Search Results

Search found 6525 results on 261 pages for 'restful authentication'.

Page 9/261 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • Nginx ignores HTTP Authentication for WordPress login directory

    - by MrNerdy
    I am running WordPress in a subfolder of my domain for testing and development purposes on a VPS LEMP-stack. In order to password-protect the wp-login.php with an etxra layer, I used HTTP authentication for the wp-admin folder. The problem is that the http authentication is ignored. When the wp-login.php or wp-admin-folder is called, it goes directly to the normal WordPress-login. I installed everything from the command line in the following way: sudo apt-get install apache2-utils sudo htpasswd -c /var/www/bitmall/wp-admin/.htpasswd exampleuser New password: Re-type new password: Adding password for user exampleuser My Nginx configuration file looks like this: server { listen 80; root /var/www; index index.php index.html index.htm; server_name example.com; location / { try_files $uri $uri/ /index.html; } location /bitmall/wp-admin/ { auth_basic "Restricted Section"; auth_basic_user_file /var/www/bitmall/wp-admin/.htpasswd; } location ~ /\.ht { deny all; } error_page 404 /404.html; error_page 500 502 503 504 /50x.html; location = /50x.html { root /var/www; } # pass the PHP scripts to FastCGI server listening on 127.0.0.1:9000 location ~ \.php$ { try_files $uri =404; fastcgi_pass unix:/var/run/php5-fpm.sock; fastcgi_index index.php; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME $document_root$fastcgi_script_name; include fastcgi_params; } } I would appreciate your advive on this.

    Read the article

  • Apache mod_auth_kerb asking 2 authentication

    - by Rianto Wahyudi
    I've configured Apache to use mod_auth_kerberos. So far everything is working nicely for client thats connected to Active Directory and have their browser to ntlm enabled. When clients are not in the domain or the browser configurerd not to authenticate automatically, they are being prompted by 2 login prompt. The first login prompt is blank and the second one is the oen that we configured First Login prompt: http://www.screencast.com/t/ZGNlZTQwZm Second Login prompt : http://www.screencast.com/t/MDA2N2Fl From the log ( first authentication) : [Wed Jan 06 15:47:29 2010] [debug] src/mod_auth_kerb.c(1684): [client x.x.x.x] [pid 2562] kerb_authenticate_user entered with user (NULL) and auth_type Kerberos In the first loging prompt , I can put any text for username and password. Once the first login form submited, it will ask for the 2nd login prompt. Apache have following config : <Directory /web/apache2/htdocs> AllowOverride All AuthType Kerberos AuthName "Staff Access ONLY Kerb-Auth" KrbAuthRealms EXAMPLE.COM Krb5Keytab /etc/httpd/conf.d/example.ktab Allow from localhost Require valid-user <Directory> What could be the cause of the first authentication and how can I get rid of them ?

    Read the article

  • apache authentication

    - by veilig
    I'm trying to set up a local webserver on my network. I want to be able to be able to access the webserver from any machine inside my network w/out authenticating. and two extra domains need access to it w/out authenticating. Everyone else I would like to authenticate in. so far, I can get to it from inside my network. and the two extra domains can access my webserver, but everyone else is just hanging. They don't get an authentication or anything. can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong here? This is part of my apache's site-available file so far: <Directory /path/to/server/> Options Indexes FollowSymLinks -Multiviews Order Deny,Allow Deny from All Allow from 192.168 Allow from localhost Allow from domain1 Allow from domain2 AuthType Basic AuthName "my authentication" AuthUserFile /path/to/file Require valid-user Satisfy Any AllowOverride All <Files .htaccess> Order Allow,Deny Allow from All </Files> </Directory>

    Read the article

  • Central Authentication For Windows, Linux, Network Devices

    - by mojah
    I'm trying to find a way to centralize user management & authentication for a large collection of Windows & Linux Servers, including network devices (Cisco, HP, Juniper). Options include RADIUS/LDAP/TACACS/... Idea is to keep track with staff changes, and access towards these devices. Preferably a system that is compatible with both Linux, Windows & those network devices. Seems like Windows is the most stubborn of them all, for Linux & Network equipment it's easier to implement a solution (using PAM.D for instance). Should we look for an Active Directory/Domain Controller solution for Windows? Fun sidenote; we also manage client systems, that are often already in a domain. Trust-relationships between Domain Controllers isn't always an option for us (due to client security restrictions). I'd love to hear fresh ideas on how to implement such a centralized authentication "portal" for those systems.

    Read the article

  • The Story of secure user-authentication in squid

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry if the story is boring and messy, but most of it is real! =) /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry for this boring and messy story! /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • secure user-authentication in squid: The Story

    - by Isaac
    once upon a time, there was a beautiful warm virtual-jungle in south america, and a squid server lived there. here is an perceptual image of the network: <the Internet> | | A | B Users <---------> [squid-Server] <---> [LDAP-Server] When the Users request access to the Internet, squid ask their name and passport, authenticate them by LDAP and if ldap approved them, then he granted them. Everyone was happy until some sniffers stole passport in path between users and squid [path A]. This disaster happened because squid used Basic-Authentication method. The people of jungle gathered to solve the problem. Some bunnies offered using NTLM of method. Snakes prefered Digest-Authentication while Kerberos recommended by trees. After all, many solution offered by people of jungle and all was confused! The Lion decided to end the situation. He shouted the rules for solutions: Shall the solution be secure! Shall the solution work for most of browsers and softwares (e.g. download softwares) Shall the solution be simple and do not need other huge subsystem (like Samba server) Shall not the method depend on special domain. (e.g. Active Directory) Then, a very resonable-comprehensive-clever solution offered by a monkey, making him the new king of the jungle! can you guess what was the solution? Tip: The path between squid and LDAP is protected by the lion, so the solution have not to secure it. Note: sorry for this boring and messy story! /~\/~\/~\ /\~/~\/~\/~\/~\ ((/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\)) (/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\/~\) (//// ~ ~ \\\\) (\\\\( (0) (0) )////) (\\\\( __\-/__ )////) (\\\( /-\ )///) (\\\( (""""") )///) (\\\( \^^^/ )///) (\\\( )///) (\/~\/~\/~\/) ** (\/~\/~\/) *####* | | **** /| | | |\ \\ _/ | | | | \_ _________// Thanks! (,,)(,,)_(,,)(,,)--------'

    Read the article

  • Unable to find valid certification path to requested target while CAS authentication

    - by Dmitriy Sukharev
    I'm trying to configure CAS authentication. It requires both CAS and client application to use HTTPS protocol. Unfortunately we should use self-signed certificate (with CN that doesn't have anything in common with our server). Also the server is behind firewall and we have only two ports (ssh and https) visible. As far as there're several application that should be visible externally, we use Apache for ajp reverse proxying requests to these applications. Secure connections are managed by Apache, and all Tomcat are not configured to work with SSL. But I obtained exception while authentication, therefore desided to set keystore in CATALINA_OPTS: export CATALINA_OPTS="-Djavax.net.ssl.keyStore=/path/to/tomcat/ssl/cert.pfx -Djavax.net.ssl.keyStoreType=PKCS12 -Djavax.net.ssl.keyStorePassword=password -Djavax.net.ssl.keyAlias=alias -Djavax.net.debug=ssl" cert.pfx was obtained from certificate and key that are used by Apache HTTP Server: $ openssl pkcs12 -export -out /path/to/tomcat/ssl/cert.pfx -inkey /path/to/apache2/ssl/server-key.pem -in /path/to/apache2/ssl/server-cert.pem When I try to authenticate a user I obtain the following exception: Caused by: sun.security.provider.certpath.SunCertPathBuilderException: unable to find valid certification path to requested target at sun.security.provider.certpath.SunCertPathBuilder.engineBuild(SunCertPathBuilder.java:174) ~[na:1.6.0_32] at java.security.cert.CertPathBuilder.build(CertPathBuilder.java:238) ~[na:1.6.0_32] at sun.security.validator.PKIXValidator.doBuild(PKIXValidator.java:318) ~[na:1.6.0_32] Meanwhile I can see in catalina.out that Tomcat see certificate in cert.pfx and it's the same as the one that is used while authentication: 09:11:38.886 [http-bio-8080-exec-2] DEBUG o.j.c.c.v.Cas20ProxyTicketValidator - Constructing validation url: https://external-ip/cas/proxyValidate?pgtUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-ip%2Fclient%2Fj_spring_cas_security_proxyreceptor&ticket=ST-17-PN26WtdsZqNmpUBS59RC-cas&service=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-ip%2Fclient%2Fj_spring_cas_security_check 09:11:38.886 [http-bio-8080-exec-2] DEBUG o.j.c.c.v.Cas20ProxyTicketValidator - Retrieving response from server. keyStore is : /path/to/tomcat/ssl/cert.pfx keyStore type is : PKCS12 keyStore provider is : init keystore init keymanager of type SunX509 *** found key for : 1 chain [0] = [ [ Version: V1 Subject: CN=wrong.domain.name, O=Our organization, L=Location, ST=State, C=Country Signature Algorithm: SHA1withRSA, OID = 1.2.840.113549.1.1.5 Key: Sun RSA public key, 1024 bits modulus: 13??a lot of digits here??19 public exponent: ????7 Validity: [From: Tue Apr 24 16:32:18 CEST 2012, To: Wed Apr 24 16:32:18 CEST 2013] Issuer: CN=wrong.domain.name, O=Our organization, L=Location, ST=State, C=Country SerialNumber: [ d??????? ????????] ] Algorithm: [SHA1withRSA] Signature: 0000: 65 Signature is here 0070: 96 . ] *** trustStore is: /jdk-home-folder/jre/lib/security/cacerts Here is a lot of trusted CAs. Here is nothing related to our certicate or our (not trusted) CA. ... 09:11:39.731 [http-bio-8080-exec-4] DEBUG o.j.c.c.v.Cas20ProxyTicketValidator - Retrieving response from server. Allow unsafe renegotiation: false Allow legacy hello messages: true Is initial handshake: true Is secure renegotiation: false %% No cached client session *** ClientHello, TLSv1 RandomCookie: GMT: 1347433643 bytes = { 63, 239, 180, 32, 103, 140, 83, 7, 109, 149, 177, 80, 223, 79, 243, 244, 60, 191, 124, 139, 108, 5, 122, 238, 146, 1, 54, 218 } Session ID: {} Cipher Suites: [SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_MD5, SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA, TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA, TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA, TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA, SSL_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA, SSL_DHE_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA, SSL_DHE_DSS_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA, SSL_RSA_WITH_DES_CBC_SHA, SSL_DHE_RSA_WITH_DES_CBC_SHA, SSL_DHE_DSS_WITH_DES_CBC_SHA, SSL_RSA_EXPORT_WITH_RC4_40_MD5, SSL_RSA_EXPORT_WITH_DES40_CBC_SHA, SSL_DHE_RSA_EXPORT_WITH_DES40_CBC_SHA, SSL_DHE_DSS_EXPORT_WITH_DES40_CBC_SHA, TLS_EMPTY_RENEGOTIATION_INFO_SCSV] Compression Methods: { 0 } *** http-bio-8080-exec-4, WRITE: TLSv1 Handshake, length = 75 http-bio-8080-exec-4, WRITE: SSLv2 client hello message, length = 101 http-bio-8080-exec-4, READ: TLSv1 Handshake, length = 81 *** ServerHello, TLSv1 RandomCookie: GMT: 1347433643 bytes = { 145, 237, 232, 63, 240, 104, 234, 201, 148, 235, 12, 222, 60, 75, 174, 0, 103, 38, 196, 181, 27, 226, 243, 61, 34, 7, 107, 72 } Session ID: {79, 202, 117, 79, 130, 216, 168, 38, 68, 29, 182, 82, 16, 25, 251, 66, 93, 108, 49, 133, 92, 108, 198, 23, 120, 120, 135, 151, 15, 13, 199, 87} Cipher Suite: SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA Compression Method: 0 Extension renegotiation_info, renegotiated_connection: <empty> *** %% Created: [Session-2, SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA] ** SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA http-bio-8080-exec-4, READ: TLSv1 Handshake, length = 609 *** Certificate chain chain [0] = [ [ Version: V1 Subject: CN=wrong.domain.name, O=Our organization, L=Location, ST=State, C=Country Signature Algorithm: SHA1withRSA, OID = 1.2.840.113549.1.1.5 Key: Sun RSA public key, 1024 bits modulus: 13??a lot of digits here??19 public exponent: ????7 Validity: [From: Tue Apr 24 16:32:18 CEST 2012, To: Wed Apr 24 16:32:18 CEST 2013] Issuer: CN=wrong.domain.name, O=Our organization, L=Location, ST=State, C=Country SerialNumber: [ d??????? ????????] ] Algorithm: [SHA1withRSA] Signature: 0000: 65 Signature is here 0070: 96 . ] *** http-bio-8080-exec-4, SEND TLSv1 ALERT: fatal, description = certificate_unknown http-bio-8080-exec-4, WRITE: TLSv1 Alert, length = 2 http-bio-8080-exec-4, called closeSocket() http-bio-8080-exec-4, handling exception: javax.net.ssl.SSLHandshakeException: sun.security.validator.ValidatorException: PKIX path building failed: sun.security.provider.certpath.SunCertPathBuilderException: unable to find valid certification path to requested target I tried to convert our pem certificate to der format and imported it to trustedKeyStore (cacerts) (without private key), but it didn't change anything. But I'm not confident that I did it rigth. Also I must inform you that I don't know passphrase for our servier-key.pem file, and probably it differs from password for keystore created by me. OS: CentOS 6.2 Architecture: x64 Tomcat version: 7 Apache HTTP Server version: 2.4 Is there any way to make Tomcat accepts our certificate?

    Read the article

  • O&rsquo;Reilly Deal of the Day 14/Aug/2014 - RESTful Web APIs

    - by TATWORTH
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/TATWORTH/archive/2014/08/14/orsquoreilly-deal-of-the-day-14aug2014---restful-web-apis.aspxToday’s half-price Deal of the Day from O’Reilly at http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920028468.do?code=DEAL is RESTful Web APIs. “The popularity of REST in recent years has led to tremendous growth in almost-RESTful APIs that don’t include many of the architecture’s benefits. With this practical guide, you’ll learn what it takes to design usable REST APIs that evolve over time. By focusing on solutions that cross a variety of domains, this book shows you how to create powerful and secure applications, using the tools designed for the world’s most successful distributed computing system: the World Wide Web.”

    Read the article

  • Certificate Authentication

    - by steve.mccall1
    Hi, I am currently working on deploying a website for staff to use remotely and would like to make sure it is secure. I was thinking would it be possible to set up some kind of certificate authentication where I would generate a certificate and install it on their laptop so they could access the website? I don't really want them to generate the certificates themselves though as that could easily go wrong. How easy / possible is this and how do I go about doing it? Thanks, Steve

    Read the article

  • basic http authentication

    - by user881480
    I am using apache's basic http authentication to control access, however, I only want to control one level of directory access, meaning, I only want directory a to be authenticated, but not a's children(eg. a/b), is this possible? <Location /a/> Options -Indexes Order Deny,Allow Allow from all AuthType Basic AuthName "Members Only" AuthUserFile /home/xxxx/.htpasswd require valid-user </Location>

    Read the article

  • Integrated Windows Authentication not working in IE only

    - by CoreyT
    In my site I have one folder that does not allow anonymous access. It is set up to use Integrated Windows Authentication as it is on an AD domain. The login works fine in Firefox, Chrome, even Safari, but not IE8. Has anyone encountered this before? I can't seem to find anyone else with a similar issue, except for where the login fails in all browsers of course.

    Read the article

  • ssh authentication with public-private key pair

    - by Rui Gonçalves
    Hi! I'm wonder if is possible to authenticate the same user with different public-private keys pairs on the same remote host. For all production servers, the public-private key pair has been generated for the same user and then exported to the backup server for allowing ssh authentication without human intervention. However, I'm having problems on some production servers, once the password prompt is always displayed. Thanks in advance for the help, Best regards!

    Read the article

  • How to: SSH private key authentication on OS X

    - by dan
    Hi, I need to ssh into a linux box. The server admin gave me a public and private ssh key. When I'm trying to login with the private key the login times out ("Operation timed out"). I'm using this command to login: ssh -v -i /path/to/private_key host What would be the right way to login? Do I need the public key for authentication? Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Firefox password manager - multiple logins for HTTP authentication

    - by pbarney
    When you're prompted to login to a site using HTTP authentication (the kind with the pop-up box requesting username/password), Firefox's password manager populates it with only the first stored password for that domain. Is there a way to have Firefox prompt for WHICH account should be used? It is unlike the normal HTML login forms in which you can just press the down arrow to select from multiple login accounts.

    Read the article

  • Nginx - basic http authentication on PHP-script

    - by half_bit
    I added a PHP-Script that serves as "cgi-bin", Configuration: location ~^/cgi-bin/.*\.(cgi|pl|py|rb) { gzip off; fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; fastcgi_index cgi-bin.php; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME /etc/nginx/cgi-bin.php; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_NAME /cgi-bin/cgi-bin.php; fastcgi_param X_SCRIPT_FILENAME /usr/lib/$fastcgi_script_name; fastcgi_param X_SCRIPT_NAME $fastcgi_script_name; fastcgi_param QUERY_STRING $query_string; fastcgi_param REQUEST_METHOD $request_method; fastcgi_param CONTENT_TYPE $content_type; fastcgi_param CONTENT_LENGTH $content_length; fastcgi_param GATEWAY_INTERFACE CGI/1.1; fastcgi_param SERVER_SOFTWARE nginx; fastcgi_param REQUEST_URI $request_uri; fastcgi_param DOCUMENT_URI $document_uri; fastcgi_param DOCUMENT_ROOT $document_root; fastcgi_param SERVER_PROTOCOL $server_protocol; fastcgi_param REMOTE_ADDR $remote_addr; fastcgi_param REMOTE_PORT $remote_port; fastcgi_param SERVER_ADDR $server_addr; fastcgi_param SERVER_PORT $server_port; fastcgi_param SERVER_NAME $server_name; fastcgi_param REMOTE_USER $remote_user; } PHP-Script: <?php $descriptorspec = array( 0 => array("pipe", "r"), // stdin is a pipe that the child will read from 1 => array("pipe", "w"), // stdout is a pipe that the child will write to 2 => array("pipe", "w") // stderr is a file to write to ); $newenv = $_SERVER; $newenv["SCRIPT_FILENAME"] = $_SERVER["X_SCRIPT_FILENAME"]; $newenv["SCRIPT_NAME"] = $_SERVER["X_SCRIPT_NAME"]; if (is_executable($_SERVER["X_SCRIPT_FILENAME"])) { $process = proc_open($_SERVER["X_SCRIPT_FILENAME"], $descriptorspec, $pipes, NULL, $newenv); if (is_resource($process)) { fclose($pipes[0]); $head = fgets($pipes[1]); while (strcmp($head, "\n")) { header($head); $head = fgets($pipes[1]); } fpassthru($pipes[1]); fclose($pipes[1]); fclose($pipes[2]); $return_value = proc_close($process); } else { header("Status: 500 Internal Server Error"); echo("Internal Server Error"); } } else { header("Status: 404 Page Not Found"); echo("Page Not Found"); } ?> The problem with it thought is that I cannot add basic authentication. As soon as I enable it for location ~/cgi-bin it gives me a 404 error when I try to look it up. How can I solve this? I thought about restricting access to only my second server where I then add basic authentication over a proxy, but there must be a simpler solution. Sorry for the bad title, I couldn't think of a better one.

    Read the article

  • Two way SSH authentication

    - by Saif Bechan
    I have installed ASL and it recommends me that I implement a two way SSH authentication. I have some questions about it. I understand the general idea that you need to login with both a key and a password. I am working from a laptop, what will happen if my laptop get's stolen. Will I never be able to login again??

    Read the article

  • Windows authentication skip for one folder and allow local domain's user

    - by Developer
    I have intranet application with windows authentication on it. Annonymous users are not allowed. Now i am trying to add one subfolder which should be allowed to local domain users too. I enabled "annonymous access" iis on that subfolder and that worked. but i am using AJAX(timer control) on one of page of that subfolder and when timer_ticks it gives "sys is undefined error". any idea to solve this issue? Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Certificate Authentication

    - by Steve McCall
    I am currently working on deploying a website for staff to use remotely and would like to make sure it is secure. I was thinking would it be possible to set up some kind of certificate authentication where I would generate a certificate and install it on their laptop so they could access the website? I don't really want them to generate the certificates themselves though as that could easily go wrong. How easy / possible is this and how do I go about doing it?

    Read the article

  • Why is my WCF Rest Service on IIS7 Authenticating TWICE!?!?

    - by TheAggie
    Ok, if someone could shed some light on this for me, I would greatly appreciate it. So here we go. I had a rest service running fine the other day but after I accidentally overwrote the web.config all hell broke loose. I've spent the past day and a half trying to sort things out but I can't seem to figure out what is missing or misplaced. So, I've designed this service around WCF Rest Contrib (http://wcfrestcontrib.codeplex.com)'s authentication process. Now, I can get this working fine on my localhost w/ the current web.config (minus the endpoint entry) but once I upload it to discountasp and select "basic authorization" in the ISS7 Manager, it appears that I'm getting authenticated twice! Once using my discount asp.net user/pass and then the next time using the application user/pass. Unfortunately I only provide one set of credentials and don't want to hard code my discountasp account info into the app. Like I said before, this worked fine a few days ago. Anyway. here is my web.config as it is now: <?xml version="1.0"?> <configuration> <connectionStrings> <add name="SQL2008_ConnectionString" connectionString="Data Source=sql2k8xx.discountasp.net;Initial Catalog=SQL2008_xx;Persist Security Info=True;User ID=SQL2008_xx_user;Password=myPass" providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" /> </connectionStrings> <system.web> <httpRuntime maxRequestLength="204800" executionTimeout="3600"/> <compilation debug="true"> <assemblies> <add assembly="System.Core, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089"/> <add assembly="System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> </assemblies> </compilation> <httpModules> <add name="ServiceAnonymityModule" type="WcfRestContrib.Web.ServiceAnonymityModule, WcfRestContrib"/> </httpModules> </system.web> <system.codedom> <compilers> <compiler language="c#;cs;csharp" extension=".cs" warningLevel="4" type="Microsoft.CSharp.CSharpCodeProvider, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <providerOption name="CompilerVersion" value="v3.5"/> <providerOption name="WarnAsError" value="false"/> </compiler> </compilers> </system.codedom> <system.webServer> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false"/> <modules> <remove name="ServiceAnonymityModule"/> <add name="ServiceAnonymityModule" type="WcfRestContrib.Web.ServiceAnonymityModule, WcfRestContrib"/> </modules> <handlers> <remove name="WebServiceHandlerFactory-Integrated"/> </handlers> </system.webServer> <system.diagnostics> <trace autoflush="true" /> </system.diagnostics> <system.serviceModel> <serviceHostingEnvironment aspNetCompatibilityEnabled="false"> <baseAddressPrefixFilters> <add prefix="http://www.mydomain.com/myServiceBaseAddress"/> </baseAddressPrefixFilters> </serviceHostingEnvironment> <extensions> <behaviorExtensions> <add name="webAuthentication" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Configuration.WebAuthentication.ConfigurationBehaviorElement, WcfRestContrib, Version=1.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89183999a8dc93b5"/> <add name="errorHandler" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Configuration.ErrorHandler.BehaviorElement, WcfRestContrib, Version=1.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89183999a8dc93b5"/> <add name="webFormatter" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Configuration.WebDispatchFormatter.ConfigurationBehaviorElement, WcfRestContrib, Version=1.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89183999a8dc93b5"/> <add name="webErrorHandler" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Configuration.WebErrorHandler.ConfigurationBehaviorElement, WcfRestContrib, Version=1.0.5.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89183999a8dc93b5"/> </behaviorExtensions> </extensions> <bindings> <customBinding> <binding name="HttpStreamedRest"> <httpTransport maxReceivedMessageSize="209715200" manualAddressing="true" /> </binding> <binding name="HttpsStreamedRest"> <httpsTransport maxReceivedMessageSize="209715200" manualAddressing="true" /> </binding> </customBinding> </bindings> <behaviors> <serviceBehaviors> <behavior name="Rest"> <webAuthentication requireSecureTransport="false" authenticationHandlerType="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.WebBasicAuthenticationHandler, WcfRestContrib" usernamePasswordValidatorType="MyLibrary.Runtime.SecurityValidator, MyLibrary" source="MyRESTServiceRealm"/> <webFormatter> <formatters defaultMimeType="application/xml"> <formatter mimeTypes="application/xml,text/xml" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.Formatters.PoxDataContract, WcfRestContrib"/> <formatter mimeTypes="application/json" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.Formatters.DataContractJson, WcfRestContrib"/> <formatter mimeTypes="application/x-www-form-urlencoded" type="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.Formatters.FormUrlEncoded, WcfRestContrib"/> </formatters> </webFormatter> <errorHandler errorHandlerType="WcfRestContrib.ServiceModel.Web.WebErrorHandler, WcfRestContrib"/> <webErrorHandler returnRawException="true" logHandlerType="MyLibrary.Runtime.LogHandler, MyLibrary" unhandledErrorMessage="An error has occured processing your request. Please contact technical support for further assistance."/> </behavior> </serviceBehaviors> </behaviors> </system.serviceModel> </configuration> So, whenever I upload this and change the ISS setting to Basic Authentication, it looks like it is trying to use the default handler for authentication as if I try to enter my web app user/pass, I get an error screen which has the following detailed information about the moduel/handler Detailed Error Information Module: IIS Web Core Notification: AuthenticateRequest Handler: svc-ISAPI-2.0 Error Code: 0x80070005 Requested URL: http://www.mydomain.com:80/MyService.../MyService.svc Physical Path: E:\web\xxxxxx\htdocs\MyServiceBaseAddress\MyService.svc Logon Method: Not yet determined Logon User: Not yet determined Now for the fun stuff... i tried providing my discountasp.net account username/password for kicks and sure enough it responded properly for any [OperationContract] which doesn't have [OperationAuthentication] defined (which is only one or two of the operations I have). I thought this was strange, so I looked at fiddler and saw something interesting. Whenever I try request a procedure with [OperationAuthentication] defined and provide my discountasp.net username/pass I get two different "WWW-Authenticate" headers back in Fiddler: WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="MyRESTServiceRealm" WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="www.mydomain.com" On the other hand, if I try to access the same procedures with only my application's user/pass, I only get the site's header: WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm="www.mydomain.com" My hypothesis is that for some reason I'm having to pass through the default "Basic Authorization" layer set by IIS before I can get to the application's "Custom Basic Authorization" layer. After verifying this by created an identical user/pass for my service that I use for my discountasp.net account, I was able to successfully pass both layers of authentication without any issues... so I think I can conclude that this is indeed the issue. Now how do I disable the default one? Do I need to do this in the IIS Manager, or in the web.config? Anyway, I have absolutely no idea how this is possible or what I need to do to resolve the issue, but I know that something is seriously out of whack. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there any real benefit to using ASP.Net Authentication with ASP.Net MVC?

    - by alchemical
    I've been researching this intensely for the past few days. We're developing an ASP.Net MVC site that needs to support 100,000+ users. We'd like to keep it fast, scalable, and simple. We have our own SQL database tables for user and user_role, etc. We are not using server controls. Given that there are no server controls, and a custom membershipProvider would need to be created, where is there any benefit left to use ASP.Net Auth/Membership? The other alternative would seem to be to create custom code to drop a UniqueID CustomerID in a cookie and authenticate with that. Or, if we're paranoid about sniffers, we could encrypt the cookie as well. Is there any real benefit in this scenario (MVC and customer data is in our own tables) to using the ASP.Net auth/membership framework, or is the fully custom solution a viable route?

    Read the article

  • Trying to use Digest Authentication for Folder Protection

    - by Jon Hazlett
    StackOverflow users suggested I try my question here. I'm using Server 2008 EE and IIS 7. I've got a site that I've migrated over from XP Pro using IIS 5. On the old system, I was using IIS Password to use simple .htaccess files to control a couple of folders that I didn't want to be publicly viewable. Now that I'm running a full-blown DC with a more powerful version of IIS, I decided it'd be a good idea to start using something slightly more sophisticated. After doing my research and trying to keep things as cheap as possible with a touch of extra security, I decided that Digest Authentication would be the best way to go. My issue is this: With Anon access disabled and Digest enabled, I am never prompted for credentials. when on the server, viewing domain[dot]com/example will simply show my 401.htm page without prompting me for credentials. when on a different network/computer, viewing domain[dot]com/example again shows my 401.htm without prompting for credentials. At the site level I only have Anon enabled. Every subfolder, unless I want it protected, has just Anon enabled. Only the folders I want protected have Anon disabled and Digest enabled. I have tried editing the bindings to see if that would spark any kind of change... www.domain.com, domain.com, and localhost have all been tried. There was never a change in behavior at any permutation (aside from the page not being found when I un-bound localhost to the site). I might have screwed up when I deleted the default site from IIS. I didn't think I'd actually need it for anything, but some of what I have read online is telling me otherwise now. As for Digest settings, I have it pointed to local.domain.com, which is the name assigned to my AD Domain. I'm guessing that's right, but honestly have no clue about what a realm actually is. Would it matter that I have an A record for local.domain.com pointing to my IP address? I had problems initially with an absolute link for 401.htm pages, but have since resolved that. Instead of D:\HTTP\401.htm I've used /401.htm and all is well. I used to get error 500's because it couldn't find the custom 401.htm file, but now it loads just fine. As for some data, I was getting entries like this from access logs: 2009-07-10 17:34:12 10.0.0.10 GET /example/ - 80 - [workip] Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+7.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+.NET+CLR+1.1.4322;+.NET+CLR+2.0.50727;+InfoPath.2) 401 2 5 132 But after correcting my 401.htm links now get logs like this: 2009-07-10 18:56:25 10.0.0.10 GET /example - 80 - [workip] Mozilla/5.0+(Windows;+U;+Windows+NT+5.1;+en-US;+rv:1.9.0.11)+Gecko/2009060215+Firefox/3.0.11 200 0 0 146 I don't know if that means anything or not. I still don't get any credential challenges, regardless of where I try to sign in from ( my workstation, my server, my cellphone even ). The only thing that's seemed to work is viewing localhost and I donno what could be preventing authentication from finding it's way out of the server. Thanks for any help! Jon

    Read the article

  • All client browsers repeatedly asking for NTLM authentication when running through local proxy server

    - by Marko
    All client browsers repeatedly asking for NTLM authentication when running through local proxy server. When pointing browsers through the local proxy to the internet, some but not all clients are being repeatedley prompted to authenticate to the proxy server. I have inspected the headers using firefox live headers as well as fiddler, and in all cases the authentication prompts happen when requesting SSL resources. an example of this would be as follows: GET http://gmail.google.com/mail/ HTTP/1.1 Accept: image/gif, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-shockwave- flash, application/x-ms-application, application/x-ms-xbap, application/vnd.ms- xpsdocument, application/xaml+xml, */* Accept-Language: en-gb User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729) Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive Host: gmail.google.com GET http://gmail.google.com/mail/ HTTP/1.1 Accept: image/gif, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-shockwave- flash, application/x-ms-application, application/x-ms-xbap, application/vnd.ms- xpsdocument, application/xaml+xml, */* Accept-Language: en-gb User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729) Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive Host: gmail.google.com Proxy-Authorization: NTLM TlRMTVNTUAABAAAAB7IIogkACQAvAAAABwAHACgAAAAFASgKAAAAD1dJTlhQMUdGTEFHU0hJUDc= GET http://gmail.google.com/mail/ HTTP/1.1 Accept: image/gif, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-shockwave- flash, application/x-ms-application, application/x-ms-xbap, application/vnd.ms- xpsdocument, application/xaml+xml, */* Accept-Language: en-gb User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729) Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive Proxy-Authorization: NTLM TlRMTVNTUAADA (more stuff goes here I cut it short) Host: gmail.google.com At this point the username and password prompt has appeared in the browser, it does not matter what is typed into this box, correct credentials, random nonsense the browser does not accept anything in this box it will continue to popup. If I press cancel, I sometimes get a http 407 error, but on other occasions I click cancel the website proceeds to download and show normally. This is repeatable with some clients running through my proxy server, but in other cases it does not happen at all. In the cases where a client computer works normally, the only difference I can see is that the 3rd request for SSL resource comes back with a 200 response, see below: CONNECT gmail.google.com:443 HTTP/1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 9.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/5.0; MALC) Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Length: 0 Host: gmail.google.com Pragma: no-cache Proxy-Authorization: NTLM TlRMTVNTUAADAAAAGAAYAIAAAA A SSLv3-compatible ClientHello handshake was found. I have tried resetting user accounts as well as computer accounts in Active Directory. User accounts and passwords that are being used are correct and the passwords have been reset so they are not out of sync. I have removed the clients and even the proxy server from the domain, and rejoined them. I have installed a complete separate proxy server and get exactly the same problem when I point clients to a different proxy server on a different IP address.

    Read the article

  • Cannot get to configure Kerberos for Reporting Services

    - by Ucodia
    Context I am trying to configure Kerberos in the domain for double-hop authentication. So here are the machines and their respective roles: client01: Windows 7 as client dc01: Windows Server 2008 R2 as domain controller and dns server01: Windows Server 2008 R2 as reporting server (native mode) server02: Windows Server 2008 R2 as SQL Server database engine I want my client01 to connect to server01 and configure a data source that is located on server02 using Intergrated Security. So as NTLM cannot push credentials that far, I need to setup Kerberos to enable double-hop authentication. The reporting service is runned by the Network Service service account and is configured only with the RSWindowsNegotiate options for authentication. Issue I cannot get to pass my client01 credential to server02 when configuring the data source on server01. Therefore I get the error: Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. So I went on dc01 and delegated full trust for any service to server01 but it not fixed the problem. I want to notice that I did not configured any SPNs for server01 because Reporting Service is runned by Network Service and from what I read on the Internet, when Reporting Services is going up with Network Service, SPNs are automatically registered. My problem is that even if that I want to configure SPNs manually, I do not know where I have to set them up. On dc01 or on server01? So I went a bit further on the issue and tried to trace this problem. From my understanding of Kerberos, this is what should happen on the network when I try to connect the data source: client01 ---- AS_REQ ---> dc01 <--- AS_REP ---- client01 ---- TGS_REQ ---> dc01 <--- TGS_REP ---- client01 ---- AP_REQ ---> server01 <--- AP_REP ---- server01 ---- TGS_REQ ---> dc01 <--- TGS_REP ---- server01 ---- AP_REQ ---> server02 <--- AP_REP ---- So captured my local network with Wireshark, but whenever I try to configure my data source from client01 on server01 to pass my credentials to server02, my client never sends a AS_REQ or TGS_REQ to the KDC on dc01. Questions So does anyone can tell me if I should configure the SPNs and on which machine does it have to be configured? Also why client01 never request for a TGT or a TGS to my KDC. Do you think there is something going wrong with the DC role of dc01?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >