I'm working with SQL Server Analysis Services for the first time and have the dilemma of working on a project in which users must be able to access SSAS Cubes (via a custom web dashboard) that live across different servers and domains, but without having access to the other server's SSAS database connection strings. So Organization A and Organization B will have their own cubes on their own servers, but Organization A users must be able to view Organization B's cubes, and Organization B users must be able to view Organization A's cubes, but neither organization should have access to the connection string.
I've read about allowing HTTP access to the SSAS server and cube from the link below, but that requires setting up users for authentication or allowing anonymous access to one organization's server for users of another organization, and I'm not sure this would be acceptable for this situation, or if this is the preferred way to do this. Is performance acceptable here?
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc917711.aspx
I also wonder if perhaps it makes sense to run a nightly/weekly process that accesses the other organization's SSAS database via a web service or something, and pull that data into a database on the organization's server, and then rebuild the cube. Then that cube would be queried without having to go and connect to the other organization server when viewing the cube.
Has anyone else attempted to accomplish something similar? Is HTTP access the standard way to go for this? Or any other possible options? Thanks, and please let me know if you need more info, still unclear on how some of this works.
HTTP is probably the best option for what you sound like you are trying to do. if they are two machines on same network but not same domain, using ipaddress\username on each (same user/pass) will work, like old school windows networking in workgroups.
You could also just backup , ftp and download/restore the cube on the other machine, might work for what you are doing.
as suggested by ScaleOvenStove HTTP is the best solution for your case, but users should be synced on both the servers to get access via HTTP. Users across both the organization's network can to be synced with a AD Sync tool. User has to be created in the other organization's network with bare minimum rights, and you can define role based security for what they can access in the cube
Related
I apologize if this question is not appropriate; however, I personally do not have Microsoft Access installed on my machine, so I am not able to test it first hand.
To my understanding, an Access database is a local database that is stored on a personal machine rather than a remote server. I am in the planning phase of a project will involve two basic interfaces - one for a regular user and another for the admin who will be running reports and the like. Personally, I would rather just use either an SQL Server or MySQL database all the way and just write some stored procedures or whatever is necessary to do the reporting.
However, the end administrative user may want to use Access. With this is mind, I am curious how I should approach the problem. As I stated earlier, I am not familiar with Access databases; however, I do not believe it is realistic to host one on a server and allow many users to access this database through a web interface. Is this correct or not? If it is possible, what is the general procedure for setting such an application up?
If not, what are my alternatives? Is there an easy way to sync a remote SQL server or MySQL database with Access database hosted on one's PC?
Thanks much.
I do not believe it is realistic to host one on a server and allow
many users to access this database through a web interface. Is this
correct or not?
You have a number of options including hosting the access database in a network folder.
https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Ways-to-share-an-Access-desktop-database-03822632-da43-4d8f-ba2a-68da245a0446
See also "Using Access Data on an ASP.NET Web Page"
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/445z2s49(v=vs.100).aspx
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.
My organisation (a small non-profit) currently has an internal production .NET system with SQL Server database. The customers (all local to our area) submit requests manually that our office staff then input into the system.
We are now gearing up towards online public access, so that the customers will be able to see the status of their existing requests online, and in future also be able to create new requests online. A new asp.net application will be developed for the same.
We are trying to decide whether to host this application on-site on our servers(with direct access to the existing database) or use an external hosting service provider.
Hosting externally would mean keeping a copy of Requests database on the hosting provider's server. What would be the recommended way to then keep the requests data synced real-time between the hosted database and our existing production database?
Trying to sync back and forth between two in-use databases will be a constant headache. The question that I would have to ask you is if you have the means to host the application on-site, why wouldn't you go that route?
If you have a good reason not to host on site but you do have some web infrastructure available to you, you may want to consider creating a web service which provides access to your database via a set of well-defined methods. Or, on the flip side, you could make the database hosted remotely with your website your production database and use a webservice to access it from your office system.
In either case, providing access to a single database will be much easier than trying to keep two different ones constantly and flawlessly in sync.
If a webservice is not practical (or you have concerns about availability) you may want to consider a queuing system for synchronization. Any change to the db (local or hosted) is also added to a messaging queue. Each side monitors the queue for changes that need to be made and then apply the changes. This would account for one of the databases not being available at any given time.
That being said, I agree with #LeviBotelho, syncing two db's is a nightmare and should probably be avoided if you can. If you must, you can also look into SQL Server replication.
Ultimately the data is the same, customer submitted data. Currently it is being entered by them through you, ultimately it will be entered directly by them, I see no need in having two different databases with the same data. The replication errors alone when they will pop-up (and they will), will be a headache for your team for nothing.
My company has a website product (ASP.NET) which is sold to customers. It means we don't host the website. They install it on their server and run it in the intranet.
I need to implement some sort of copy protection mechanism so that not everyone ends up installing the website. It has following aspects:
It has to be completely software based (no dongles).
Hiding usage information in registry or some folder in c:\ (basically outside virtual directory) is not an option for a website
Please can you suggest any scheme/method?
One suggestion is to use some kind of web service running, of course you need to have a main server to do so. In this server you can have some of your clients servers data (IP of the authorized servers, CPU and Motherboard ID's, and other important data).
This web service has to run some important logic of the program and return a value to the authorized servers. If the data of autorization sent by the client doesn't match, the server do will not execute the routine.
Of course I assume that this side of the logic is included in a DLL in the application and not in plain code.
A technique that worked well for a buddy of mine was to install a web bug on an administrative page which would report back to their server. You can monitor when and where the application is installed. It could be easily removed, but won't by most customers.
Simple, easy to do, and works relatively well.
Something you could try. Compile binaries for each client, obfuscate the code, lock the site down to a single domain. If its an internal app the domain might be something like "productname.clientname.internal". The app checks the domain of all the incoming requests, refuses anything that doesn't match.
As already pointed out by jeffamaphone: people will find ways around it, but it's enough to 'slow down' those not super determined.
[disclaimer]I sell the product I am recommending.[/disclaimer]
Take a look at DeployLX. You can add licensing to your web based application to require one of a couple different options.
Hardware based locking so it can only be used on one machine.
Domain based locking so it's tied to a specific domain name.
IP based locking to tie it to an IP address.
License server locking to that your app checks in periodically with a centralized web service.
It's pretty flexible and should let you create a balance between protection and not frustrating your users.
I am looking for a best practice for End to End Authentication for internal Web Applications to the Database layer.
The most common scenario I have seen is to use a single SQL account with the permissions set to what is required by the application. This account is used by all application calls. Then when people require access over the database via query tools or such a separate Group is created with the query access and people are given access to that group.
The other scenario I have seen is to use complete Windows Authentication End to End. So the users themselves are added to groups which have all the permissions set so the user is able to update and change outside the parameters of the application. This normally involves securing people down to the appropriate stored procedures so they aren't updating the tables directly.
The first scenario seems relatively easily to maintain but raises concerns if there is a security hole in the application then the whole database is compromised.
The second scenario seems more secure but has the opposite concern of having to much business logic in stored procedures on the database. This seems to limit the use of the some really cool technologies like Nhibernate and LINQ. However in this day and age where people can use data in so many different ways we don't foresee e.g. mash-ups etc is this the best approach.
Dale - That's it exactly. If you want to provide access to the underlying data store to those users then do it via services. And in my experience, it is those experienced computer users coming out of Uni/College that damage things the most. As the saying goes, they know just enough to be dangerous.
If they want to automate part of their job, and they can display they have the requisite knowledge, then go ahead, grant their domain account access to the backend. That way anything they do via their little VBA automation is tied to their account and you know exactly who to go look at when the data gets hosed.
My basic point is that the database is the proverbial holy grail of the application. You want as few fingers in that particular pie as possible.
As a consultant, whenever I hear that someone has allowed normal users into the database, my eyes light up because I know it's going to end up being a big paycheck for me when I get called to fix it.
Personally, I don't want normal end users in the database. For an intranet application (especially one which resides on a Domain) I would provide a single account for application access to the database which only has those rights which are needed for the application to function.
Access to the application would then be controlled via the user's domain account (turn off anonymous access in IIS, etc.).
IF a user needs, and can justify, direct access to the database, then their domain account would be given access to the database, and they can log into the DBMS using the appropriate tools.
I've been responsible for developing several internal web applications over the past year.
Our solution was using Windows Authentication (Active Directory or LDAP).
Our purpose was merely to allow a simple login using an existing company ID/password. We also wanted to make sure that the existing department would still be responsible for verifying and managing access permissions.
While I can't answer the argument concerning Nhibernate or LINQ, unless you have a specific killer feature these things can implement, Active Directory or LDAP are simple enough to implement and maintain that it's worth trying.
I agree with Stephen Wrighton. Domain security is the way to go. If you would like to use mashups and what-not, you can expose parts of the database via a machine-readable RESTful interface. SubSonic has one built in.
Stephen - Keeping normal end users out of the database is nice but I am wondering if in this day and age with so many experienced computer users coming out of University / College if this the right path. If someone wants to automate part of their job which includes a VBA update to a database which I allow them to do via the normal application are we losing gains by restricting their access in this way.
I guess the other path implied here is you could open up the Application via services and then secure those services via groups and still keep the users separated from the database.
Then via delegation you can allow departments to control access to their own accounts via the groups as per Jonathan's post.