Search Results

Search found 199 results on 8 pages for 'threat'.

Page 1/8 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >

  • Take Steps to Mitigate the Threat of Insiders

    - by Troy Kitch
    Register now for our upcoming Feb 23 Webcast The Insider Threat, Understand and Mitigate Your Risks. Insiders, by virtue of legitimate access to their organizations' information and IT infrastructure, pose a significant risk to employers. Employees, motivated by financial problems, greed, revenge, the desire to obtain a business advantage, or the wish to impress a new employer, have stolen confidential data, proprietary information, or intellectual property from their employers. Since this data typically resides in databases, organizations need to consider a database security defense in depth approach that takes into account preventive and detective controls to protect their data against abuse by insiders. Register now and learn about: Actual cases of insider cyber crimes Three primary types of insider cyber crimes: IT sabotage, theft of intellectual property (e.g. trade secrets), and employee fraud Lack of controls around data that allow these crimes to be successful Solutions to help secure data and database infrastructure

    Read the article

  • Apple Patches Pwn2own OS Threat

    After a security researcher demonstrated a security flaw in Apple's Safari browser running on its Snow Leopard operating system, the company has issued a fix, providing clues as to the nature of the threat.

    Read the article

  • 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

  • A New Threat To Web Applications: Connection String Parameter Pollution (CSPP)

    - by eric.maurice
    Hi, this is Shaomin Wang. I am a security analyst in Oracle's Security Alerts Group. My primary responsibility is to evaluate the security vulnerabilities reported externally by security researchers on Oracle Fusion Middleware and to ensure timely resolution through the Critical Patch Update. Today, I am going to talk about a serious type of attack: Connection String Parameter Pollution (CSPP). Earlier this year, at the Black Hat DC 2010 Conference, two Spanish security researchers, Jose Palazon and Chema Alonso, unveiled a new class of security vulnerabilities, which target insecure dynamic connections between web applications and databases. The attack called Connection String Parameter Pollution (CSPP) exploits specifically the semicolon delimited database connection strings that are constructed dynamically based on the user inputs from web applications. CSPP, if carried out successfully, can be used to steal user identities and hijack web credentials. CSPP is a high risk attack because of the relative ease with which it can be carried out (low access complexity) and the potential results it can have (high impact). In today's blog, we are going to first look at what connection strings are and then review the different ways connection string injections can be leveraged by malicious hackers. We will then discuss how CSPP differs from traditional connection string injection, and the measures organizations can take to prevent this kind of attacks. In web applications, a connection string is a set of values that specifies information to connect to backend data repositories, in most cases, databases. The connection string is passed to a provider or driver to initiate a connection. Vendors or manufacturers write their own providers for different databases. Since there are many different providers and each provider has multiple ways to make a connection, there are many different ways to write a connection string. Here are some examples of connection strings from Oracle Data Provider for .Net/ODP.Net: Oracle Data Provider for .Net / ODP.Net; Manufacturer: Oracle; Type: .NET Framework Class Library: - Using TNS Data Source = orcl; User ID = myUsername; Password = myPassword; - Using integrated security Data Source = orcl; Integrated Security = SSPI; - Using the Easy Connect Naming Method Data Source = username/password@//myserver:1521/my.server.com - Specifying Pooling parameters Data Source=myOracleDB; User Id=myUsername; Password=myPassword; Min Pool Size=10; Connection Lifetime=120; Connection Timeout=60; Incr Pool Size=5; Decr Pool Size=2; There are many variations of the connection strings, but the majority of connection strings are key value pairs delimited by semicolons. Attacks on connection strings are not new (see for example, this SANS White Paper on Securing SQL Connection String). Connection strings are vulnerable to injection attacks when dynamic string concatenation is used to build connection strings based on user input. When the user input is not validated or filtered, and malicious text or characters are not properly escaped, an attacker can potentially access sensitive data or resources. For a number of years now, vendors, including Oracle, have created connection string builder class tools to help developers generate valid connection strings and potentially prevent this kind of vulnerability. Unfortunately, not all application developers use these utilities because they are not aware of the danger posed by this kind of attacks. So how are Connection String parameter Pollution (CSPP) attacks different from traditional Connection String Injection attacks? First, let's look at what parameter pollution attacks are. Parameter pollution is a technique, which typically involves appending repeating parameters to the request strings to attack the receiving end. Much of the public attention around parameter pollution was initiated as a result of a presentation on HTTP Parameter Pollution attacks by Stefano Di Paola and Luca Carettoni delivered at the 2009 Appsec OWASP Conference in Poland. In HTTP Parameter Pollution attacks, an attacker submits additional parameters in HTTP GET/POST to a web application, and if these parameters have the same name as an existing parameter, the web application may react in different ways depends on how the web application and web server deal with multiple parameters with the same name. When applied to connections strings, the rule for the majority of database providers is the "last one wins" algorithm. If a KEYWORD=VALUE pair occurs more than once in the connection string, the value associated with the LAST occurrence is used. This opens the door to some serious attacks. By way of example, in a web application, a user enters username and password; a subsequent connection string is generated to connect to the back end database. Data Source = myDataSource; Initial Catalog = db; Integrated Security = no; User ID = myUsername; Password = XXX; In the password field, if the attacker enters "xxx; Integrated Security = true", the connection string becomes, Data Source = myDataSource; Initial Catalog = db; Integrated Security = no; User ID = myUsername; Password = XXX; Intergrated Security = true; Under the "last one wins" principle, the web application will then try to connect to the database using the operating system account under which the application is running to bypass normal authentication. CSPP poses serious risks for unprepared organizations. It can be particularly dangerous if an Enterprise Systems Management web front-end is compromised, because attackers can then gain access to control panels to configure databases, systems accounts, etc. Fortunately, organizations can take steps to prevent this kind of attacks. CSPP falls into the Injection category of attacks like Cross Site Scripting or SQL Injection, which are made possible when inputs from users are not properly escaped or sanitized. Escaping is a technique used to ensure that characters (mostly from user inputs) are treated as data, not as characters, that is relevant to the interpreter's parser. Software developers need to become aware of the danger of these attacks and learn about the defenses mechanism they need to introduce in their code. As well, software vendors need to provide templates or classes to facilitate coding and eliminate developers' guesswork for protecting against such vulnerabilities. Oracle has introduced the OracleConnectionStringBuilder class in Oracle Data Provider for .NET. Using this class, developers can employ a configuration file to provide the connection string and/or dynamically set the values through key/value pairs. It makes creating connection strings less error-prone and easier to manager, and ultimately using the OracleConnectionStringBuilder class provides better security against injection into connection strings. For More Information: - The OracleConnectionStringBuilder is located at http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/win.111/b28375/OracleConnectionStringBuilderClass.htm - Oracle has developed a publicly available course on preventing SQL Injections. The Server Technologies Curriculum course "Defending Against SQL Injection Attacks!" is located at http://st-curriculum.oracle.com/tutorial/SQLInjection/index.htm - The OWASP web site also provides a number of useful resources. It is located at http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Main_Page

    Read the article

  • Any spywhere threat due to 3rd party plugins?

    - by DUKE
    I installed the plugin mentioned in the following link and after that, by Ubuntu 12.04 LTS behaves a little strange, particularly keyboard shortcuts are not working as expected. http://www.webupd8.org/2012/03/recoll-lens-full-text-search-unity-lens.html Actual my worry is not about keyboard shortcuts, but are there any spywhere threats by installing 3rd party applications (not through Ubuntu software centre) like that.

    Read the article

  • Improved Database Threat Management with Oracle Audit Vault and ArcSight ESM

    - by roxana.bradescu
    Data represents one of the most valuable assets in any organization, making databases the primary target of today's attacks. It is important that organizations adopt a database security defense-in-depth approach that includes data encryption and masking, access control for privileged users and applications, activity monitoring and auditing. With Oracle Audit Vault, organizations can reliably monitor database activity enterprise-wide and alert on any security policy exceptions. The new integration between Oracle Audit Vault and ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager, allows organizations to take advantage of enterprise-wide, real-time event aggregation, correlation and response to attacks against their databases. Join us for this live SANS Tool Talk event to learn more about this new joint solution and real-world attack scenarios that can now be quickly detected and thwarted.

    Read the article

  • Solera Networks Threat Predictions for 2012, Solutions

    Legitimate sites are often trusted by their visitors, which makes them a perfect target for cybercriminals. Solera lists attacks on legitimate, yet compromised sites as a growing trend for 2012 due to the increased amount of such sites containing unpatched vulnerabilities. Once compromised, hackers can use the legitimate sites to redirect unsuspecting visitors and put them in harm's way. According to Solera, malicious spam is another undesirable item that should increase in 2012. Various methods, such as email, instant messaging, attachments, malicious links, and social networks will cont...

    Read the article

  • Is Oracle a threat to Java? [closed]

    - by Deadlocked_Thread
    Java is one of the best language, but after Oracle has bought Sun it might try to go for some standardization (Like MS) and it might take Java away from programmers. Java is popular because it has no limits and i think Oracle is gonna set the limits to get some standards. Oracle is no longer supporting Eclipse (IBM) and political game is being played be both camps: 1. What is the future of Java? 2. Do you think it will be in same class as .NET family (C# etc.)? 3. Will MS get benefits from this internal fight?

    Read the article

  • ESET Remote Administrator Console showing infected files on a client, but threat log is empty

    - by Aron Rotteveel
    We recently deployed ESET NOD32 Antivirus on our small domain network and use the Remote Adminstrator to manage everything remotely. On a recent full system scan, one of the clients shows 10 infected files of which 4 have been cleaned in the scan log. The strange thing, however, is that the threat log is empty. Is there any reason why the threat log is empty? What has happened to the 6 remaining uncleaned files? Where can I view information on what files are infected and what they have been infected with? I know this can be done through the scan log properties screen, but with 958790 files scanned, I obviously do not want to browse through this list. Any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Does pointing *.[int].mydomain.com to 192.168.1.[int] constitute a security threat

    - by Dave
    For testing purposes, I've found it's really useful to point whatever.machineIP.mydomain.com to 192.168.1.machineIP : that way we can test each other's code without fidgetting with hosts files. I'm aware that this identifies our local IP addresses to the outside world, but if someone could access the network, it'd be trivial to sniff which of the local IP addresses respond to port 80 anyway. Is there anything I'm not seeing? Credit for the idea: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1168896

    Read the article

  • SYN flooding still a threat to servers?

    - by Rob
    Well recently I've been reading about different Denial of Service methods. One method that kind of stuck out was SYN flooding. I'm a member of some not-so-nice forums, and someone was selling a python script that would DoS a server using SYN packets with a spoofed IP address. However, if you sent a SYN packet to a server, with a spoofed IP address, the target server would return the SYN/ACK packet to the host that was spoofed. In which case, wouldn't the spoofed host return an RST packet, thus negating the 75 second long-wait, and ultimately failing in its attempt to DoS the server?

    Read the article

  • Is SYN flooding still a threat?

    - by Rob
    Well recently I've been reading about different Denial of Service methods. One method that kind of stuck out was SYN flooding. I'm a member of some not-so-nice forums, and someone was selling a python script that would DoS a server using SYN packets with a spoofed IP address. However, if you sent a SYN packet to a server, with a spoofed IP address, the target server would return the SYN/ACK packet to the host that was spoofed. In which case, wouldn't the spoofed host return an RST packet, thus negating the 75 second long-wait, and ultimately failing in its attempt to DoS the server?

    Read the article

  • Real-time threat finder

    - by Rohit
    I want to make a small program that is capable to download files from the cloud onto my system. As the file reaches my system, another program on my system will analyze the file and try to find suspicious behaviors in it. I want to make a system similar to ThreatExpert (www.threatexpert.com). The suspicious data gathered by my program will be sent to Anti-Virus companies for analysis. I want to know whether this program can be written in .NET or as a PHP website. I have no experience of Cloud computing. How to retrieve files from the cloud?

    Read the article

  • Ipad, closed environment and threat to privacy

    - by Akshay Bhat
    I had an unusual question about ipad, Since ipad environment is closed and does not allows installation of diagnostic and security related programs. How can then we be sure that any of the software installed on ipad is not infringing upon our privacy by doing stuff such as homing back information, etc. We cant install a packet tracer or any other software to check for attacks on privacy. Also given Apples poor track record (the safari browser was broken in one day), I don't think trusting apple solely would be a good idea. This might not seem to be a big issue but for business users it would be a significant concern.

    Read the article

  • SYN flooding still a threat to servers?

    - by Rob
    Well recently I've been reading about different Denial of Service methods. One method that kind of stuck out was SYN flooding. I'm a member of some not-so-nice forums, and someone was selling a python script that would DoS a server using SYN packets with a spoofed IP address. However, if you sent a SYN packet to a server, with a spoofed IP address, the target server would return the SYN/ACK packet to the host that was spoofed. In which case, wouldn't the spoofed host return an RST packet, thus negating the 75 second long-wait, and ultimately failing in its attempt to DoS the server?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to configure TMG to impersonate a domain user for anonymous requests to a website?

    - by Daniel Root
    I would like to configure Forefront Threat Management Gateway (formerly ISA server) to impersonate a specific domain user for any anonymous request to a particular listener. For example, for any anonymous request to http://www.mycompany.com, I would like to serve up http://myinternal as though MYDOMAIN/GuestAccount were accessing the site. Is this even possible in ISA/TMG? If so, where do I go to configure this?

    Read the article

  • Redundancy and Automated failover using Forefront TMG 2010 Standard between Production-DR site ?

    - by Albert Widjaja
    Hi, I'm using MS TMG 2010 Standard as my single firewall to publish my Exchange Server and IIS website to the internet, however it is just one VM in the DMZ network with just one network card (vNIC), what sort of redundancy method that is suitable for making this firewall VM redundant / automatically failover in my DR site ? Because it is very important in the event of disaster recovery all important email through various mobile device will still need to operate and it is impossible if this TMG 2010 VM is offline. is it by using: 1. Multicast NLB 2. Any other clustering 3. VMware HA / FT (one VM in production, the other VM in DR site with different subnet ?) Any suggestion and idea willl be appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Always failed in connecting to the Outlook Anywhere through TMG 2010 with certificate ?

    - by Albert Widjaja
    Hi, I have successfully published Exchange Activesync using TMG 2010 and OWA internally only but somehow when I tried to publish the Outlook Anywhere it failed ( as can be seen from the https://www.testexchangeconnectivity.com ) Settings: IIS 7 settings, I have unchecked the require SSL and "Ignore" the client certificate Exchange CAS settings: ServerName : ExCAS02-VM SSLOffloading : True ExternalHostname : activesync.domain.com ClientAuthenticationMethod : Basic IISAuthenticationMethods : {Basic} MetabasePath : IIS://ExCAS02-VM.domainad.com/W3SVC/1/ROOT/Rpc Path : C:\Windows\System32\RpcProxy Server : ExCAS02-VM AdminDisplayName : ExchangeVersion : 0.1 (8.0.535.0) Name : Rpc (Default Web Site) DistinguishedName : CN=Rpc (Default Web Site),CN=HTTP,CN=Protocols,CN=ExCAS02-VM,CN=Servers,CN=Exchange Administrative....... Identity : ExCAS02-VM\Rpc (Default Web Site) Guid : 59873fe5-3e09-456e-9540-f67abc893f5e ObjectCategory : domainad.com/Configuration/Schema/ms-Exch-Rpc-Http-Virtual-Directory ObjectClass : {top, msExchVirtualDirectory, msExchRpcHttpVirtualDirectory} WhenChanged : 18/02/2011 4:31:54 PM WhenCreated : 18/02/2011 4:30:27 PM OriginatingServer : ADDC01.domainad.com IsValid : True Test-OutlookWebServices settings: 1013 Error When contacting https://activesync.domain.com/Rpc received the error The remote server returned an error: (500) Internal Server Error. 1017 Error [EXPR]-Error when contacting the RPC/HTTP service at https://activesync.domain.com/Rpc. The elapsed time was 0 milliseconds. https://www.testexchangeconnectivity.com testing result: Checking the IIS configuration for client certificate authentication. Client certificate authentication was detected. Additional Details Accept/Require client certificates were found. Set the IIS configuration to Ignore Client Certificates if you aren't using this type of authentication. environment: Windows Server 2008 (HT-CAS) Exchange Server 2007 SP1 TMG 2010 Standard Outlook 2007 client SP2. Any kind of help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Wrong source IP when accessing internet directly from TMG server

    - by jarod1701
    Hi everyone, after implementing a ForeFront TMG server I'm facing only one problem: After I added a second IP to the external adapter I had to manually set "NAT Address Selection" inside the network rule "Internet Access" to the first IP since all others would get blocked by the CISCO firewall. This configuration works as long as traffic comes from the internal network (e.g. browser on clients). Traffic from the TMG directed to the internet always carries the second IP as it's source address and gets blocked. All our other TMGs/ISAs are running fine and I never came across this problem- Does anybody have a clue, coz I don't?! Kevin

    Read the article

  • SINGLE SIGN ON SECURITY THREAT! FACEBOOK access_token broadcast in the open/clear

    - by MOKANA
    Subsequent to my posting there was a remark made that this was not really a question but I thought I did indeed postulate one. So that there is no ambiquity here is the question with a lead in: Since there is no data sent from Facebook during the Canvas Load process that is not at some point divulged, including the access_token, session and other data that could uniquely identify a user, does any one see any other way other than adding one more layer, i.e., a password, sent over the wire via HTTPS along with the access_toekn, that will insure unique untampered with security by the user? Using Wireshark I captured the local broadcast while loading my Canvas Application page. I was hugely surprised to see the access_token broadcast in the open, viewable for any one to see. This access_token is appended to any https call to the Facebook OpenGraph API. Using facebook as a single click log on has now raised huge concerns for me. It is stored in a session object in memory and the cookie is cleared upon app termination and after reviewing the FB.Init calls I saw a lot of HTTPS calls so I assumed the access_token was always encrypted. But last night I saw in the status bar a call from what was simply an http call that included the App ID so I felt I should sniff the Application Canvas load sequence. Today I did sniff the broadcast and in the attached image you can see that there are http calls with the access_token being broadcast in the open and clear for anyone to gain access to. Am I missing something, is what I am seeing and my interpretation really correct. If any one can sniff and get the access_token they can theorically make calls to the Graph API via https, even though the call back would still need to be the site established in Facebook's application set up. But what is truly a security threat is anyone using the access_token for access to their own site. I do not see the value of a single sign on via Facebook if the only thing that was established as secure was the access_token - becuase for what I can see it clearly is not secure. Access tokens that never have an expire date do not change. Access_tokens are different for every user, to access to another site could be held tight to just a single user, but compromising even a single user's data is unacceptable. http://www.creatingstory.com/images/InTheOpen.png Went back and did more research on this: FINDINGS: Went back an re ran the canvas application to verify that it was not any of my code that was not broadcasting. In this call: HTTP GET /connect.php/en_US/js/CacheData HTTP/1.1 The USER ID is clearly visible in the cookie. So USER_ID's are fully visible, but they are already. Anyone can go to pretty much any ones page and hover over the image and see the USER ID. So no big threat. APP_ID are also easily obtainable - but . . . http://www.creatingstory.com/images/InTheOpen2.png The above file clearly shows the FULL ACCESS TOKEN clearly in the OPEN via a Facebook initiated call. Am I wrong. TELL ME I AM WRONG because I want to be wrong about this. I have since reset my app secret so I am showing the real sniff of the Canvas Page being loaded. Additional data 02/20/2011: @ifaour - I appreciate the time you took to compile your response. I am pretty familiar with the OAuth process and have a pretty solid understanding of the signed_request unpacking and utilization of the access_token. I perform a substantial amount of my processing on the server and my Facebook server side flows are all complete and function without any flaw that I know of. The application secret is secure and never passed to the front end application and is also changed regularly. I am being as fanatical about security as I can be, knowing there is so much I don’t know that could come back and bite me. Two huge access_token issues: The issues concern the possible utilization of the access_token from the USER AGENT (browser). During the FB.INIT() process of the Facebook JavaScript SDK, a cookie is created as well as an object in memory called a session object. This object, along with the cookie contain the access_token, session, a secret, and uid and status of the connection. The session object is structured such that is supports both the new OAuth and the legacy flows. With OAuth, the access_token and status are pretty much al that is used in the session object. The first issue is that the access_token is used to make HTTPS calls to the GRAPH API. If you had the access_token, you could do this from any browser: https://graph.facebook.com/220439?access_token=... and it will return a ton of information about the user. So any one with the access token can gain access to a Facebook account. You can also make additional calls to any info the user has granted access to the application tied to the access_token. At first I thought that a call into the GRAPH had to have a Callback to the URL established in the App Setup, but I tested it as mentioned below and it will return info back right into the browser. Adding that callback feature would be a good idea I think, tightens things up a bit. The second issue is utilization of some unique private secured data that identifies the user to the third party data base, i.e., like in my case, I would use a single sign on to populate user information into my database using this unique secured data item (i.e., access_token which contains the APP ID, the USER ID, and a hashed with secret sequence). None of this is a problem on the server side. You get a signed_request, you unpack it with secret, make HTTPS calls, get HTTPS responses back. When a user has information entered via the USER AGENT(browser) that must be stored via a POST, this unique secured data element would be sent via HTTPS such that they are validated prior to data base insertion. However, If there is NO secured piece of unique data that is supplied via the single sign on process, then there is no way to guarantee unauthorized access. The access_token is the one piece of data that is utilized by Facebook to make the HTTPS calls into the GRAPH API. it is considered unique in regards to BOTH the USER and the APPLICATION and is initially secure via the signed_request packaging. If however, it is subsequently transmitted in the clear and if I can sniff the wire and obtain the access_token, then I can pretend to be the application and gain the information they have authorized the application to see. I tried the above example from a Safari and IE browser and it returned all of my information to me in the browser. In conclusion, the access_token is part of the signed_request and that is how the application initially obtains it. After OAuth authentication and authorization, i.e., the USER has logged into Facebook and then runs your app, the access_token is stored as mentioned above and I have sniffed it such that I see it stored in a Cookie that is transmitted over the wire, resulting in there being NO UNIQUE SECURED IDENTIFIABLE piece of information that can be used to support interaction with the database, or in other words, unless there were one more piece of secure data sent along with the access_token to my database, i.e., a password, I would not be able to discern if it is a legitimate call. Luckily I utilized secure AJAX via POST and the call has to come from the same domain, but I am sure there is a way to hijack that. I am totally open to any ideas on this topic on how to uniquely identify my USERS other than adding another layer (password) via this single sign on process or if someone would just share with me that I read and analyzed my data incorrectly and that the access_token is always secure over the wire. Mahalo nui loa in advance.

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >