How do I know the current logged in users on OpenLDAP 2.3 server? I have configured OpenLDAP 2.3 slurpd replication and my requirement is to know who are all logged in to the systems with using their LDAP account.
You can't. Users are only bound (not logged-in) to an LDAP server for quite short periods of time while they are establishing their own identity. Most of the time it is applications which are logged into the LDAP server, to search it, look up user's permissions, etc, but those connections are quite short-lived as well, although typically prolonged a bit by client-side connection pooling.
You shouldn't be using 2.3: it is many years out of date. Current version of OpenLDAP is 2.4.40, and 2.4.26 was released three years ago. I can't even find how old 2.3 is. You shouldn't be using slurpd replication: it's been obsolete for many years too. You should be using syncrepl.
Related
The desktop application I am developing (C#/.NET, WPF) uses a feature which requires connection to IMAP- and SMTP servers of the user. I am using a package called MailKit for this. Some of our users are using Microsoft365 and will require modern authentication in the future, as opposed to the basic authentication they are using right now. This is supported by MailKit and I am able to authenticate using OAuth2.0.
However, this requires a client secret, which expires after a certain amount of time (e.g. two years) after creation in Azure. This client secret is compiled with the application, after which the application is distributed. Does this mean the users need to update their installation at least every two years, so I can supply a new client secret? This is undesirable to our users. The best solution for me would be if I could refresh expired client secrets without the user having to perform any action.
Perhaps its a good idea to force the users to upgrade the software after two years? Like forcing them to buy an upgrade (business opportunity) or as a way to distribute fixes and updates to the application?
Most applications today you do update at least every year?
I have experience developing software and web applications and I have decided to do some freelance work on the side. Well, I met with my first client and they are requesting a relatively simple, custom system that (without being long winded) tracks client’s paperwork as it progresses through the business’s different manual processes. It is a small business that has about 10 employees, but all of the employees will interact with the client’s paperwork, therefore everyone would need access to the new system. When I say ‘track’ I literally mean that the employees will ‘check as complete’ on a simple page the increases a progress bar at different stages for the paperwork. Now I am %110 capable of coding the custom system that meets their needs, but I am unsure about how I should go about doing it.
The information that is being tracked in the new system and stored in the DB is confidential information that they are very protective of. My main question is how should I be developing this to be as secure as I can?
-They have their own server in house, so should I develop an application (VB and SQL) for the server and require employees to log on remotely to use it? Can more than one person access/use the application at a time?
-Or should I develop a web application (ASP.Net/VB and SQL) that is only accessible on their network to their employees? They plan to expand offices, could they set up a VPN to access the site?
I’m leaning towards a web application, but I have not done too much in term of security. Basically I’m looking for pros and cons for either option or any suggestions on what I should.
PS, stackoverflow is awesome! Long time user, first time poster!
If you want to develop using vb & sql you have to consider that:
You need to have real ip
Your system will communicate threw certain port and you have to handle the security measure for letting certain port opened in your server.
You should have good knowledge in network programming
If you want to develop using asp.net you have to consider that:
in case only office employees will use the system, you can develop against users in Active Directory and for outside users with username and password with SSL connection or vpn
for preventing more than one person access the file you can simply add column 'locked' in case file is being used.
Well im not a web fan (I suck) ive seen too many security issues go with it...i.e Lulzsec, but i do very much love VB apps.
So I would definetely recommend a VB app connected to a MSSQL database (coz it's easy to configure and havent seen any security exploits yet),my Chinese friend told me there is a way to access MySQL free databases.Now, allow remote access but make sure your Windows Firewall is also configured properly do look at all angles of security.
If I remember well there is an option in MSSQL to specify the IP addresses or is it MAC addresses that can access the DB so maybe input all of the 10 employees' IP addresses assuming they are static,if they are dynamic (DHCP) don't bother. And ask them to make the IP address of the server where you will host the DB on static.
If only 10 employees use the DB then limit the connections to 10. For now develop this when it comes to VPN you can make a Remote version of the App im sure that will come later right now focus on the basics. Also use Dotfuscator when you are publishing the app I heard it is very good.N also im suggesting the document/work order is received at the reception so that user will check in the document with specifics...if they are passing on the work order to the next user they should select the user and then THAT user may enter some sort of verification code unique to the user...im sure you can envision the rest from here. Now do I also get a cut from this?lol
I've been doing the same for years now, and I always take the website side, this days I go width ASP.NET MVC 4, it's easier, everything in their place and extremely easier to test and maintain.
The web application has a very big advantage to any standalone windows application, you deploy and upgrade only one application instead to maintain all the different versions once you start deploying windows apps, and they are harder to debug once you start to having different machines with different versions and so on...
so, Web or Win app = Web app, always!
All you need is a server that run IIS and set it up for using Active Directory (Visual Studio has that project already, simply create an ASP.NET MVC and choose the "intranet" template), it will set up everything for you, and all you need later is tweak the Active Directory connection string.
I also use a self-signed SSL to protect data between client and server, as I also make the apps available outside the office without VPN needed, as long as they login with their secure AD credentials.
And... audit everything into a secondary database, every action performed by a user since they login until they logout, every view, update or creating data witch .NET makes it simple if you create your Logging method to simple log messages and Stack messages on errors.
This will greatly benefit your employer and you when something goes wrong.
I would say to go with web application. Advantage using web application is, if they want to expand bussiness .. same can you do with you WebApp. But choose .Net over VB, going with latest techonology will help you resolve current challanges.
Our company is thinking about moving to the cloud. Would we still be able to meet all our current requirements (below). We want to be able to easily scale in the future without high costs.
5 ASP.net 4.0 websites running (using sql databases, see below)
SQL Server 2008 Express (8 databases on this)
2 Scheduler services running (send nightly reports via email e.g. new orders in db)
MongoDB and Memcached are also installed on server
Currently the websites are on a separate server from the database server for security reasons.
We were thinking about Windows Azure and Amazon Web Services (AWS) as providers, which would best fit our requirements?
Are there any other factors we need to consider?
Re: SQL Databases: on Windows Azure this would map to SQL Azure. Costs start at $5/month for up to a 100 MB instance - and goes all the way up to 150 GB - and goes beyond that with Federations.
Re: 5 ASP.net 4.0 websites running: these map naturally into Windows Azure Web Roles. The "small" instance is $0.12/hour/instance, and you'll usually want two instances (to avoid single point of failure for a few scenarios). Depending on your load, you may be able to put all 5 sites on the same instances. If you have very low usage sites, consider the $0.05/hour/instance "extra small" instance.
Re: Currently the websites are on a seperate server from the database server for security reasons: of course this is also doable.
Re: 2 Scheduler services running: Running Windows Services is no problem.
Re: send nightly reports via email e.g. new orders in db: No problem doing, though is not baked into Windows Azure directly, but there are many simple ways to do this (even for free, such as via SendGrid).
Re: We want to be able to easily scale in the future without high costs: you will need to do the math regarding your actual costs, but Windows Azure can surely scale.
Re: MongoDB and Memcache are also installed on server: These can both be run on Azure. Check out https://github.com/mongodb/mongo for MongoDB. Also, the Azure Caching service is also avail (managed for you).
Re: We were thinking about Azure and Amazon as providers, which would best fit our requirements: These are functionally very similar (in capability and cost), with a few noteworthy differences.
Windows Azure is Platform as a Service meaning that you don't need to worry about Virtual Machines, but rather Applications. In other words, you upload your (basically) Zipped app package to the cloud for execution. With Amazon, you will be dealing with the Virtual Machine yourself. In Azure, you get a copy of Windows Server 2008 which is managed for you, but you can also do admin things to it if you need to. This is far less of an advantage if your app is an old messy install that isn't really clean (though may not be a good high-value cloud candidate anyway).
Windows Azure has an emulator that works great - F5 right from visual studio to work with storage system and VMs and more popular features.
Re: Are there any other factors we need to consider: Yes. With any cloud application, you need to be prepared to deal with scaling out (not up), dealing with transient retries (you may need to retry an operation to a cloud service - any cloud service). The benefits of this are much better (and more cost-effective) scalability and higher reliability (when you run across nodes, you don't have a single point of failure). Be sure to understand when/where storage on a VM is persistent vs. ephemeral. There are more considerations, but these are primary ones.
You may want to check out the Windows Azure Pricing calculator.
Good luck! And welcome to the cloud.
with the exception of the scaling question, and the 2 physical servers, you can move this functionality into a hosted environment and you will technically be in "the cloud". This could be a dedicated or VPS (Virtual Private Server), or even a shared server if you are small.
Those can allow for growth over time...you just need to upgrade what you have with the provider.
You also could use a colo-server with a hosting provider, which basically means you put your hardware in an hosting provider rack, and use their electricity and bandwidth. They charge based on bandwidth usage.
Since you are using SQL Express, remember that each database is limited to 8gb. So that will limit your growth at some point. That would entail an upgrade from Express to regular SQL if you don't want to re-engineer anything.
Have you considered AppHarbour? It has Memcached, MongoDB, SQL Server and so on, and is quicker to deploy to than Azure. I like Azure, but there is quite a learning curve and I have found the connection to SQL Azure to be pretty bad - which means re-engineering your DAL to use something like the SQL Transient Failure Library = a bit of a faff for existing projects.
AppHarbour does not have blob storage - so if you are uploading files you will need to use Azure Blob Storage or Amazon S3 or some equivalent as well.
Hope this helps.
Not an expert but being that Asp.net is a Microsoft product it should be easier to migrate to azure, although from what I have heard AWS shouldn't be difficult. Another thing you may want to consider is cost. Last time I checked AWS is significantly less costly unless you already pay for MSDN subscriptions.
All the requirements you sum up are not any issue to deploy in Windows Azure. You can find a lot of information on the internet on how to do this.
Keep in mind, if you want to deploy your services to windows azure, you'll need to do some code review of your applications to fix session state, output cache and so forth on your web applications.
Since you want to scale them out and they are sitting behind a non-sticky round-robin load balancer, you will run into issues with your session state if it is saved on the machine itself. You'll need to part session state to SQL Azure or to the Windows Azure table storage for example.
Installing MongoB and Memcache in Azure is not an issue, you'll find a lot of information on how to do it, but it'll require some to set up your role and the scripting
codingoutloud has given a very detailed answer. I would add two very key considerations to think about when moving any application to Azure (or, indeed, many other cloud providers).
Local state
With normal Azure, they reserve the right to shut down any one instance of a role at any time in order to move or upgrade it. This means you always need at least two instances of any one role and they will be transparently load balanced. If your current websites are currently running on individual servers then they may rely on session state or files in local directories etc. Now, there are ways around this (like putting session state in SQL, using the cookie provider for temp data, using a shared drive for files etc) or, indeed, bypassing a lot of the benefits of Azure and using their "virtual server" concepts which means you don't get the scale benefits etc.
But, sites that rely heavily on local state may be challenging to move to the cloud.
Time Zones
All Azure servers run on UTC time. If you are used to running on dedicated servers serving users from a single time zone then chances are that you use things like DateTime.Now() which won't really correspond to what the user wants.
I don't see any of the above as limitations of Azure, I find them very useful in forcing you to build global and scalable solutions from the start. However, when porting an existing application, the above may be quite a challenge to adapt to, even though there are workarounds.
As also mentioned elsewhere, there is a learning curve to Azure and somehow the documentation - plentiful as it is - just doesn't quite seem to help for some reason. Once you "get it", though, I find Azure really nice and there are a bunch of subtle features that will help you build scalable solutions, like the whole queuing infrastructure, the blob storage and the table storage. In some ways the learning is hampered by having too much choice.
Good luck!
Could Umbraco Membership handle say 1 million users?
The Member data wouldn't be managed in backend but just by users on their my account page
is this feasible using the default setup or would I need to create a custom setup?
Theoretically it should work, since it uses the asp.net membership provider, which runs on sql server which can scale almost without limits.
That said, with a million users you are going to need some serious hardware to run the sql server database. If I had to guess as your number of users increase and starts to approach very large numbers, umbraco will have the problem(bottleneck) before the membership provider does.
Indeed, theoretically you're only limited to SQL Server specs. See this URL for more information:
http://our.umbraco.org/forum/core/general/11920-Maximum-number-of-content-nodes-for-Umbraco-45
I couldn't find anything about this online so I thought I'd ask here. Do any of you have issues with sessions just randomly clearing on a Windows 2008 Server environment? This problem is completely random and very unpredictable. I have no code that clears sessions except on logout, and not quite sure what could be causing it (well, I have ideas...)
My host, who I've been with for many years (and never had a problem with) is telling me that Windows 2003 is better at managing session variables and that I will likely be rid of this session clearing issue if I were to move to a 2003 Server environment. Thing is, I'm already set up and running on IIS 7 with the URL Rewrite module and I'd rather not move or reconfigure URL rewriting. Tech support says the App Pool I am running on is configured properly. My session timeout is set to 60 minutes in Web.config and my host tells me that session timeout is set to 60 minutes for my domain.
I could optionally go with an Azure AppFabric Cache for sessions but I'd rather not pay an extra $50 a month--it's a pretty small and low income site. I'm currently using a SQL Azure database but from what I hear, database sessions are not ideal on SQL Azure.
Thoughts?
Are you modifying any files in the web site?
Changes to the folder or file structure of the web site often triggers an app pool recycling, resetting sessions. The work-around is to use a durable session store like the SQL Server Session State provider.
Most likely answer is your app pool is recycling on you for some reason or another which will dump your in process session every time. Proximate causes can be lots of things, especially if app pools are shared. An easy way to see if your app pool is getting dumped is to take advantage of asp.net heartbeat monitoring, it could be configured to email you when these events occur.