SQL Server – SQL – work locally instead of public ports

My database and my web application are currently on the same server and I want to access SQL Server as localhost and close the SQL Server port for remote connections.

This is my current connection string, how can I change it to access the database as localhost?

"ConnectionStrings": {
    "DefaultConnection": "Server=tcp:152.242.211.112;Initial Catalog=testdb;User ID=usera;Password=********"
}

I have tried:

server=(local)
tcp=127.0.0.1
Data Source=(local)

using Data Source=(local)\SQLEXPRESS
I got this message:

A connection has been established with the server, but a connection
an error occurred during the login process. (provider: shared memory
Supplier, error: 0 – No process is at the other end of the pipe.

Using SQL Server 2017.

malware – Given a set of ports, is there one that is more likely to bypass a firewall?

I was trying to solve a homework question in an info-security course, and I was perplexed about a problem and I did not really know where to put my questions. Questions. If this is not the case, let me know.

Given the following ports,

8080 / UDP

6667 / TCP

53 / TCP

443 / TCP

if someone was developing malware, what would be the most likely software to use to get around the firewall?

I know that 53 and 443 are respectively DNS and HTTPS.

My thinking about the problem is that it is likely that a firewall would be configured to not drop incoming HTTPS traffic, making it the best choice for malware development, but I have impression that the question I miss is perhaps a trap. . In addition, it is probably possible to eliminate the UDP 8080 because it falls outside the commonly used UDP service range, which means that it is likely to be blocked by default.

Any idea or explanation would be helpful. Thank you!

iptables – Transfer specific ports on a virtual interface to a fixed menu

I've created a virtual interface on my enp1s0 called virtual0. enp1s0 will be configured to be behind the router. Virtual0 will be configured to be accessible to the outside world. I run docker instances, which I use locally on the network, but I wish to expose some of them to the outside world. Example: I would not want my samba instance to be exposed, but I want my openvpn instance to be exposed.

I managed to get two IP addresses, but I can not just allow access to some instances of docker through ip uses enp1s0.

dual boot – Ubuntu 19.04 with gdm3 REFUSED to work with HDMI ports or mini-screen

I am at the end of my mind here. I am running 19.04 in dualboot (same SSD) with winning 10.

On win10 everything is fishing; HDMI and mini-screen work perfectly.

Come to Ubuntu 19.04, everything fails. Neither port works (xrandr never opens the hdmi port as below):

Screen 0: minimum 320 x 200, current 1920 x 1080, maximum 8192 x 8192
eDP-1 connected primary 1920x1080+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 344mm x 193mm
   1920x1080    144.00*+  60.01    60.00    59.97    59.96    59.93  
   1680x1050     84.94    74.89    69.88    59.95    59.88  
   1600x1024     60.17  
   1400x1050     85.00    74.76    70.00    59.98  
   1600x900      59.99    59.94    59.95    59.82  
   1280x1024     85.02    75.02    60.02  
   1440x900      59.89  
   1400x900      59.96    59.88  
   1280x960      85.00    60.00  
   1440x810      60.00    59.97  
   1368x768      59.88    59.85  
   1360x768      59.80    59.96  
   1280x800      59.99    59.97    59.81    59.91  
   1152x864     100.00    85.06    85.00    75.00    75.00    70.00    60.00  
   1280x720      60.00    59.99    59.86    59.74  
   1024x768      85.00    75.05    60.04    85.00    75.03    70.07    60.00  
   1024x768i     86.96  
   960x720       85.00    75.00    60.00  
   928x696       75.00    60.05  
   896x672       75.05    60.01  
   1024x576      59.95    59.96    59.90    59.82  
   960x600       59.93    60.00  
   832x624       74.55  
   960x540       59.96    59.99    59.63    59.82  
   800x600       85.00    75.00    70.00    65.00    60.00    85.14    72.19    75.00    60.32    56.25  
   840x525       85.02    74.96    69.88    60.01    59.88  
   864x486       59.92    59.57  
   800x512       60.17  
   700x525       85.08    74.76    70.06    59.98  
   800x450       59.95    59.82  
   640x512       85.02    75.02    60.02  
   720x450       59.89  
   700x450       59.96    59.88  
   640x480       85.09    60.00    85.01    72.81    75.00    59.94  
   720x405       59.51    58.99  
   720x400       85.04  
   684x384       59.88    59.85  
   680x384       59.80    59.96  
   640x400       59.88    59.98    85.08  
   576x432      100.11    85.15    85.09    75.00    75.00    70.00    60.06  
   640x360       59.86    59.83    59.84    59.32  
   640x350       85.08  
   512x384       85.00    75.03    70.07    60.00  
   512x384i      87.06  
   512x288       60.00    59.92  
   416x312       74.66  
   480x270       59.63    59.82  
   400x300       85.27    72.19    75.12    60.32    56.34  
   432x243       59.92    59.57  
   320x240       85.18    72.81    75.00    60.05  
   360x202       59.51    59.13  
   360x200       85.04  
   320x200       85.27  
   320x180       59.84    59.32  
   320x175       85.27  

And I've tried everything with Google. All failed. I've installed and switched to LightDM, no use. I have reinstalled, have gdm3 only running, no use. Ideas? It becomes super frustrating 🙁

Connecting the laptop to my dell monitor brings up the monitor message: No hdmi signal from your device

ADD: I went from proprietary nvidia-driver-418 to newer drivers, without success either. I've opened the nvidia settings and I'm currently running on the iGPU selection.

centos – Unable to block specific ports for OpenVPN users

CentOS7.6 + iptables + OpenVPN2.4 (UDP proto) on board.

The question is duplicated and seems simple: I just want to block some specific ports for my VPN users.
So I'm doing

iptables -I FORWARD -p udp -m state --state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED -m udp -m multiport --dports 445,3333,5228,17890 -j DROP
service iptables save
service iptables restart

then do iptables -L and FORWARD string contains my added rules.

The complete configuration of iptables is:

iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.8.0.0/24 ! -d 10.8.0.0/24 -j SNAT --to 111.222.333.444
iptables -I INPUT -p udp --dport 1194 -j ACCEPT
iptables -I FORWARD -s 10.8.0.0/24 -j ACCEPT
iptables -I FORWARD -m state --state RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
iptables -I FORWARD -p udp -m state --state NEW,RELATED,ESTABLISHED -m udp -m multiport --dports 445,3333,5228,17890 -j DROP

But then, I try to monitor the traffic with

tcptrack -i eth0

I can still see that the connections to the blocked ports are creating.

What am I doing wrong?

how to know the version, the configuration files, the open ports and the purpose of the task

how to know the version, the configuration files, the open ports and the purpose of the task.

enter the description of the image here

19.04 – 2/4 USB ports are no longer detected

I have a MSI gs63vr with 3 USB3 ports and 1 USB2 port. Two of the USB3 ports have stopped working (those located at the back), but the other two are working perfectly. I have tried to edit the / etc / default / grub file several times, without success.

The ports themselves do not seem to be the problem, I can load the devices with them very well, they are just not detected by Ubuntu (I've checked lsusb to be sure).

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

metasploit – Proxy chains to access ports on the same host

It may be an amazing stupid question but I need to know if this concept is even possible.

I got a low privilege shell on a target machine. After an enumeration, I know that the host is vulnerable to EternalBlue but port 445 is blocked by firewall restrictions.

Is it possible to transfer port 445 to my machine as a low privileged user? As can be seen in the screen shot below, I used the MSF socks4a module in combination with the proxy chains, but my probes were denied.

screen capture

I've also tried using the MSF portfwd module which for some reason did not stop killing my meter-meter sessions as soon as I connected to the local port.

Could someone please clarify this for me?

Change keyboard for MacBook Pro (13 ports, 2017, four Thunderbolt 3 ports)

According to https://support.apple.com/keyboard-service-program-for-mac-notebooks, I can change the keyboard.

I've already had problems with my keyboard, including some keys that do not respond when you tap lightly and that type two characters when you tap it. However, these problems fade or disappear when I start in the recovery system. These problems have not appeared for nearly three months. Should I change the keyboard?

The main concern for me is this: (1) it takes time and I do not really have a lot of time, and (2) I've heard that even after replacing people, the keyboard still presents problems, that is to say that this problem is only attenuated afterwards. change, not resolved.

nic – How to create a 10 Gbps Ethernet link between a server and a switch using SFP + ports?

This is a network hardware compatibility request. 2019-08-08

I have no experience with SFP + ports and I may not understand how to use them.

If I installed this network card on my server:
Intel X520-DA2 Ethernet Converged Network Card

… and connected to this network switch:
QNAP Switch 10GbE QSW-1208-8C

… using this network cable:
10GTEK 10G SFP + Cable DAC 10GBASE-CU

… can I expect my server to have a 10 Gbps link to the switch?

Otherwise, I would appreciate a lot to understand why not.