## calculus – Simplifying limit help

In my calculus class, I have that
$$f(t) = 11.14(1.023)^t$$, and I am trying to find the instantaneous rate of change at $$t=15$$. So far the arithmetic I’ve done has lead me to
$$lim_{h to 0} frac{11.14(1.023)^{15+h} – 11.14(1.023)^{15}}{h}$$
but I can’t seem to further simplify this, and thus I can’t think of a solution. Is there something I’m overlooking, i.e. an identity or arithmetic simplification? Thanks.

## 2013 – Workflow to set limit of people per date in list

I have a task list / calendar that serves as a signup for classes. What I am trying to do is set 20 people per class per date. Once 20 people have signed up for the class (i.e. – once we have 20 list items with the same date), the date is no longer available for folks to sign up for.

I’m trying to use a workflow for this, but can’t figure out how to make this happen.
Any ideas?

## windows server 2012 r2 – How Apache Limit POST are set to accept Strictly local service Request?

I am trying to harden an Apache 2.4 Web server running 2 wordpress sites with separate vhost settings. Deployed on Windows 2012 r2. I was hacked a few weeks ago and the server was completely lost. On the new server they are still trying to hack the site with post request injections/code executions. I’m having trouble trying to block all `POST` request that are not sent by the server on submission.

Things I have tried include

• `<Location>`, `<Directory>`, `<Limit>` tags with their attributes like `GET`,`PUT`, `POST PUT DELETE` trying varied combos with various `Require` statements ie. `local`, `ip`, `host`, and `order allow, deny` patterns. `Allow all from`

• `<Directory "/">`, `<Location >`,`<LimitExcept >` Tags including attributes such as `GET`,`POST` and combos.

• Various `<if >` statements

• `AllowMethod` Statements

• Whitelisting Directories in the `.htacess`

Placing attempts in different file context. Such as `httpd.conf`, `Vhost.conf`, `.htaccess`. Any file I found referenced in Apache docs related to the directive context. Even placed it where it should not work for giggles. Nothing, I read in the docs or on stack overflow seemed to work.

All auth Modules loaded like mod_auth, mod_host etc. Just assume Modules are fine.

What I would like to achieve is to `deny` or `<Limit POST>` request. Strictly allowing them in a dynamic `<Directory "/.*"> or `` being responded to only when the server submits the Request using the server IP. Therefore the IP:port of the request should be the “remote address” because the apache local service sends the request method via PHP. I believe this to be correct logic.

The last thing I had time to try before leaving work, is the below code attempting a dynamic `<Directory “/.*”> tag I do not want to dig through WordPress for every form and create a tag for each directory.

``````<Directory "/.*">
<if "%{REQUEST_METHOD} == 'POST'">
<Limit POST PUT DELETE>
Require req, http %{REMOTE_ADDR} == 'xx.xx.xx.xx:xx'
</Limit>
</if>
</Directory>
``````

Now I tried

``````<Directory "/">
<Limit POST>
allow from all
</Limit>
</if>
</Directory>
``````
``````<Directory "/">
<Limit POST>
allow from all
</Limit>
</if>
</Directory>

``````

No plugin, No nginx,E xpress, Or IIS Suggestions. Only relevant solutions to this config.

## Why can carriers limit unlocked iPhone hotspot/tethering?

The answers here and here explain that carriers can tell an iPhone whether to allow tethering or use as a hotspot.

My question is why, on an unlocked phone, can they do that?

Has Apple simply colluded with a cellular service consortium to respect their wishes?

Or are there a means by which a cellular data provider can detect that data are being served to and from a different device through the iPhone bearing its SIM card? (While possible without any countermeasures, AFAIK it would be trivial for the iPhone to obscure the fact that it is tethering.)

## pr.probability – Is the weak* limit of Girsanov measures also a Girsanov measure?

Let $$mu_0$$ be the standard Wiener measure on $$C[0,T]$$. Let $$mu_n$$ be a sequence of measures with $$mu_nll mu_0$$ for all $$n$$ and so that the weak$$^ast$$ limit of $$mu_n$$ exists, call it $$mu$$. Is it true that $$mu ll mu_0$$?

I know for general measures this is not true. For example we can have a Gaussian with variance $$varepsilon$$ and send $$varepsilon to 0$$.

But what about for Girsanov measures?

## how to stop limit number of urls posted

ive set a project to

“stop the project after xxx verifications per url”
under project>options

it has already done multiples of what its supposed to do & just keeps doing more,
its the indexer engine, its done about 1500 in half a day for each project,
i just want it to do a steady amount & put the rest in the lists for when they are needed,
but apart from turning that engine off completely (which i would have to do for each project)
how do you get it to stay at the levels you have set it to at

project>options
its not 20-30% more -its not going to stop

## How to best limit SQL injection attacks that are being funneled through an Apache proxy I control

I use an Apache proxy to funnel traffic to an IIS server. The IIS server sends me emails if some bad actor attacks my site with an sql injection attack. It captures their IP address, and sends me the URL that was used.

The other day I got 8,400 emails in 50 minutes, nothing my mail server can’t handle, but all from some IP proxy in the US.

Now I am thinking of hardening my code by adding some time sensitive (hindering) factor into the equation. The idea is to send them a redirect to somewhere else (fbi?) for a set time period, after an initial warning; provided they reach that emails code.

Should I have IIS handle this (simple to implement,) or is it better for Apache to handled it? I would think so it there is such a function in Apache.

In IIS I could start a session logging IP addresses of bad actors, and block their access to the site. Or has Apache something that could block these request for a set time period?

And how would I implement this IIS to Apache handover, maybe via some header?

## Are Javascript closures a useful technique to limit exposing data to XSS?

I’m wondering if using Javascript closures is a useful technique to limit exposing data to XSS? I realize it wouldn’t prevent an attack, but would it reliably make an attack more difficult to execute, or would it only make my code more irritating to write and read (a waste of time)?

I got the idea from the Auth0 documentation regarding storing OAuth/OIDC tokens. It reads:

Auth0 recommends storing tokens in browser memory as the most secure option. Using Web Workers to handle the transmission and storage of tokens is the best way to protect the tokens, as Web Workers run in a separate global scope than the rest of the application. Use Auth0 SPA SDK whose default storage option is in-memory storage leveraging Web Workers.

If you cannot use Web Workers, Auth0 recommends as an alternative that you use JavaScript closures to emulate private methods.

I can see how this is better than just putting the token or other sensitive information in `localstorage`. In `localstorage` an XSS attack needs only to execute `localStorage.token` to get the token.

Now, if you’re not familiar with tokens just apply this reasoning to any sensitive to information. In my case I want to build a client-side cache mapping user IDs to usernames for an administrative interface, but I realize that client IDs and usernames are somewhat sensitive, so I wondered if I could “hide” the data.

## astrophotography – Is there any way to increase the limit of exposure time on a Canon EOS M50?

I would be interested in using my Canon EOS M50 for astrophotography, however I would like to take longer exposures than the 30 second limit. Is there any way to increase this limit beyond 30 seconds to take better exposures?

I considered using Magic Lantern, however I don’t believe it is supported by the camera and also it was ambiguous as to whether or not that was a feature that magic lantern actually offered. Is there some sort of software that can accomplish this? I assume that this was a limit of the software rather than the hardware, but I’m not sure if I’m missing something.

## How to Limit Database Quota In cPanel CloudLinux Server?

Hi,

I would like to limit Database Quotas in our cPanel CloudLinux server like below:

Database Size:

Database Table Size:

DB Queries Execution Times:

The limits would be different on each shared hosting plan.

How to implement that, is there any idea?