search for: insecurely

I'm using "insecure=invite" with two different dial plans, it it working with one dial plan but not with the other. What other parameters could influence "insecure=invite" In sip.conf below "insecure=invite" is working OK [pstn-1270] type=friend secret=spa3k username=voice-1270 mailbox=369 host=dynamic insecure=invite canreinvite=no disallow=all allow=ulaw

If ‘virt-v2v -oo insecure’ is used then ‘openstack --insecure’ flag is added whenever we invoke the openstack command. This turns of SSL certificate validation. --- v2v/output_openstack.ml | 14 +++++++++++++- v2v/virt-v2v-output-openstack.pod | 1 + v2v/virt-v2v.pod | 7 +++++++ 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/v2v/output_openstack.ml

I run "logcheck" on my servers and have noticed that my DC01 log has these: Feb 4 06:58:16 dc01 named[2096]: validating @0xb1c75c18: . NS: got insecure response; parent indicates it should be secure Feb 4 06:58:16 dc01 named[2096]: error (insecurity proof failed) resolving './NS/IN': 208.67.222.222#53 Feb 4 06:58:16 dc01 named[2096]: validating @0xb1c75c18: . NS: got insecure

A smaller change than v2, we simply generalize the ability to pass through flags to the underlying openstack command, allowing the --insecure flag to be specified directly. Rich.

I just noticed after upgrade from Asterisk 1.4.39 to 1.8.8 my caller ID is not working WARNING[1671]: chan_sip.c:13956 check_auth: username mismatch, have <11>, digest has <pstn-1270> NOTICE[1671]: chan_sip.c:22048 handle_request_invite: Failed to authenticate device "KMIEC Z" <sip:7804715665 at 10.0.0.110>;tag=1c976040515 -- Joseph

Does the sort order matter in sip.conf file? I know sort order might effect: allow=ulaw allow=alaw but does it matter where I place: insecure=invite ? The reason I'm asking is that I've loaded almost two identical (sip.conf and extension.conf) files on the same asterisk server and with one set insecure=invite is working correctly. When I load the second set of dial plan (sip.conf and

Thanks - that much I (pretty much) got. Its really the "wide links" option that isn't well distinguished/clarified. *insecure* wide links is much more clear, although the detail you've given helps a lot. What exactly is the "ordinary" "wide links = yes" option going to do (with or without Unix extensions), and how does it compare/how much exposure to

I'd like to understand reasonably fully,, the difference between the two options "wide links" and "allow insecure wide links" in smb.conf. The docs make them sound very similar but as there are obvious security implications for anything to do with symlink scope, it's important to know what each of them allows/blocks and where they differ. Interestingly, only the

Previously we allowed arbitrary flags to be passed through to the underlying openstack CLI command, provided they have the format ‘--key=value’. We want to pass the ‘--insecure’ flag through, but that doesn't have the key=value form. However a small modification to the matching rules would allow this. The effect of this change is that you can now use ‘virt-v2v -oo insecure’ to turn off SSL

Hi all I'm trying to figure out what values are valid for the "insecure" option in a realtime configuration table. The table field is 4 chars long and the actual valid values for this is longer. Can I modify the field length or has this changed? Below is where I looked, if I'm not looking in the right place please let me know. the field on the table is: ... `insecure`

Hey List, I'm trying to test out using Gluster 3.4 for virtual machine disks. My enviroment consists of two Fedora 19 hosts with gluster and qemu/kvm installed. I have a single volume on gluster called vmdata that contains my qcow2 formated image created like this: qemu-img create -f qcow2 gluster://localhost/vmdata/test1.qcow 8G I'm able to boot my created virtual machine but in the

On Tuesday, 20 November 2018 11:25:10 CET Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Previously we allowed arbitrary flags to be passed through to the > underlying openstack CLI command, provided they have the format > ‘--key=value’. We want to pass the ‘--insecure’ flag through, but > that doesn't have the key=value form. However a small modification to > the matching rules would allow

Hello! Looks like faq, but... Could you , please, point me on how to convert this [cisco] type=friend host=192.168.22.253 insecure=port,invite to pjsip? as you can see another side is very old cisco router, so I can't change anything there. I don't see any examples here

Does the 'allow insecure wide links' parameter work in the Samba in RHEL 6.5 (which is 3.6.9-167.el6_5)? I need 'unix extensions' to be yes and also follow wide links. So I set 'allow insecure wide links' but it doesn't seem to work. By the way (and this may be a known issue that's been resolved in later releases) after we upgraded our Macs to 10.9 (which rolled

Hi bob., As fas as i know opendns does not support dnssec. which is default enabled in bind9 try switchin your dns forwarders to googles ( which support dnssec ) and see what happens. or.. disable dnssec in bind9 Louis >-----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- >Van: bob at donelsontrophy.net >[mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Bob of Donelson Trophy >Verzonden:

Does anyone know if upstream ever plans on updating the dovecot package to a non RC version or to even one of the RC versions that isn't so insecure, And by insecure, I of course refer to the recent rash of bugs which have been found. Thanks, -Drew -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

The DC is a Windows AD DC. Could you please clarify why i should change setting in the Windows DC instead of the Samba server, which is the one that does the insecure ldap bind? Regards Andrea Cucciarre' On 11/9/2020 3:13 PM, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 09/11/2020 13:28, Andrea Cucciarre' wrote: >> My customer complain that in the AD DC they see the following

Package: xen-utils-common Version: 3.0.3-0-2 Severity: normal I'm not an expert in networking but I think that the current setup when using network-nat for domains is insecure. I've configured : (network-script 'network-nat netdev=eth1') (vif-script vif-nat) So when only domain 0 is started, I get the following : # iptables -L -n Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot

I running Asterisk 1.1 on Mandriva 2006. Everything works fine, can connect with softphone, send outgoing calls to VOIP provider. The only (and big) problem is that Asterisk refuses to authenticate incoming calls with the message (in the log): Failed to authenticate user "XXXXXXXXXX" <sip:XXXXXXXXXX@209.17.160.129> From what I've read in the various docs I could access, I

Thanks Vardan, I will like to know if this scenario can work when peer is not having fixed ip and we use host = nasir.server.com ? also I have set insecure=invite,port what if i use insecure=no thanks again. Message: 24 Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 10:52:14 +0500 From: Vardan <hvardan71 at gmail.com> Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Dialing a SIP Peer without using register strin To: