Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to see plain xml text of xmpp messages content for developing , debugging ,etc
so I've installed 'ejabberd' as xmpp server and 'empathy' as xmpp client.(i track packets with wireshark)
i think it should be done by changing configuration in xmpp server , but i don't know how ?!
I would like someone to guide me through disabling encryption and see xmpp request in plain text form in wireshark.
Thanks in advance!
In ejabberd.cfg, in the listen section, look for configurations for ejabberd_c2s.
Comment out the lines specifying the the certificate and starttls support.
Without starttls, no encryption will be offered (you might need to confirm on your client that you want to connect without encryption as some clients prevents that by default).
Related
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I have got telnet server running on a bsd target. I want to connect to this target from multiple other machines. Surprisingly it does not allow more connections.
I checked why and found it is not listening(listen) in a loop. So, I kinda fixed it. But I was wondering is there any specific reason why telnetd code is kept with single connection at a time? (I am allowed to connect to telnetd server from only one client for a particular port.)
(I know telnet is not a safe option. But I am having just fun on small embedded platform and getting things working is more imp than security at this moment.)
Thanks
Telnet is supposed to be launched by inetd. You need to configure inetd to do the listening for you.
The wikipedia article that I linked to explains how to do that.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
Let's say somebody invented a new protocol I would put on top of IP. Would two computers from the other ends of the world be able to communicate with it, i.e. would routers forward the frames that aren't standard TCP/UDP/ICMP?
Yes, if it is build on top of IP then it would be routable over the internet. The IP protocol defines the header and payload. The header is used for routing. So you would be able to send custom IP-based protocol data from one computer to another over the internet.
However, both computers will need custom drivers to send, receive and understand the data.
I'm not sure why you'd bother though. If you're sending custom data, you're much better off writing an application level protocol on top of tcp or udp and take advantage of the networking layer built into all computers and operating systems already. It'll be easier to write, maintain, and debug.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm working on a project for my company. I'm using a DSL connection. My IP address changes every time I restart my router. Is there a faster way to request a new IP from my ISP programatically? I've seen that RDSL services can change the IP in a few seconds, but I'm looking for a more "legal" way to do this other than RDSL.
Thank you!
Does your router have firmware you can browse to? There may be a link to reboot your router (or even release/renew your IP lease) there. You can set up a cron job to call cURL to access that URL every so often. You might also have to authenticate in order to do that, but cURL should handle that.
If you're on a system that does not have cURL or cron, you may have equivalents, but they're pretty simple programs and you should be able to find them for any popular OS.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
We are setting up a link to a client and they wish to use SFTP but without using keys for client authentication, just passwords. Do you still get the benefit of data encryption with this setup? I thought the protocol used the client keys for encryption but does it or can it use the host key instead?
EDIT:
Looks like Wikipedia has what I needed to know: "SSH also supports password-based authentication that is encrypted by automatically generated keys." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Shell#Key_management). And yes not entirely a programming question but a bit of a reflex reaction for me to ask other developers.
Yes. There's a difference between the transport-layer key exchange and the user-authentication key exchange. You do not need to generate any client key pairs for password authentication; authentication happens over an encrypted tunnel negotiated by the transport-layer key exchange, which is largely transparent to the user.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
If I push to Bitbucket like this:
C:\My Projects\repo>hg push https://user:passd#bitbucket.org/user/repo/
pushing to https://user:***#bitbucket.org/user/repo/
searching for changes
no changes found
The first line is what I type:
C:\My Projects\repo>hg push https://user:pass#bitbucket.org/user/repo/
But the message from Mercurial hides the typed password:
pushing to https://user:***#bitbucket.org/user/repo/
Does that mean my password is encrypted before it goes out over the public WiFi connection and is therefore safe?
If it uses SSL then it should be encrypted before password is sent. Whether mercurial uses it or not is specified in mercurial web server configuration.
push_ssl
Whether to require that inbound pushes be transported over SSL to prevent password sniffing. Default is True.
Link