I have a website running CMSMadeSimple on an Azure Linux VM. The current URL is [website].cloudapp.net/cmsmadesimple, but now that the site is complete I need to change the it to the client's URL [website].com.
I've done this in the past by simply remoting in to the server and changing the DNS records, but since the VM is Linux, I can't just remote it. I've looked around but have yet to find a solution.
What am I missing here?
Just create a CNAME or A record. However, your application server must cooperate by redirecting the request to your new hostname to the existing application. It's likely a VirtualHost is already setup for this but if you get a 404 then you need to "remote" in.
First update the config.php files for the new domain.
Second update your vhost files on your webserver to listen to the new domain.
Final update the DNS (usually it is where you registered the domain -- like godaddy.com, namecheap.com, etc) to point to the IP or alias given to you by Azure.
Related
For network gurus out there, I'll like to ask some questions regarding some unique setup where the server will be sending a request to a client on localhost on a certain port.
I have a cloudy understanding of some network fundamentals that I hope you'll be able to help me out.
Kindly check the image below:
Basically, there's a static website hosted in AWS s3 and at some point this website will send a request to https://localhost:8001.
I was expecting that it will connect to the nginx container listening on port 8001 in my local machine, but it results in 504 gateway error.
My questions are:
Is it possible for a remote server to directly send data to a client at a particular port by addressing it as localhost?
How is it possible for the static website to communicate to my local docker container?
Thanks in advance.
In the setup you show, in the context of a Web site, localhost isn't in your picture at all. It's the desktop machine running the end user's Web browser.
More generally, you show several boxes in your diagram – "local machine", "Docker VM", "individual container", "server in Amazon's data center" – and within each of these boxes, if they make an outbound request to localhost, it reaches back to itself.
You have two basic options here:
(1) Set up a separate (Route 53) DNS name for your back-end service, and use that https://backend.example.com/... host name in your front-end application.
(2) Set up an HTTP reverse proxy that forwards /, /assets, ... to S3, and /api to the back-end service. In your front-end application use only the HTTP path with no host name at all.
The second option is more work to set up, but once you've set it up, it's much easier to develop code for. Webpack has a similar "proxy the backend" option for day-to-day development. This setup means the front-end application itself doesn't care where it's running, and you don't need to rebuild the application if the URL changes (or an individual developer needs to run it on their local system).
I have my rails 5 website on an AWS server, everything works fine for me but i need to change region due to problems with sending emails, i created an image of my instance using the information in this web page and then i executed it specifying the new region but when i tried to access through the ipv4 address the page stays loading and doesn't show me my website that worked well in the other instance, i tried to access through the console using the key pair and all the files from my previous instance are there. my server uses nginx. what could be missing?
You may be trying to access the old IP address. When you moved the instance to a new region it will get a new IP address.
Another possibility is that the web server on the server was not started automatically. You may have to configure that to start on boot. The procedure may depend on how you set up the server.
We have an new version of php web app listening to port 80.
I am wondering if it is possible to host the new version on another port, with no code modification, while keep the old version listening to port 80.
For example, if the user visits the page www.example.com, then it goes to the old version, and if the user visits the page www.example.com:8080 then it goes to the new version.
Maybe I can achieve this with route53? or maybe I have to alter the apache configuration?
Thanks.
The way to achieve this is by tweaking the Apache configuration as you suggested, to force Apache to fetch your content from another DocumentRoot when the 8080 listener is triggered.
Route53 will not help here as a DNS system only resolves name to IP Address, and do not deal with multiple ports for the same IP address.
You can use Apache's VirtualHost to configure multiple listener. You can even have different PHP versions per host ports, as per Running two PHP versions on the same server
I've been thinking of the concept of an ad blocker that runs at the OS level, rather than as a browser extension. I know that I can place x.com in Windows' %windows%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts file and point it to the IP of y.com, and on y.com I can serve up content that says, "This ad blocked by Example Ad Blocker". However, the domain list I have is quite large -- like literally a thousand domains and growing, and so this wouldn't work well in file lookups. Does Windows permit some way to programmatically, like Qt/C++, add a DNS reroute rule in a more speedy way?
There's a risk of doing domain intercepts and DLL hooks using APIs because AV products and/or Microsoft would have to whitelist you and certify you so that your activity doesn't look like a virus. And the odds of them doing that are not only low (unless you're a multimillion dollar company), but they want to protect their ad marketing too.
The best option is to make a browser extension for each of the browsers. You can even check the source code of the AdBlock Chrome extension to see how it works. The trouble with that in 2017, however, is that there's no common browser extension platform just yet. It's getting much closer, but it's still not standardized yet. The new standard uses the Chrome standard. Opera, Firefox, Edge, and of course Chrome support this new standard to some degree, but it's kind of unsmooth still. And for anyone outside of that, such as IE11 or earlier, they're not going to have your Chrome-style browser extension and you'll have to go the seriously hard route to make one just for those earlier browsers or ask the customer to upgrade when your adware product installs.
If you want something that doesn't require a browser extension, then the option you want is to add another DNS server connection in the user's DNS client settings. I don't know how to do this yet via C#, Qt/C++, or C++. However, you can shell out from those languages and use the "netsh" command to create those DNS connections. Probably a good strategy would be to find the user's default gateway IP. Then, make the DNS priority like so:
your DNS server that redirects x.com to y.com so that you can do ad blocking from y.com via a web server
the user's default gateway IP
Google's DNS (8.8.8.8) in case the default gateway IP has changed for the user
So, it would be something like these 4 netsh commands:
netsh delete dnsserver "Wireless Network Connection" all
netsh interface ip add dns name="Wireless Network Connection" addr=1.1.1.1 index=1
netsh interface ip add dns name="Wireless Network Connection" addr=192.168.254.254 index=2
netsh interface ip add dns name="Wireless Network Connection" addr=8.8.8.8 index=3
Change "Wireless Network Connection" to "Local Area Connection" if they are using a cable for their computer instead of wireless. (Few do that these days.)
Change 1.1.1.1 to the IP address of your special DNS server.
Change 192.168.254.254 to the IP address of their default gateway.
The third rule (8.8.8.8) tells the computer to use Google's DNS if all else fails. This is important because they could disconnect their laptop at home and go to a café or something, and we need their DNS stuff to still work.
Now, once you get the DNS client settings right, you need a cheap Linux cloud host to serve up the DNS server and web server. You might even need more than one in case one goes down for maintenance, and possibly on a different cloud zone or even cloud hosting provider.
For the DNS product, if you have Linux skills, you can install and configure dnsmasq pretty easily to get a cheap and easy to manage DNS server on Linux. Or, if you search your Linux repositories, you can find other DNS servers, some more robust than others, some harder to use than others.
For the web product, you can install NGINX or Apache on each of the two DNS servers. Then, you can make a configuration where any domain connection can come to it and it will load a web page for that domain. The web page can say something like, "Ad Blocked By X Ad Blocker" or whatever you want in very small font (small enough to fill the ad spot).
Once this is all in place, you'll have to reboot the Win PC client and also clear their browser cache and history so that DNS will route through the new arrangement.
The end result is that when people on that Windows PC surf the web and load an ad, their OS will make a DNS request to translate domain name to IP address. The first DNS server they'll reach will be your private DNS server. It can then say that x.com ad domain (as an example) is the IP address of your private DNS server. That private web server will then be contacted and it will display the ad block message. For all other requests not served up by your DNS servers, they'll go to their default gateway. If that's not serving up DNS as needed, then they'll failsafe to the Google DNS on 8.8.8.8. So, web browsing will work fine, minus ads.
As for a bad domain list, there's a community-maintained bad domains list here on Github.
The trouble with the private DNS server that you host is that you're now having to pay a bandwidth bill for gobs of connections to it. That's probably undesirable unless you've got a proper way to monetize that. A better strategy would be to NOT use a private DNS server on the web and use a local DNS server and a local web server. You'd have to code both of those or use some third-party product for that. The trouble there, however, is that you may have some commercial licensing problems with that, or increased costs, and it won't work for some web developers who already use a web server on their workstation.
Therefore, as you can see from the added costs, hassle, and workstation configuration nuance troubles, the best strategy would be to use the browser extension for ad blocking.
However, even at that, how are you going to differentiate your product from the free ad blockers out there that are doing a sensational job already?
I have Shibboleth configured on an IIS server and am using it protect a .NET application.
I need authenticated access for users accessing the application over the web and for that Shibboleth is working fine.
The application also hosts web services which need to be accessed by other applications in the same server and for that working with Shibboleth is a challenge since web service clients cannot deal with the log in page.
Is it possible to configure Shibboleth to ignore requests coming from the same server for example by checking the IP address?
It won't directly answer your question, but I can share a workaround I found and hope it can help with your problem too.
Define another website in IIS pointing to the same folder as the initial one, and make it only respond to a different domain (like something.local). Then in IP Address and Domain Restrictions, make sure only 127.0.0.1 is allowed to access it.
In C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc open the file "hosts" in Notepad (running with Administrator privileges). Add the line "127.0.0.1 something.local" (no quotes; make sure the domain is the same one you defined before)
Now, make the webservices call the application by the new domain.