IPTV 3.4 Allow access to content without password

Well 3.4 has made up the problems with lack of security in 3.2 only to make it essentially that now enter a password while accessing the server.
My problem is I want web pages using the plugin to access the sdp files from the download directory without requiring a password as in 3.2 while still maintaning security on the content server configuration. HELP ! What have other done ?
There is nothing written about configuring apache on CCO
Desperate for Help and Advice !
Simon

Duane - Did you ever get this resolved? If not the fix is to modify the cgi block in the httpd.conf file on the Apache server. This will allow you to restrict access to the server config files on the Content Manager but not require the users to know the admin username/password. Let me know if you need more assistance.
Thank you,
Danny

Similar Messages

  • Access to User without Password

    A temporary employee (now gone forever) set up some workfiles on a non networked Mac in their own User - as the administrator can we access the User without the password (which we have buckley's of getting).

    Use the "Accounts" System Preference" from the administrator account. Click the lock at the lower-left to unlock it, select the user's account, and change the password. You can also use Get-Info to change ownership or permissions on the user's files and folders if you click the lock icon in the Get-Info window (click the "Details" triangle at the bottom of the window).

  • IPhone5 can access guest network without password

    I have just finished setting up the Cisco Valet M20 and tried to access the "guest network" using password. All devices connected to "guest network" were taken to a login screen for a password. All except the iPhone5. The phone was able to have connect wirelessly without having to go to the login screen and enter the guest password. I have tried changing "guest network's" password and resetting the network configuration of my iPhone5, still the same result.  My laptop, iPad and andriod phone did go  through the login screen for password. Is there a fix to this problem? 

    Since other wireless devices were working thru the guest network as they should, I believe it has something to do with the IPhone5. How about you try this workaround: disable the guest network, turn the M20 off for 10-15 seconds, once you power it back on, access the cisco connect software again and enable the guest network. On your iphone, try to reset the network settings again then try to connect to the guest network.

  • Sun Convergence - allow access with spaces as password

    Hi,
    We've discovered that Sun Convergence log in as any user when we write space sign without any other signs in password field. It's lok like ldap search (or bind) command fails if only spaces are in password field.
    We use:
    - Convergence with patch 12 and 10.
    - Directory Server 5.2 (not recomennded, but on compatibile list)
    We read some threards about similar problem with LDAP auth, but ... thera are not Sun Products. I suspect that problem are in LDAP (implementation Convergence requests).
    We have temporary workaround, but ... it very bad. Any people have acces to any known user.
    I woonder if some other have similar problem
    regards
    IT

    Oracle does not comment on published reports of alleged Oracle product vulnerabilities. Please refer to Critical Patch Updates and Security Alerts (http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/security/alerts.htm) for more details on the policy.
    Note: I still recommend you contact support for access to the latest Convergence patch (not yet available on SunSolve) which fixes known product vulnerabilities.

  • Is anyone else having trouble getting iTunes 11 to allow access to play lists on the iPhone 4s?

    I have a MacBook Pro running Mac OS X 10.7.5, running iTunes 11.0.
    When I select:
    my iPhone 4s running iOS 6.0.1
    I don't get an on this iPhone button to allow access to content on the phone.
    3rd generation iPod touch running iOS 5.1.1
    I get a on this iPod button that shows the music and play lists on the iPod.
    3rd generation iPad running iOS 6.0.1
    I get an on this ipad button to allow access to content on the iPad.
    Does anyone know what is going on, have any ideas on what I can do, or do I need to provide any additional information?
    Thanks for any help.

    I found the answer on another thread.
    If you turn on the sidebar view in the view menu, you get access to the content on all devices.

  • How do I get the line above the tasks, which allows you to edit the cell contents, without double clicking the cell?

    As title says.
    Normally in Gantt Chart View, above the tasks there's a line which displays the contents of the cell you have selected, and allows you to edit the contents without having to double click the cell.
    In my case, this line is not there, and it is slightly hindering my work.
    So, does anyone know where I should go to re-enable this line?
    Thanks a lot!

    Hi,
    Go to file, then options, then display and check the "entry bar" option.
    http://www.manageprojectsonsharepoint.com/blog/2012/04/02/microsoft-project-quick-tip-entry-bar/
    Hope this helps.
    Guillaume Rouyre - MBA, MCP, MCTS

  • ITunesStoreAustralia:why not allowed buy/rent HD content without Apple TV?

    Anyone know why in Australia, we are not allowed to purchase HD content without an Apple TV? I don't need an Apple TV with my laptop, and forthcoming Mac Mini, so why should I be forced to buy one just to get HD content from the store...

    Such restrictions usually are due to the copyright holders demand

  • Without providing access of mass storage,allow access of data card or local printer ,

    Hello,
    Pls assist in exploring the possibility to allow access of data card or local printer  without providing access of mass storage.
    Balwan Singh

    Hello Balwan Singh,
    You can use two methods on is using Administrative Template and the other is using Preferences, both are available within the GPO in Domain Controllers with 2008 and later.
    Option 1: Administrative Template.
    This setting can be configured either at Computer or User level.
    You need to go to:
    Computer or User Configuration\Policies\Administrative Templates\System\Removable Storage Access
    In here you can Enable the setting "Removable Disks: Deny read access" or "Removable Disks: Deny write access" 
    Just be aware that this settings does not apply to a servers at a "User Configuration" level.
    Option 2: Preferences.
    This setting can be configured either at Computer or User level.
    You need to go to:
    Computer or User Configuration\Preferences\Control Panel\Devices
    In here you need to create a new item as follows:
    - Right click and select new --> Device
    - On General Tab you can select two "Action" options "Use this device (enable)" or "Do not use this device (disable)" in this case you should use the second option "Do
    not use this device (disable)"
    - On "Device class:" you can browse the devices attached to the computer from where you are configuring this GPO.
    In this list yo need to choose the "Universal Serial Bus controllers" node and among the options listed in here you should choose the "USB Mass Storage Device" which is the class used for USB drives.
    Remember that if you are configuring the GPO from a domain controller probably you do not see the "USB Mass Storage Device" in the "Universal
    Serial Bus controllers" node since there does not exists a USB drive directly attached to your domain controller.
    You can workaround this by either connect a USB drive to your Domain Controller or connect with the Group Policy Management Console (GPMC.msc) from a workstation on which you can safely plug a USB drive just to be able to visualize it and configure your GPO.
    Related Info:
    Configure a Device Item
    https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc771861.aspx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396
    I hope this info help you to reach yor goal. :D
    5ALU2 !

  • How do I manage Google calendar account to allow access to my iCal account?

    In Delegation box I see message: "You can change who can access your account by clicking the Edit button". This is what I am trying to do, but when I click Edit, Page opens on Manage Account Access which remains blank. It won't recognise account in sidebar.
    Message comes up: "Cannot enable access to your account ****@gmail was not found" "Search again for the user you want to add by typing their name and selecting one of the resulting choices." Bar below offers "Cancel" or "Search Again" No choice appears in the Manage Account Access page.
    I can only access new google CalDAV account in sidebar by highlighting my own account below in same sidebar. It then appears in box: Accounts I can access:
    I tick box under Show, Under 'Users' new account appears correctly,  but Privilege says "Read only".
    I want it to allow "Read & Write". How do I set that up? Can you help? Thanks.

    Many thanks for trying to help. I am afraid nothing works. I still don't know what to do: the Google Calendars page is set under the heading "Calendars I can view and modify" as Calendars with shared edit settings. These show two gmail calendars. No iCal. When I follow instructions to Get started with CalDav I get the same problem every time.
    On the Delegation page when I click my gmail account in the sidebar the other account appears as "read only". I cannot edit to allow access to other account.
    I can see other account's entries on my iCal Calendar. But I can't edit or add to them. Other account has no access, cannot view or edit my iCal Calendars at all on his gmail account.
    When I click on the other account in the sidebar I get message mentioned before: "Cannot enable access to your account ****@gmail was not found" "Search again for the user you want to add by typing their name and selecting one of the resulting choices." Bar below offers "Cancel" or "Search Again" which repeats whole procedure without success.
    Would be grateful for help.
    Message was edited by: b2013

  • Our accountant is no longer allowed access to the QuickBooks file

    My main server is Small Business Server 2008 Standard (i.e. pre-R2).  I have another box running Server 2012 that's just acting as a Hyper-V host.  On that server I have three relevant VMs, all Windows 7 Professional and joined to the domain. One
    is acting as a host for our QuickBooks file and running some other QuickBooks-related tasks.  The other two are for two people who have to access QuickBooks remotely via RDP (we don't have a Terminal Server license).
    Our accountant has been accessing the QuickBooks file for several weeks from an in-office domain-joined Windows 7 Pro computer at the shared resource "\\Quickbooks-host\QuickBooks Data".  Today she's told that she's not allowed to access Quickbooks-host.
    In the SBS console she is set for local administrator access to that computer. On Quickbooks-host the "Quickbooks Data" folder is shared with her having explicit full control as <domain>\<user>, both in Properties | Sharing | Share...
    and Properties | Sharing | Advanced Sharing ... | Permissions. On Quickbooks-host she is listed in Control Panel | User Accounts | Give other users access to this computer under her user name and my domain as an administrator.  What more could Microsoft
    possibly want?
    (BTW, I despise Microsoft's networking permissions management.  Why must I give permission in two places for the same resource, and still have it not work?)
    So I tried to get her going for the day by letting her RDP into one of the other two VMs, since the person that regularly uses that is  in the office today.  She's a member of Remote Desktop Users and Mobile Users and a few others. But I can't
    connect using her account, with or without a domain and using the real domain name or "quickbooks-host" as the domain name.  SOmetims I just get "login failed", sometimes I get a pop-up "The connection was denied because the user
    account is not authorized for remote login".  I can't find any more places to add authorization.
    Did I mention how much I despise Windows' control of networking permissions?
    So is there any way to convince Windows 7 that our accountant is allowed access?

    Hi,
    Glad to see your problem resolved, hope your experience is helpful with others.
    Roger Lu
    TechNet Community Support

  • How do I allow access to non admin network users to disk volume?

    I would like to allow access to a specific volume (disk) on one of our networked macs (Mac1) to all users. I've set user accounts on Mac 1 for all network users. These users are "regular" users, not admin. They can access this disk (and all others on Mac1) if I log in as Admin set Users to Admin. If I do this, then users have access to ALL data on all disks. If I do not, leaving them as "regular" users, when they log in they only see public folders. How can I allow access to the one disk volume without making network users admin? I tried changing various settings for the volume in Finder Info (everone else=read/write; ignore permissions) with no luck.
    Thanks
    iMac, ibooks, G5, Tibook   Mac OS X (10.4.4)  

    Your observations are correct - by default, an "admin" user connecting over AFP can choose from available "volumes" (default) or "shares", whereas a non-admin user can only mount "shares".
    By default, the only "shares" on an OS X client machine are the users' "Public" folders, and unlike pre-OS X Macs, it isn't easy to configure your own share points. Apple's official statement is that users wanting this functionality should buy OS X Server.
    However, it is possible to create an arbitrary share point using 3rd party software called "SharePoints" (donationware). I have never used it, but it seems to be well regarded. Alternatively, you can do it manually following the instructions in this hint & comments (especially apw8's):
    http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20011108161839416
    Once the external drive (or folder on the external drive) is configured as a share point, it should be possible for non-admin users to select and mount it once they connect over AFP.

  • Is there a way to set firefox so it only allows access to only one website / (ip address).

    Is there a way to set firefox so it only allows access to only one website / (ip address) and block traffic from everything else (the entire web) other than the one site I want to allow? The site I want to allow is a corporate web application that will only work in firefox. We as a business run a windows server and all client desktops run Internet Explorer with security setting controlled by group policy. We have already locked down the security setting in firefox so users can’t bypass the proxy server settings.

    I have a proxy server set up (Symantec.cloud). Fire fox is “locked” so users would find it difficult to bypass it.
    I have a file: '''local-settings.js '''
    This is located in: C:\Program Files (x86)\Mozilla Firefox\defaults\pref
    The content of this file is:
    ''pref("general.config.obscure_value", 0); // only needed if you do not want to obscure the content with ROT-13
    pref("general.config.filename", "mozilla.cfg");''
    I also have the file: called: '''mozilla.cfg'''
    This is located: C:\Program Files (x86)\Mozilla Firefox
    The contents of this file is:
    lockPref("network.proxy.type", 5);
    All that is working fine, users can’t easily change the connection settings.
    So all that is good and works…
    What I would also like to do is set firefox so access is limited to 1 IP address and nothing else is allowed (the whole internet is blocked, except this one IP address).
    You suggest using a PAC file - I was unsure how I would use a PAC file, (I have never written one) and do not understand how I would implement one? Please help.

  • HELP needed on Remote Management set to allow access for all users

    my mac mini snow leopard server runs in a data center and i use screen sharing to interact with it. i played with the sharing settings remotely yesterday and changed "allow access for" to all users. i was disconnected immediately and i couldn't logon again. i have no luck changing to other users. i don't want to make a special trip to the center to change it back to whatever it used to be. i can still use afp to connect but the screen sharing option is no longer available. what does "allow access for all users" mean anyway?
    thanks!

    As its name implies, allow access for all should allow any valid user account to access the server. I'm not sure why it's no longer working. It almost sounds like the ARDAgent crashed.
    Either way there's a command-line interface to the ARD preferences:
    /System/Library/CoreServices/RemoteManagement/ARDAgent.app/Contents/Resources/ki ckstart
    man kickstart discusses the options, including examples of how to enable access for specific users.

  • How to set up remote access on wvc80n without using TZO

    Just purchased the WVC80N, but how do you set it up for remote access without using TZO?  I can not get TZO to work w/ my Uverse 2wire 3800-hgv-b router.  Please help as the uverse customer support has not been helpful with port forwarding either.

    Hi, I'm a newbie at this, so pls be patient with my terminology...  I want to install 2 or 3 of these cameras in my mother's home, and I will have AT&T DSL service (one dynamic IP address) there with only a modem/wireless router.  I want to access the cameras from my laptop or from my Blackberry Tour when I am traveling.  Also want to allow access for my other relatives.  I do not have another home computer to serve as a WHS, and my laptop is obviously not connected to the internet all of the time.  Can I use the DDNS setup with DynDNS to provide access?  The instructions that I read seemed to imply that I needed a WHS in order to forward ports, etc.  Thanks in advance for your help.. Garry

  • Allowing access to select few public objects (moved from Native forum)

    I am moving my posting from Java Forums > Fundamentals > Key Classes > Native forum to this one. Sorry for posting it on the wrong forum earlier. Before each reply I have added a lien for clarity.
    Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: COOLNM Posts: 5 Registered: 12/21/05
    Dec 21, 2005 9:59 AM
    I am developing a java application. I need to provide some scripting support (using Jython or Rhino) to my application so that the user can better use my application. Now the problem is I just want a select few public objects to be accesible via scripts and not all public objects I have written internally. I read somewhere that class name and code obfuscation could be a option but not a full proof solution. Can anyone suggest how a full proof solution can be achieved? Would running the script interpreter in seperate JVM help (and propogate the calls to the original JVM) ? Would a custom class loader help? Please suggest.
    Thanks,
    COOLNM
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: IanSchneider Posts: 1,381 Registered: 10/26/00
    Dec 21, 2005 10:14 AM (reply 1 of 10)
    I read somewhere that class name and code obfuscation could be a option but not a full proof solution.Correct, someone could still can call obfuscated methods.
    Would running the script interpreter in seperate JVM help (and propogate the calls to the original JVM) ?No.
    Would a custom class loader help? Possibly depending upon how the interpreter dispatches calls.
    Can anyone suggest how a full proof solution can be achieved?With jython, you could write custom PyObject subclasses (or general java facade classes) to expose only the methods you want to. The former technique allows more cool scripting functionality, the latter would presumably work in other interpreters. This would have to be done for every object you want to expose.
    Alternatively, you could enable a SecurityManager and allow only trusted code to invoke yours.
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: COOLNM Posts: 5 Registered: 12/21/05
    Dec 21, 2005 9:36 PM (reply 2 of 10)
    I read somewhere that class name and codeobfuscation could be a option but not a full proof
    solution.
    Correct, someone could still can call obfuscated
    methods.
    Would running the script interpreter in seperate JVMhelp (and propogate the calls to the original JVM) ?
    No.Could you please explain why this wouldn't work?
    The plan is:
    Let say I have 2 public objects A & B and I want the user to only use A via their scripts.
    In JVM1: I use both A & B
    In JVM2: I write a psuedo A and not B. For all the methods of A, I propogate the calls to JVM1 (I think this is achievable but not sure how)
    The script interpreter runs on JVM2.
    Now if the user tries to access A then the call would go to JVM1 but if he tries to access B then there is no B available in JVM2 so the user cant access B.
    I know this method could be heavy as each call would have to go from JVM1 to JVM2.
    By sepeate JVMs I mean seperate instance of java.
    >
    Would a custom class loader help? Possibly depending upon how the interpreter
    dispatches calls.
    Can anyone suggest how a full proof solution can beachieved?
    With jython, you could write custom PyObject
    subclasses (or general java facade classes) to expose
    only the methods you want to. The former technique
    allows more cool scripting functionality, the latter
    would presumably work in other interpreters. This
    would have to be done for every object you want to
    expose.
    Alternatively, you could enable a SecurityManager and
    allow only trusted code to invoke yours.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: allquixotic Posts: 12 Registered: 12/19/05
    Dec 22, 2005 5:09 AM (reply 3 of 10)
    RMI has a way for multiple JVMs to communicate programmatically; you could also use sockets on the loopback network device (localhost). These techniques are how mature Java products constrain their number of running instances to a finite number (usually 1), they terminate any starting JVM early in the initialization procedures of the main method if the "already-running test" indicates one is running.
    If you use the networking method, you could basically read from a ServerSocket on the "executing" JVM, while the "scripting" JVM writes to a Socket. Then use reflection in the executing (server) side to determine if the method or object being referenced is one you want to expose. If not, do something -- like write back to the client that the method invocation was invalid. Reflection will slow down your code a lot though, so I don't recommend it for apps that already take up 50 megs or more of RAM ;)
    Regards,
    Sean
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: IanSchneider Posts: 1,381 Registered: 10/26/00
    Dec 22, 2005 9:05 AM (reply 4 of 10)
    Would running the script interpreter in seperate JVMhelp (and propogate the calls to the original JVM) ?
    No.
    Could you please explain why this wouldn't work?It could work. I said no because the other methods are better - easier to implement and vastly more performant without wasting resources.
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: COOLNM Posts: 5 Registered: 12/21/05
    Dec 23, 2005 12:48 AM (reply 5 of 10)
    Ya, the seperate JVM approach seems complex and might not be fully achievable.
    Can someone give small code snippets on how the method level control be achieved using Java SecurityManager. Just a recap on what I am trying to achieve -
    A & B are two public objects defined internally by my app.
    I have to give the user of my app the ability to write some code. But only B
    is to be exposed to client and not A.
    Let say I have this code -
    Object A = Interpreter.InitializeEngine(..);
    A.executeFromUser(stdin);
    The user mostly uses some scripting language, say Python and the Interpreter
    is Jython. Now my Interpreter is capable of understanding calls to Java
    objects from Python. If the user tries to access B via the scripts then it
    should be allowed to do so but access to A should not be allowed via the
    scripting language.
    Thanks,
    Neeraj
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: bschauwejava Posts: 721 Registered: 1/13/04
    Dec 26, 2005 2:13 PM (reply 6 of 10)
    What you probably want is to give the user access to an interface - not a class - that only exposes the methods that you want to expose.
    This is the way all RMI APIs are exposed to client programs.
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: bschauwejava Posts: 721 Registered: 1/13/04
    Dec 26, 2005 2:16 PM (reply 7 of 10)
    Just one more comment. You haven't said very much about the runtime model of the scripting environment vs your java environment. How many processes do you expect to have running to make the system work? Are you expecting your java code to wind up in a jar file and get loaded by the Python process? Or are you planning on the java code executing in a separate process? If the latter, then RMI is probably your best bet.
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: COOLNM Posts: 5 Registered: 12/21/05
    Dec 27, 2005 4:20 AM (reply 8 of 10)
    I haven't finalized on the runtime model yet as the scripting security issue is still not resolved. But I am sure that the java app code would init and run the scripting code and not the other way round. The app is pretty huge with heavy UI. Ya, the java code would be wrapped in jars (but mostly not in a single jar as I dont want the jar to be too hefty).
    Can someone comment on the use of SecurityManager in this case. My initial investigation shows that the objective on implementing method level security can't be implemented by this.
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: IanSchneider Posts: 1,381 Registered: 10/26/00
    Dec 27, 2005 9:14 AM (reply 9 of 10)
    My initial reply suggested writing a facade in java or by subclass PyObject. I highly recommend this path for ease of development, use, and runtime performance.
    Given that you don't understand the basics of java security, I will recommend this again.
    Re: Allowing access to select few public objects
    Author: COOLNM Posts: 5 Registered: 12/21/05
    Dec 27, 2005 11:33 PM (reply 10 of 10)
    I have started investigating on facade in java and subclassing PyObject. But I am not sure how these would resolve the primary issue. Even if I use these and if the script writer knows that there is a public class, say XYZ in my app then he can always access that class directly skipping my subclassed PyObject or the Java facade. Or am I missing something here?

    I have started investigating on facade in java and subclassing PyObject. But I am not sure
    how these would resolve the primary issue. Even if I use these and if the script writer knows
    that there is a public class, say XYZ in my app then he can always access that class directly
    skipping my subclassed PyObject or the Java facade. Or am I missing something here?Presumably your objects are somehow connected to the application. Your user could do something like:
    from com.foo import Player
    p = Player()
    p.setGold(Integer.MAX_VALUE)But of course the new Player object would not be part of the game. Now if you have some kind of static/singleton game state, then the malicious user could insert the Player into the game model...
    The real trick lies in understanding how to setup the jython interpreter. If your interpreter classloader can only load facade classes (and system classes) then the client script could not load other classes. There is also a hook for the import keyword so you could disallow importing java classes. Each interpretor instance has the ability to setup the locals and globals for the session so you can insert live game objects.
    I am only familiar with jythons internals, so this may or may not be applicable to rhino.

Maybe you are looking for