VPS E-gold Accepted
Aug 13, 2008Who knows VPS provider (located anywhere) accepting e-gold for payments?
View 3 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
AB Scripts Gold Classifieds
Jul 30, 2008Did any one of know something about AB Scripts Gold Classifieds I want to go and buy.
View 1 Replies View RelatedGNAX Colo: Gold Vs. Silver Networks
Jun 10, 2008I want to get peoples opinions that HAVE USED or DO USE GNAX and their network.
What is the main difference between their networks, which one are you on, and have you tried the other, etc. I want to get some real feedback here. From what I can tell, the gold just appears to be bigger name connections that are charging alot more money for their backbone. The silver has nearly as many connections as the gold it appears.
How Can I Make Sshd Lie About It's Accepted Authentication Methods
May 16, 2008With my sshd installation, I have password authentication disabled, and only accept key-based auth. What I want to do is, make sshd lie about it's accepted authentication methods, or even make up a few to confuse anyone who's trying to connect. For example,
[root@vps2 ~]# ssh hah.cx
Permission denied (publickey).
I'd like to make it show something like,
[root@vps2 ~]# ssh hah.cx
Permission denied
CAC/Smartcard User Info Not Accepted, Must Use Domain Usr/pwd Instead For SSL Site
Sep 9, 2009Having an issue with random individuals trying to access an intranet site with a security certificate. Most users are able to simply select their Smartcard/CAC certificate, enter the pin number and then are granted access to the site's pages.
However, random individuals enter their pin and then are immediately re-prompted by the IE alert dialogue to enter their domain username and password. If they don't enter their network domain username and MS password, then they receive a 401.1 Unauthorized.
I am confused as to why these certain users (who are selecting the same certificates as the successful ones) are being prompted for their domain name/pwd. Furthermore, they're able to access other sites which require a CAC to get past the security certificate.
Possible that a user token is unable to be established via a CAC for the particular site, but not sure why. Since these users are getting a 401.1, then somehow their identity associated with their CAC credentials is not validating.
In IIS: Anonymous users are not allowed (unchecked). 128-bit encryption is required with SSL. Integrated Windows Authentication is checked. Accepting client certificates In the site's web.config file all users are allowed and only anonymous are denied.
Developed in asp.net 3.5
We have tried to reproduce the problem in testing and development environments, but have fortunately/unfortunately been unable to duplicate this issue. This furthermore eludes to an issue that might be isolated to the production server, users access to it, and/or the certificate that is applied to that SSL website on that server.
The exact same setup is present on the development box without any issues at all, indicating to me that the problem resides on the production server's ability to properly receive/handle CAC information from those individuals or that something funky is going on with the way the security certificate is relating to the client's CAC x.509 certificate.
A little more information that may be of use: the browser prompt that initially asks for the CAC has nothing to do with the code of the site, but rather is enabled by applying the security certificate to a site in IIS; thus indicating to me that there is something written into the certificate that looks for client certificates tied to the ActivClient agent via the browser?
The violating users' cards work on all other applications and even on SSL sites on other servers that bring up a CAC prompt. I believe we have confirmed that the certificates associated with their cards and their IE browsers are valid through 2015 (or longer in some cases), and are the same in nature (x509 certificate from the card)... and issuer is being consistently selected as DOD Email CA-15 (though the regular DOD CA-15 works as well). Again, maybe something with the fact that it's isolated to one production server, something with the SSL cert. on that url or user access?
Then again, I probably have no idea what i'm talking about, just throwing a bone here to see if anyone has had the same issue or has any ideas.
Plesk 11.x / Linux :: Mailbox Disabled - Email Accepted And Not Bouncing
Jul 4, 2014I have Plesk 11.5.30 Update #47, Centos OS 6.5 x64, MTA Qmail 1.03
Today I encountered a estrange thing, a disabled mailbox was accepting mail but not bouncing it.
In the panel the "user@tld.com" mailbox is disabled, if a email is sent to that address Qmail accepts it:
Jul 4 17:51:35 mx3 qmail-queue-handlers[27432]: Handlers Filter before-queue for qmail started ...
Jul 4 17:51:36 mx3 qmail-queue-handlers[27432]: from=root@mx3
Jul 4 17:51:36 mx3 qmail-queue-handlers[27432]: to=user@tld.com
Jul 4 17:51:36 mx3 qmail-queue-handlers[27432]: handlers_stderr: SKIP
[Code] ....
No mail is bounced, nothing, the message is not in the mailbox.
Tested in several accounts the result is the same, even in a new created account.