Playing with the ssh and public_key application in Erlang, I've discovered a nice feature.
I was trying to connect to my running Erlang SSH daemon by using a rsa key, but the authentication was failing and I was prompted for a password.
After some debugging and tracing (and a couple of coffees), I've realized that, for some weird reason, a non valid key for my user was there. The authorized_keys file contained two keys. The wrong one was at some point in the file, while the correct one was appended at the end of the file.
Now, the Erlang SSH application, when diffing the provided key with the ones contained in the authorized_keys, it was finding the first entry (completely ignoring the second on - the correct one). Then, it was switching to different authentication mechanism (at first it was trying dsa instead of rsa and then it was prompting for a password).
The question is: Is this behavior intended or should the SSH server check for multiple entries for the same user in the authorized_keys file? Is this a generic SSH behaviour or it's just specific to the Erlang implementation?
Yes, its a 'first failure' authentication, and I came across your issue several times. As far as implementation goes, it was explained to me that the demon iterated over the authorised_keys file looking for a matching login, and THEN checked the key.
This seems to be the standard implementation,
Related
I'm trying to send my first image to gcr(google container reg.) via local bash, but somehow I couldn't do it even though I added my current user as 'owner' to the project. In the last link that gave me an error, the following was written.
{"errors":[{"code":"UNAUTHORIZED","message":"Unauthorized access."}]}
Also, my ubuntu distribution ip that I use on wsl2 was banned by google on the grounds that I tried too much. This is my 2nd problem that I need to solve.
I encountered my problem in the first item through powershell on my local computer.
What should I do in this case?
The refusal to connect to GCP might be related to the IP ban that you mentioned, was there any specified length to the ban? Usually, an email is sent with more details about the ban. Otherwise, there is specific documentation dealing with authenticating to Container Registry. The documentation lists several authentication methods:
gcloud credential helper
Standalone credential helper
Access token
JSON key file
Which of these methods are you having issues with? The documentation lists the procedure to authenticate properly with each of these methods. Is the correct account configured? It could be a different account or a service account is being used instead.
I have used Spring Rabbitmq XML configuration in my project. To create the RabbitConnectionFactoryBean, we provide the ssl.properties file resource with below properties
keyStore=file:/secret/keycert.p12
trustStore=file:/secret/trustStore
keyStore.passPhrase=secret
trustStore.passPhrase=secret
The passPhrases are hardcoded values. We are worried that any one who gains access to the system can read this file and misuse it. It is true that the system admin and OS should protect these files, but this can be considered a security threat when untrusted user logs in.
In this link Gary suggests to use Java configuration and we can use that to create the RabbitConnectionFactoryBean and maybe read the encrypted passwords from system and use the setter to set them in the bean.
But since we are already using XML configuration, is there any other ways to secure the passPhrases in the properties file?
Will this same configuration cause similar security issue in the PRODUCTION environment.?
Kindly help me on how to achieve security on the above.
Not sure if that is legal to say in the public, but I'll try.
There is some security token approach, when you start your project it requests such a token. An admin (or security representative) comes, inserts some special flesh drive, enter passwords. Your project reads properties from that device, populates all the properties and starts properly. That admin pulls flesh drive from USB and goes away. No one see password for your application!
The other solution you could consider is something like Config Server. So, your properties are stored somewhere outside of the current machine.
You also can really follow encryption way as well: http://cloud.spring.io/spring-cloud-static/Finchley.RELEASE/multi/multi__spring_cloud_context_application_context_services.html#_encryption_and_decryption
I'm currently developing a Wolkenkit application which is run on my local machine.
I want to upload a file from the Wolkenkit app to the blob server (as documented here).
When sending a POST request from the server to https://local.wolkenkit.io:3001/, Node.js gives me the error ECONNREFUSED.
I've tested the POST-Request with another program and it works there. Any idea why it doesn't work from the wolkenkit application itself?
Thanks!
The Storing files sample you linked to shows code that is to be run in the browser, not in the backend itself. Of course, both should work, but there are a few minor differences you need to watch out for.
Fixing the host name
First, I suppose that local.wolkenkit.io in your case maps to 127.0.0.1, which is the default for wolkenkit. That means that when you try to connect to this domain from within a Docker container, the container does not try to call out to the blog storage container, but it stays within itself. So, the first thing that needs to be fixed is the host name.
Basically, there are two options for this: You can either setup local.wolkenkit.io so that it resolves to the external IP address of your machine. This would work, but is pretty cumbersome. The other option is to directly address the appropriate container that is responsible for blob storage, by its internal name. The internal name is <name-of-your-app>-depot-file. So you need to replace https://local.wolkenkit.io:3001/ by https://<...>-depot-file.wolkenkit.io:3001/.
Fixing the port
Second, the port is wrong. This is because the blob storage service is internally running on port 3000, externally on 3001. So instead of https://<...>-depot-file.wolkenkit.io:3001/ you need to use https://<...>-depot-file.wolkenkit.io:3000/.
Once you have done this you should not get any more errors like ECONNREFUSED, since now the service can be found.
Fixing SSL issues
Third, since you are now connecting to the blob storage service using a different domain name, the SSL certificate doesn't match any more, since it was issued for local.wolkenkit.io. As a result, you will get SSL errors when trying to connect.
The simplest way to get around this is to disable any SSL checks (albeit this is also the most insecure way to handle this!). How to do this depends on the HTTP client module you are using. E.g., in request there is an option called strictSSL that you can set to false.
Of course, what you actually should do is to either use a custom certificate which includes this domain name as well, or to write a function that handles the certificate check and accepts the presented one, especially in this case.
If you do all of this, things should work :-)
PS: I am one of the authors of wolkenkit. Thanks a lot for bringing up this issue, and we will take care of this in the future, to make storing blobs easier.
I have a program in which checks a php file on a web server to see if the user is verified. The php files runs through the DB and checks and echos "verified" if they are.
Now, people are now easily bypassing the verification system by installing Xampp, routing my server to 127.0.0.1 in their hosts file, and then setting a script that echos verified.
I want to be able to check the IP address of my domain to check if it is routing to 127.0.0.1.
How would I go about resolving the IP address of a domain through delphi?
I used to use a similar hack to get around ICQ server-side verifications. Very convenient when I wanted to test alpha/beta builds that I was not invited to :-)
Indy, which ships with Delphi, has a TIdStack.ResolveHost() function, and a separate TIdDNSResolver component, which can both be used to get the domain's IP(s). It also has a TIdStack.LocalAddresses property to retreive the local IPv4 addresses. Or you can just use the socket API gethostbyname() or getaddrinfo() functions directly, along with platform-specific APIs to enumerate the local IPs, like the GetAdaptersAddresses() function on Windows.
However, rather than having the PHP script simply echo plain-text back to your app, a much more secure option that does not require you to verify IPs is to have your app create a dynamically generated nonce value and send it to the PHP script, then have the script process it, hash it, whatever as needed using an algorithm that only you know, and then send it back to the app. The app can perform the same algorithm and compare the results. Unless someone takes the time to reverse engineer your app, they will not be able to reproduce your algorithm or fake its results with their custom Xampp scripts.
Even better, use SSL/TLS to encrypt your connection to your domain server, and give your domain server an SSL certificate that your app can verify before it exchanges any data with your PHP script. If you do just this much, you can continue using the plain-text echo since SSL/TLS will verify you are connected to your domain for you.
I'm making a twitter client, and I'm evaluating the various ways of protecting the user's login information.
Hashing apparently doesn't do it
Obfuscating in a reversable way is like trying to hide behind my finger
Plain text sounds and propably is promiscuous
Requiring the user to type in his password every time would make the application tiresome
Any ideas ?
You could make some OS calls to encrypt the password for you.
On Windows:
You can encrypt a file (on a NTFS filesystem)
Use the DPAPI from C
Use the DPAPI in .Net by using the ProtectedData class
CryptProtectData is a windows function for storing this kind of sensitive data.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa380261.aspx
For an example see how Chrome uses it:
http://blog.paranoidferret.com/index.php/2008/09/10/how-google-chrome-stores-passwords/
For Windows: encrypt the password using DPAPI (user store) and store it in your settings file or somewhere else. This will work on a per-user basis, e.g. different users on the same machine will have different unrelated encryption keys.
What platform?
On *nix, store the password in plain text in a file chmoded 400 in a subdirectory of the home directory. See for example ~/.subversion. Administrators can do anything they like to users anyway, including replacing your program with their own hacked version that captures passwords, so there's no harm in the fact that they can see the file. Beware that the password is also accessible to someone who takes out that hard drive - if this is a problem then either get the user to reenter the password each time or check whether this version of *nix has file encryption.
On Windows Pro, store the password in an encrypted file.
On Windows Amateur, do the same as *nix. [Edit: CryptProtectData looks good, as Aleris suggests. If it's available on all Windowses, then it solves the problem of only the more expensive versions supporting encrypted files].
On Symbian, store the password in your data cage. Programs with AllFiles permission are rare and supposedly trusted anyway, a bit like *nix admins.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either store the password (which you've ruled out), or don't and require it to be typed in every time (which you've ruled out.)
Have a good symmetric encryption scheme, it should make it difficult enough to decrypt the credentials that it won't worth trying.
Otherwise, if the service only requires the hash to be sent over the network, you can store the hast encrypted. This way even the decryption won't get the attacker closer to the solution.
However other users are true. If you store the data it can be found.
The key is finding the balance between security and usability.