Search Results

Search found 14771 results on 591 pages for 'security policy'.

Page 82/591 | < Previous Page | 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89  | Next Page >

  • Renault under threat from industrial espionage, intellectual property the target

    - by Simon Thorpe
    Last year we saw news of both General Motors and Ford losing a significant amount of valuable information to competitors overseas. Within weeks of the turn of 2011 we see the European car manufacturer, Renault, also suffering. In a recent news report, French Industry Minister Eric Besson warned the country was facing "economic war" and referenced a serious case of espionage which concerns information pertaining to the development of electric cars. Renault senior vice president Christian Husson told the AFP news agency that the people concerned were in a "particularly strategic position" in the company. An investigation had uncovered a "body of evidence which shows that the actions of these three colleagues were contrary to the ethics of Renault and knowingly and deliberately placed at risk the company's assets", Mr Husson said. A source told Reuters on Wednesday the company is worried its flagship electric vehicle program, in which Renault with its partner Nissan is investing 4 billion euros ($5.3 billion), might be threatened. This casts a shadow over the estimated losses of Ford ($50 million) and General Motors ($40 million). One executive in the corporate intelligence-gathering industry, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said: "It's really difficult to say it's a case of corporate espionage ... It can be carelessness." He cited a hypothetical example of an enthusiastic employee giving away too much information about his job on an online forum. While information has always been passed and leaked, inadvertently or on purpose, the rise of the Internet and social media means corporate spies or careless employees are now more likely to be found out, he added. We are seeing more and more examples of where companies like these need to invest in technologies such as Oracle IRM to ensure such important information can be kept under control. It isn't just the recent release of information into the public domain via the Wikileaks website that is of concern, but also the increasing threats of industrial espionage in cases such as these. Information rights management doesn't totally remove the threat, but abilities to control documents no matter where they exist certainly increases the capabilities significantly. Every single time someone opens a sealed document the IRM system audits the activity. This makes identifying a potential source for a leak much easier when you have an absolute record of every person who's had access to the documents. Oracle IRM can also help with accidental or careless loss. Often people use very sensitive information all the time and forget the importance of handling it correctly. With the ability to protect the information from screen shots and prevent people copy and pasting document information into social networks and other, unsecured documents, Oracle IRM brings a totally new level of information security that would have a significant impact on reducing the risk these organizations face of losing their most valuable information.

    Read the article

  • How to store Role Based Access rights in web application?

    - by JonH
    Currently working on a web based CRM type system that deals with various Modules such as Companies, Contacts, Projects, Sub Projects, etc. A typical CRM type system (asp.net web form, C#, SQL Server backend). We plan to implement role based security so that basically a user can have one or more roles. Roles would be broken down by first the module type such as: -Company -Contact And then by the actions for that module for instance each module would end up with a table such as this: Role1 Example: Module Create Edit Delete View Company Yes Owner Only No Yes Contact Yes Yes Yes Yes In the above case Role1 has two module types (Company, and Contact). For company, the person assigned to this role can create companies, can view companies, can only edit records he/she created and cannot delete. For this same role for the module contact this user can create contacts, edit contacts, delete contacts, and view contacts (full rights basically). I am wondering is it best upon coming into the system to session the user's role with something like a: List<Role> roles; Where the Role class would have some sort of List<Module> modules; (can contain Company, Contact, etc.).? Something to the effect of: class Role{ string name; string desc; List<Module> modules; } And the module action class would have a set of actions (Create, Edit, Delete, etc.) for each module: class ModuleActions{ List<Action> actions; } And the action has a value of whether the user can perform the right: class Action{ string right; } Just a rough idea, I know the action could be an enum and the ModuleAction can probably be eliminated with a List<x, y>. My main question is what would be the best way to store this information in this type of application: Should I store it in the User Session state (I have a session class where I manage things related to the user). I generally load this during the initial loading of the application (global.asax). I can simply tack onto this session. Or should this be loaded at the page load event of each module (page load of company etc..). I eventually need to be able to hide / unhide various buttons / divs based on the user's role and that is what got me thinking to load this via session. Any examples or points would be great.

    Read the article

  • Is reliance on parametrized queries the only way to protect against SQL injection?

    - by Chris Walton
    All I have seen on SQL injection attacks seems to suggest that parametrized queries, particularly ones in stored procedures, are the only way to protect against such attacks. While I was working (back in the Dark Ages) stored procedures were viewed as poor practice, mainly because they were seen as less maintainable; less testable; highly coupled; and locked a system into one vendor; (this question covers some other reasons). Although when I was working, projects were virtually unaware of the possibility of such attacks; various rules were adopted to secure the database against corruption of various sorts. These rules can be summarised as: No client/application had direct access to the database tables. All accesses to all tables were through views (and all the updates to the base tables were done through triggers). All data items had a domain specified. No data item was permitted to be nullable - this had implications that had the DBAs grinding their teeth on occasion; but was enforced. Roles and permissions were set up appropriately - for instance, a restricted role to give only views the right to change the data. So is a set of (enforced) rules such as this (though not necessarily this particular set) an appropriate alternative to parametrized queries in preventing SQL injection attacks? If not, why not? Can a database be secured against such attacks by database (only) specific measures? EDIT Emphasis of the question changed slightly, in the light of the initial responses received. Base question unchanged. EDIT2 The approach of relying on paramaterized queries seems to be only a peripheral step in defense against attacks on systems. It seems to me that more fundamental defenses are both desirable, and may render reliance on such queries not necessary, or less critical, even to defend specifically against injection attacks. The approach implicit in my question was based on "armouring" the database and I had no idea whether it was a viable option. Further research has suggested that there are such approaches. I have found the following sources that provide some pointers to this type of approach: http://database-programmer.blogspot.com http://thehelsinkideclaration.blogspot.com The principle features I have taken from these sources is: An extensive data dictionary, combined with an extensive security data dictionary Generation of triggers, queries and constraints from the data dictionary Minimize Code and maximize data While the answers I have had so far are very useful and point out difficulties arising from disregarding paramaterized queries, ultimately they do not answer my original question(s) (now emphasised in bold).

    Read the article

  • Can see samba shares but not access them

    - by nitefrog
    For the life of me I cannot figure this one out. I have samba installed and set up on the ubuntu box and on the Win7 box I CAN SEE all the shares I created. I created two users on ubuntu that map to the users in windows. On ubuntu they are both admins, user A & B on Windows User A is admin and user B is poweruser. User A can see both shares and access them, but user B can see everythin, but only access the homes directory, the other directory throws an error. I have two drives in Ubuntu and this is the smb.config file (I am new to samba): [global] workgroup = WORKGROUP server string = %h server (Samba, Ubuntu) wins support = no dns proxy = yes name resolve order = lmhosts host wins bcast log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m max log size = 1000 syslog = 0 panic action = /usr/share/samba/panic-action %d security = user encrypt passwords = true passdb backend = tdbsam obey pam restrictions = yes unix password sync = yes passwd program = /usr/bin/passwd %u passwd chat = *Enter\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *Retype\snew\s*\spassword:* %n\n *password\supdated\ssuccessfully* . pam password change = yes map to guest = bad user ; usershare max shares = 100 usershare allow guests = yes And here is the share section: Both user A & B can access this from windows. No problems. [homes] comment = Home Directories browseable = no writable = yes Both User A & B can see this share, but only user A can access it. User B get an error thrown. [stuff] comment = Unixmen File Server path = /media/data/appinstall/ browseable = yes ;writable = no read only = yes hosts allow = The permission for the media/data/appinstall/ is as follows: appInstall properties: share name: stuff Allow others to create and delete files in this folder is cheeked Guest access (for people without a user account) is checked permissions: Owner: user A Folder Access: Create and delete files File Access: --- Group: user A Folder Access: Create and delete files File Access: --- Others Folder Access: Create and delete files File Access: --- I am at a loss and need to get this work. Any ideas? The goal is to have a setup like this. 3 users on window machines. Each user on the data drive will have their own personal folder where they are the ones that can only access, then another folder where 2 of the users will have read only and one user full access. I had this setup before on windows, but after what happened I am NEVER going back to windows, so Unix here I am to stay! I am really stuck. I am running Ubuntu 11. I could reformat again and put on version 10 if that would make life easier. I have been dealing with this since Wed. 3pm. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to set up an rsync backup to Ubuntu securely?

    - by ws_e_c421
    I have been following various other tutorials and blog posts on setting up a Ubuntu machine as a backup "server" (I'll call it a server, but it's just running Ubuntu desktop) that I push new files to with rsync. Right now, I am able to connect to the server from my laptop using rsync and ssh with an RSA key that I created and no password prompt when my laptop is connected to my home router that the server is also connected to. I would like to be able to send files from my laptop when I am away from home. Some of the tutorials I have looked at had some brief suggestions about security, but they didn't focus on them. What do I need to do to let my laptop with send files to the server without making it too easy for someone else to hack into the server? Here is what I have done so far: Ran ssh-keygen and ssh-copy-id to create a key pair for my laptop and server. Created a script on the server to write its public ip address to a file, encrypt the file, and upload to an ftp server I have access to (I know I could sign up for a free dynamic DNS account for this part, but since I have the ftp account and don't really need to make the ip publicly accessible I thought this might be better). Here are the things I have seen suggested: Port forwarding: I know I need to assign the server a fixed ip address on the router and then tell the router to forward a port or ports to it. Should I just use port 22 or choose a random port and use that? Turn on the firewall (ufw). Will this do anything, or will my router already block everything except the port I want? Run fail2ban. Are all of those things worth doing? Should I do anything else? Could I set up the server to allow connections with the RSA key only (and not with a password), or will fail2ban provide enough protection against malicious connection attempts? Is it possible to limit the kinds of connections the server allows (e.g. only ssh)? I hope this isn't too many questions. I am pretty new to Ubuntu (but use the shell and bash scripts on OSX). I don't need to have the absolute most secure set up. I'd like something that is reasonably secure without being so complicated that it could easily break in a way that would be hard for me to fix.

    Read the article

  • SSL + Jquery + Ajax

    - by chobo2
    Hi I starting too look at a bit of security into my site. My site I would consider a very low security risk as it has really no personal information from the user other than email. However the security risk will go up a bit as I am partnering with a company and the initial password for this companies users will be the same password they use essentially to get onto the network and every piece of software. So I have up my security( what is fine by me...I wanted to get around to this anyways). So one of my security concerns is this. A user logs in. form submit(non ajax is done). Password is hashed & Salted and compared to one in the database. Reject or let them proceed. So this uses no jquery or ajax but is just asp.net mvc and C#. Still if my understanding is right the password is sent in clear text. So if a use SSL and I would not need to worry about that is this correct? If that is true is that all I need? Second the user can change their password at anytime. This is done through ajax. So when the password is sent it is sent in clear text( and I can verify this by looking at firebug). So if I have SSL enabled on this page is that all I need or do I need to do more? So I am just kinda confused of what I need to make the password being sent to the server(both ajax and full post ways secure). I am not sure if I need to do more then SSL or if that is enough and if it is not enough what is the next layer of security?

    Read the article

  • Upgraded AGPM Server cannot connect to relocated archive

    - by thommck
    We were using the Advanced Group Policy Management (AGPM) v3.0 on out Windows Server 2008 DC. It kept the archive on the C: drive. When we upgraded to AGPM v4 we relocated the archive to the D: drive. Now when we try to look at a GPO's hisory in GPMC we get the following error Failed to connect to the AGPM Server. The following error occurred: The server was unable to process the request due to an internal error. For more information about the error, either turn on IncludeExceptionDetailInFaults (either from ServiceBehaviorAttribute or from the configuration behavior) on the server in order to send the exception information back to the client, or turn on tracing as per the Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0 SDK documentation and inspect the server trace logs. System.ServiceModel.FaultException (80131501) You are able to click Retry or Cancel. Retry brings up the same error and Cancel takes you back to GPMC and the History tab displays "Archive not found". I installed the client on a Windows 7 computer (which is a n unsupported set up) and it could read the server archive without any issues. I followed the TechNet article "Move the AGPM Server and the Archive" but that didn't make a difference How can I tell the server where the archive is?

    Read the article

  • Where in the stack is Software Restriction Policies implemented?

    - by Knox
    I am a big fan of Software Restriction Policies for Microsoft Windows and was recently updating our settings for this. I became curious as to where Microsoft implemented this technology in the stack. I can imagine a very naive implementation being in Windows Explorer where when you double click on an exe or other blocked file type, that Explorer would check against the policy. I call this naive because obviously this wouldn't protect against someone typing something in a CMD window. Or worse, Adobe Reader running an external application. On the other hand, I can imagine that software restriction policies could be implemented deep in the stack almost at the metal. In this case, the low level loader would load into memory the questionable file, but mark the memory in the memory manager as non-executable data. I'm pretty sure that Microsoft did not do the most naive implementation, because if I block Java using a path block, Internet Explorer will crash if it attempts to load Java. Which is what I want. But I'm not sure how deep in the stack it's implemented and any insight would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Cisco ASA 5510 Time of Day Based Policing

    - by minamhere
    I have a Cisco ASA 5510 setup at a boarding school. I determined that many (most?) of the students were downloading files, watching movies, etc, during the day and this was causing the academic side of our network to suffer. The students should not even be in their rooms during the day, so I configured the ASA to police their network segment and limit their outbound bandwidth. This resolved all of our academic issues, and everyone was happy. Except the resident students. I have been asked to change/remove the policing policy at the end of the day, to allow the residents access to the unused bandwidth at night. There's no reason to let bandwidth sit unused at night just because it would be abused during the day. Is there a way to setup Time of Day based Policies on the ASA? Ideally I'd like to be able to open up the network at night and all day during weekends. If I can't set Time based policies, is is possible to schedule the ASA to load a set of commands at a specific time? I suppose I could just setup a scheduled task on one of our servers to log in and make the changes with a simple script, but this seems like a hack, and I'm hoping there is a better or more standard way to accomplish this. Thanks. Edit: If there is a totally different solution that would accomplish a similar goal, I'd be interested in that as well. Free/Cheap would be ideal, but if a separate internet connection is my only other option, it might be worth fighting for money for hardware or software to do this better or more efficiently.

    Read the article

  • Change default profile directory per group

    - by Joel Coel
    Is it possible to force windows to create profiles for members of one active directory group in a different folder from members in another active directory group? The school here uses DeepFreeze to protect public computers. In a nutshell, DeepFreeze prevents all changes to a hard drive such that every time you restart the machine the disk is identical to it was at the time you froze it. This is a bit different than restoring to an image, in that it never really wrote changes to disk in a permanent way in the first place. This has a few advantages over images: faster recover times, and it's easy to thaw the machine for a few minutes to perform maintenance such as windows updates (which can even be automated). DeepFreeze also allows you to configure a "thawspace" partition, where changes are persistent across reboots. One of the weaknesses of DeepFreeze is that you end up needing to create a new profile every time you log in, unless your profile existed at the time the machine was frozen. And even then, any changes you make to your profile while working on a frozen machine are lost. As students have frequent legitimate needs to log in to our classroom machines, there is currently a lot of cleanup involved from time to time in removing their old profiles and changes, so I want to extend DeepFreeze to protect our classroom computers as well as public computers. The problem is that faculty have a real need to keep a stateful profile locally on these classroom computers. The solution I would like to use is to configure Windows via group policy (or even manually, if that's the way I'll have to do it) to place profile folders on the thawspace partition, but only for members of the faculty security group. Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • How can I make WSUS less invasive for our users?

    - by Cypher
    We have WSUS pushing updates out to our user's workstations, and things are going relatively well with one annoying caveat: there seems to be an issue with a pop-up being displayed in front of some users informing them that their machine will be rebooted in 15 minutes, and they have nothing to say about it: This may be because they did not log out the prior night. Nevertheless, this is a bit too much and is very counter-productive for our users. Here is a bit about our environment: Our users are running Windows XP Pro and are part of an Active Directory Domain. WSUS is being applied via Group Policy. Here is a snapshot of the GPO that is enforcing the WSUS rules: Here is how I want WSUS to work (ideally - I'll take whatever can get me close): I want updates to automatically download and install every night. If a user is not logged in, I would like the machine to reboot. If a user is logged in, I would like their machine not to reboot, but instead wait until the next "installation period" where it can perform any other needed installations and reboot then (provided the a user account is not still logged in). If a user is to be prompted for reboot, it should only happen once per day (if possible), but every time they are prompted, they must have a way to postpone the reboot. I do not want users to be forced to restart their computer whenever the computer thinks it should happen (unless it's after an update installation and there are no logged in users). That doesn't seem productive to force a system restart in the midst of a person's workday. Is there something that I can do with the GPO that would help make WSUS less intrusive? Even if it gave the user an option to Restart Later - that would be better than what is happening now.

    Read the article

  • Single Sign On 802.1x Wireless - saying “Connecting to <SSID>”, hangs for 10 seconds, fails with “Unable to connect to <SSID>, Logging on…”.

    - by Phaedrus
    We are implementing WiFi on Windows 7 machines in our corporate environment. Machines should be able to log into the domain by WiFi as the Machine (Pre-Logon), and as the User (Post-Logon). We have everything working correctly except for 2 things: 1) Sometimes the login scripts don't run 2) The user VLAN is sometimes different than the machine vlan, and no DHCP renew occurs after user logon. I am clear that both these problems should be fixable by using the "Single Sign On" Option under the 802.1x Wireless Vista GPO, and setting the wireless to connect immediately before user logon and also by enabling "This network uses different VLAN for authentication with machine and user credentials" If I enable these GPO settings in a lab, the computer does authenticate & gets WIFI before the user logs on, so when the login box is displayed, it says “Windows will try to connect to ”, even though it is already connected (which should be ok?). Enter the user credentials and it goes to a screen saying “Connecting to ”, hangs for 10 seconds, fails with “Unable to connect to , Logging on…”. Desktop fires up and then the user re-authenticates with no problem as himself instead of the machine, but by that point, we defeat the point of the WiFi SSO “before user logon”. Also by that point, no DHCP renew seems to occur, and the user is still stuck with the wrong IP address for the new VLAN. When the “Connecting to ” screen comes up, there’s no indication on the AP or the Radius server that anything whatsoever is happening after credentials are entered until after the domain logon. Also with this policy enabled, sometimes windows hangs on a black screen indefinitely until I disable the Wireless NIC, so something is knackered for sure. What have I missed? Suggestions are much appreciated... /P

    Read the article

  • How to script GPO in Windows computers without Active Directory?

    - by Peteris Krumins
    Does anyone know how to script GPO for users in a Windows computer that is not on any Active Directory network? I can't use GPMC because it doesn't work without a domain. I have been searching the net for the last couple of hours and all the solutions that I find are related to GPMC. I'd imagine there are some objects in the GPO that are accessible via WMI? Does anyone know anything about that? I was unable to find any information about that. Here is the situation I am trying to script: I have 10 users on the machine, and I want to restrict what they are able to do on the machine. So I created 10 GPOs for each one of them. Now I want to apply a common policy to all of them. The only way to do it is to go through each of the GPO and do it manually. This is too time consuming, therefore I am seeking for a simpler solution. I was unable to find a way to copy GPO from a user to a user. That would make it much easier, I would create a GPO for 1st user, then copy it over to all the other users, but no luck, couldn't find a way to copy GPOs. The other method I tried was creating a GPO for the whole user group but it turns out you can't apply GPO to a group unless you use GPMC, which I can't cause the computer is not on any domain. So I am thinking about scripting this whole process, but again I can't find any examples of how to access particular GPO objects for particular users and modify properties through WMI. Any suggestions on the issue I am having? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Provide a user with service start/stop permissions

    - by slakr007
    I have a very basic domain that I use for development. I want to create a GPO that provides users in the Backup Operators group with start/stop permissions for two specific services on a specific server. I have read several articles about this, and they all indicate that this is very easy. Create a GPO, give the user start/stop permissions to the services under Computer Configuration Policies Windows Settings Security Settings System Services, and voila. Done. Not so much, but I have to be doing something wrong. My install is pretty much the default. The domain controller is in the Domain Controllers OU, the Backup Operators group is under Builtin, and I created a user called Backup under Users. I created a GPO and linked it to the Domain Controllers OU. In the GPO I give the Backup user permission to start/stop two specific services on the server. I forced an update with gpupdate. I used Group Policy Results to verify that my GPO is the winning GPO giving the user the permission to start/stop the two services. However, the user is still unable to start/stop the services. I attempted different loopback settings on the GPO to no avail. I'm sort of at a loss here.

    Read the article

  • apt-get update error after removing apt-key

    - by Caterpillar
    After Running apt-get update on ubuntu 10.04 server, I found this issue, Can any help me to solve this issue. Before this I had remove apt-key. Where can I get this apt-key to add it again. apt-get update Get:1 http://security.ubuntu.com lucid-security Release.gpg [198B] Ign http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-security/main Translation-en_IN Ign http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-security/restricted Translation-en_IN Get:2 http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid Release.gpg [189B] Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid/main Translation-en_IN Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid/restricted Translation-en_IN Ign http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-security/universe Translation-en_IN Ign http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-security/multiverse Translation-en_IN Get:3 http://security.ubuntu.com lucid-security Release [44.7kB] Err http://security.ubuntu.com lucid-security Release Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid/universe Translation-en_IN Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid/multiverse Translation-en_IN Get:4 http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid-updates Release.gpg [198B] Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-updates/main Translation-en_IN Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-updates/restricted Translation-en_IN Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-updates/universe Translation-en_IN Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid-updates/multiverse Translation-en_IN Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid Release Ign http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid Release Get:5 http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid-updates Release [44.7kB] Err http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid-updates Release Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid/main Packages Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid/restricted Packages Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid/main Sources Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid/restricted Sources Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid/universe Packages Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid/universe Sources Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid/multiverse Packages Hit http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid/multiverse Sources Fetched 587B in 1s (465B/s) Reading package lists... Done W: A error occurred during the signature verification. The repository is not updated and the previous index files will be used.GPG error: http://security.ubuntu.com lucid-security Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 40976EAF437D05B5 W: GPG error: http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 40976EAF437D05B5 W: A error occurred during the signature verification. The repository is not updated and the previous index files will be used.GPG error: http://in.archive.ubuntu.com lucid-updates Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 40976EAF437D05B5 W: Failed to fetch http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/lucid-security/Release W: Failed to fetch http://in.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/lucid-updates/Release W: Some index files failed to download, they have been ignored, or old ones used instead.

    Read the article

  • SSL security error

    - by shah
    What would the reason of getting the following error? Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server error '80004005' [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (SECDoClientHandshake()).]SSL Security error.

    Read the article

  • http, https and ftp is not working but smtp and imap is working

    - by Unicron
    hi all, yesterday on a computer of a friend a strange thing happened. after booting the ports fo http, https and ftp are closed but e-mail is still working. in the control panel the windows firewall seems active even if he tries to deactivate it. i have a suspision that it is the faul of norton internet security 2010, we have tried to uninstall it, but the uninstallation did not work. when using the removal tool from symantec it just goes to 23% and then it crashes. the process ccSvcHst.exe is still running. how can i safeley remove the rest of norton internet security? thanks in advance [edit] norton internet security 2010 is sucesfully removed, but still no connectivity

    Read the article

  • McAfee Security Scan appears out of thin air

    - by Jacques
    Hi, We have a Windows Server 2008 Standard edition server and when we logged in today a service, McAfee Security Scan, had been installed. I checked all the logs, but can't find any trace of who or how this install was initiated. We already use Nod32 so there would be no reason for us to install McAfee. Any idea how this happens? I did look for other installs like Flash or the like, but didn't see anything. Thanks Jacques

    Read the article

  • Which smartphone OS would you choose for your users ?

    - by Florent
    While we currently only use windows mobile smartphone, my boss seems less and less reluctant to try and choose a new kind of OS for our users corporate phones. For some reasons, we can't use a Blackberry Enterprise Server, so i guess our only choice is between Iphone OS and Android (or Blackberry without BES ? I don't really know if this works fine) We need activesync capable smartphones of course, and activesync security policies must be available (pin when using your phone for example). Centralized Phone management would be nice too :D Any ideas on what should be the best smartphone to choose for our users ?

    Read the article

  • Cannont add service account to domain group during sql cluster install

    - by Sam
    I'm installing a 2008 instance on a 2003 machine which is already running 2005. I need to set up domain groups for the security setup step: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179530.aspx On Windows Server 2003, specify domain groups for SQL Server services. All resource permissions are controlled by domain-level groups that include SQL Server service accounts as group members. Much more info on this here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/910708 I've had problems with being able to add the windows service accounts to the groups at install time. The security admins had to make my account a domain admin - which they were hesitant to do. The account under which SQL Server Setup is running must have permissions to add accounts to the domain groups. Is there a specific security setting which would allow my account to add accounts to a group?

    Read the article

  • Security System Preference won't open on Macos 10.6 Snow Leopard

    - by adambox
    When I try to open the Security preference pane on my iMac running Mac OS 10.6.6, it says "loading..." and it never opens. I get this in the console: 3/5/11 4:16:56 PM System Preferences[724] Could not connect the action resetLocationWarningsSheetOk: to target of class AppleSecurity_Pref 3/5/11 4:16:56 PM System Preferences[724] Could not connect the action resetLocationWarningsSheetCancel: to target of class AppleSecurity_Pref 3/5/11 4:16:56 PM System Preferences[724] *** -[NSCFDictionary initWithObjects:forKeys:count:]: attempt to insert nil value at objects[0] (key: NSFont)

    Read the article

  • Secure Server Distro

    - by Drama
    Hello, I have a root-server (i7/24GB/1TB) running Ubuntu 10.04 LTS as my OS. After some security audits (OpenVAS, Retina etc) I see that Ubuntu isn't the most secure system for a semi-corporate environment. Its updated from many sources, ofc from the Ubuntu security repo too. But nevertheless I could exploit my OpenSSL install with an exploit from August/September. There are some critical updates needed which Ubuntu does not provide. I was using Debian and Ubuntu for almost 5 years but now I doubt. What distro is secure and up to date from your point of view? How can I make the server more secure? Outsourcing of every software-module to a VM? I am not new to server-hardening, my packages are up to date I read Ubuntu Security Notices and I have no unneeded services installed on my server. Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89  | Next Page >