I have some code in .NET V2.0 that is talking to an asmx service
As a related issue I also have some code in the same winforms app that is doig BITS uploads
We are a very small shop and quite frankly do not have any sort of proxy server setup
But of course our clients will
I want to test with a proxy server sitting between my home FIOS connection and the internets and I want to test when auth information is required against the proxy server
Clearly the number of configurations in the wild are way many but any suggestions welcome
1) Any public proxy servers where I can create credential based accounts and test?
2) any catch all .NET solution like asking for creds setting them somehow on BITS uploads and asmx services and then just assuming they work 90% of the time
Thanks
You could run a proxy server on your own computer, then 'connect to yourself' as the proxy.
Related
Background
We have almost a hundred Eureka clients (spring cloud apps) being registered to an Eureka discovery server. One client can depend as many as more than 10 other clients. Traditionally, we have to run all the dependencies (along with discovery and config server) on local dev environment when developing against one client. Sometimes, to avoid bring up so many projects, I just connect the single client I am working on to our integration test environment which has all clients running. This way, it is very convenient for myself, but having a critical issue: my local client can be discovered by other clients, meaning someone else's testing might be effected by my instance. I know there are ways to mock or proxy the client dependencies. But they are not always good for every scenario, also the setup takes additional time.
Question
Is there a practically quick and easy way to register a client without being discovered by other clients. Besides, I can not issuePUT /eureka/v2/apps/appID/instanceID/status?value=OUT_OF_SERVICEor other discovery server side command. I can only configure my local project.
The easiest way to achieve that is adding the below property only in your local profile.
eureka:
client:
registerWithEureka: false
If so, your application still can look up other instances from Eureka, but your application will not register itself into Eureka.
I'm planning to build an application that will include users registration and so on.. I want to build a kind of social network application and i wonder how should I build my server and what is the right way to connect between the application and the server?
I know to build clients and servers in python and connect between them with sockets, but I realise that this is not the right way to do it in mobile applications..
someone told me I should learn something called SOA or web application server , I did not understand him so well,
I hope that you understand what I search for, thanks!
A good start is to create a REST-based backend service that exposes methods/operations via HTTP. Host the service on your server, and allow the app to communicate with the service. This service can send and receive data, typically in the JSON format, between the service and your app(s). Try looking here for some examples:
Python: https://www.sitepoint.com/building-simple-rest-api-mobile-applications/
.NET: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/web-api/overview/older-versions/build-restful-apis-with-aspnet-web-api
Good evening, just saw that Facebook released his messenger bot toolkit and i immediately jumped right into it to learn more about it and maybe try to do my own.
My problem is that i don't have a https website running and it requires a https valid url. I tried to use my local web-server that has a certificate but it doesn't work.
My question is if this is possible to be done using a localhost url at all.
Thank you in advance
Actually this is possible with localhost. Use ngrok. It allows you to open localhost to the public web, over http or https. This should only be used for testing however.
If you want to test webhooks on your local environment, I would try ultrahook.com, you can get an API Key for free and the tool creates a tunnel from a public URL to your computer. This is from their FAQs page:
You download and run the UltraHook client on your computer. It
connects to UltraHook servers in the cloud and creates a tunnel from a
public endpoint on our servers to your computer. Any HTTP POST
requests sent to the public end point will be sent through the tunnel
an delivered to a private endpoint accessible from your computer.
I have used it to test webhooks from different providers (like payment gateways). In your computer, you can run something like:
ultrahook <subdomain> http://localhost:8000/webhook/
and then configure the webhook URL in your external service to something like <subdomain>.ultrahook.com
My question is if this is possible to be done using a localhost url at all.
No, of course it isn’t – because what such a “callback” actually means, is that Facebook makes a request to your server – and that is hardly possible with localhost.
A valid SSL certificate for your website is easy to get for free these days, via LetsEncrypt. And even if that is not available on your server, there’s still StartSSL, that provide basic certificates for free. All you need is a server you can install them on, or upload them to, or whatever mechanism your hoster provides for it. (And if they don’t provide any, then it might be time to switch.)
I'm working on a web application that will use Rhino Service Bus to send messages that are then consumed by a windows service on the app server. I've been able to test this on my machine (hosting the web app and the windows service) and it works fine. I was also able to test this in our dev environment, which has one web server and one app server, without any problems. However, our staging environment has two web servers and two app servers, so I'm not sure how to configure the endpoint to which the messages are sent.
I know I can edit the config section for each web server to point to one of the app servers. I can also put the windows service on only one machine and send everything to a queue on that machine. Neither of these sounds like a good option. What's the best practice in a scenario like this?
Any help would be appreciated.
It depends on which transport you're using. If you're using Rhino.Queues you can leverage hardware based load balancing + DNS. If you're using MSMQ, then you would need to use the MSMQ load balancer in RSB. You can find tests in the source that demonstrate this. Your workarounds that you mentioned would also work.
Our IT staff refuses to install the SiteMinder agent on our application's IIS 6.0 web server, citing security concerns as it is a third-party software, as well as the possibility of high resource utilization impacting application performance.
They suggest that we set up an independent, segregated web server containing only a bare-bones IIS, the SiteMinder Agent, and a "shim" to authenticate login attempts.
This shim would be a single ASPX page marked to be protected by the agent. It would use the SiteMinder agent to authenticate the user ID, look up the user ID in the application's database, and return the user ID and password to the user's browser. A JavaScript function would then POST the user ID and password to the application's existing login page as if they typed it in themselves.
Are their concerns warranted? Why or why not?
Have you ever heard of anyone implementing a similar architecture?
Is their proposed solution good, bad, or ugly?
It does not look like it would work, because the agent manages not only the initial login, but subsequent calls to the application, i.e. authenticated session. The agent examines the cookie, validates it, etc. Your scenario does not describe how that would happen.
In our environment, all internet traffic goes through an Apache reverse proxy before hitting IIS. IIS is behind firewall. The Apache reverse proxy has the SM agent all it does is redirect the traffic to IIS. I suppose it would be feasible to do a similar setup with IIS acting as a reverse proxy.
BTW, tell your IT guy that his proposed shoestring and bubblegum login solution is a much bigger security concern than installing SiteMinder on IIS.
The apache reverse proxy solution will definitely work, but with SiteMinder r12.51, Secure Proxy Server is included, which is basically SiteMinder's version of a reverse proxy (plus a lot more).
SPS will let you configure a single server as a "gateway" for all of your applications that can't or won't install a SiteMinder agent. The web agent is embedded in SPS and a proprietary Java app does the heavy lifting. SPS also has a GUI which follows the look and feel of the r12 WAMUI, which makes configuring it very simple.
Secure Proxy Server also has a Federation Gateway feature, so you don't need to install the web agent option pack if you are doing SAML Federation. All of your fcc pages can also be served by the SPS, so you can reduce the number of webservers needed to support your SSO environment.