning, when opening an MS Word document (.doc format, and a document I created myself some months ago) I was greeted with a new dialog box saying: Security Alert - Office File Validation WARNING: Office File Validation detected a problem while trying to open this file. Opening this is probably dangerous, and may allow a malicious user to take over your computer. Contact the sender and ask them to re-save and re-send the file. For more security, verify in person or via the phone that they sent the file. Including two links to some microsoft blabla webpage. Obviously the document is safe as I created it myself some months ago. How to disable this irritating dialog box? (On a sidenote, a rethorical question: Will Microsoft never learn? I consider myself a power user in Word, but I have no clue what could be wrong with my document so that it is considered dangerous. Let alone more basic users of Word. Sigh....)

  Read the article

• SharePoint extranet security concerns, am I right to be worried?

  - by LukeR

  We are currently running MOSS 2007 internally, and have been doing so for about 12 months with no major issues. There has now been a request from management to provide access from the internet for small groups (initially) which are comprised of members from other Community Organisations like ours. Committees and the like. My first reaction was not joy when presented with this request, however I'd like to make sure the apprehension is warranted. I have read a few docs on TechNet about security hardening with regard to SharePoint, but I'm interested to know what others have done. I've spoken with another organisation who has already implemented something similar, and they have essentially port-forwarded from the internet to their internal production MOSS server. I don't really like the sound of this. Is it adviseable/necessary to run a DMZ type configuration, with a separate web front-end on a contained network segment? Does that even offer me any greater security than their setup? Some of the configurations from a TechNet doc aren't really feasible, given our current network budget. I've already made my concerns known to management, but it appears it will go ahead in some form or another. I'm tempted to run a completely isolated, seperate install just for these types of users. Should I even be concerned about it? Any thoughts, comments would be most welcomed at this point.

  Read the article

• Security implications of adding www-data to /etc/sudoers to run php-cgi as a different user

  - by BMiner

  What I really want to do is allow the 'www-data' user to have the ability to launch php-cgi as another user. I just want to make sure that I fully understand the security implications. The server should support a shared hosting environment where various (possibly untrusted) users have chroot'ed FTP access to the server to store their HTML and PHP files. Then, since PHP scripts can be malicious and read/write others' files, I'd like to ensure that each users' PHP scripts run with the same user permissions for that user (instead of running as www-data). Long story short, I have added the following line to my /etc/sudoers file, and I wanted to run it past the community as a sanity check: www-data ALL = (%www-data) NOPASSWD: /usr/bin/php-cgi This line should only allow www-data to run a command like this (without a password prompt): sudo -u some_user /usr/bin/php-cgi ...where some_user is a user in the group www-data. What are the security implications of this? This should then allow me to modify my Lighttpd configuration like this: fastcgi.server += ( ".php" => (( "bin-path" => "sudo -u some_user /usr/bin/php-cgi", "socket" => "/tmp/php.socket", "max-procs" => 1, "bin-environment" => ( "PHP_FCGI_CHILDREN" => "4", "PHP_FCGI_MAX_REQUESTS" => "10000" ), "bin-copy-environment" => ( "PATH", "SHELL", "USER" ), "broken-scriptfilename" => "enable" )) ) ...allowing me to spawn new FastCGI server instances for each user.

  Read the article

• Using Plesk for webhosting on Ubuntu - Security risk or reasonably safe?

  - by user66952

  Sorry for this newb-question I'm pretty clueless about Plesk, only have limited debian (without Plesk) experience. If the question is too dumb just telling me how to ask a smarter one or what kind of info I should read first to improve the question would be appreciated as well. I want to offer a program for download on my website hosted on an Ubuntu 8.04.4 VPS using Plesk 9.3.0 for web-hosting. I have limited the ssh-access to the server via key only. When setting up the webhosting with Plesk it created an FTP-login & user is that a potential security risk that could bypass the key-only access? I think Plesk itself (even without the ftp-user-account) through it's web-interface could be a risk is that correct or are my concerns exaggerated? Would you say this solution makes a difference if I'm just using it for the next two weeks and then change servers to a system where I know more about security. 3.In other words is one less likely to get hacked within the first two weeks of having a new site up and running than in week 14&15? (due to occurring in less search results in the beginning perhaps, or for whatever reason... )

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >