Enabling WebDAV On Fedora 16

Logo for the Apache HTTPD Server Project .

Image via Wikipedia

Here is how I enabled WebDAV on Fedora 16 (before starting, you need to know how to use a terminal/shell and change into root account from terminal/shell):

  1. I opened up ports 80 and 443 for the firewall
  2. I disabled SELinux
    1. Open up the file vi /etc/sysconfig/selinux by typing in the command vi /etc/sysconfig/selinux as root inside a terminal
    2. Change the line that says SELINUX=enforcing to SELINUX=disabled
    3. Save the /etc/sysconfig/selinux file and get out of vi
    4. Reboot the machine
  3. I installed Apache Web Server
    1. Inside a terminal as root, type in the command yum -y install httpd
    2. Edit the file vi /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf by typing in the command vi /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf inside a terminal as root user
    3. Change line #43 to ServerTokens Prod
    4. Change line #75 to KeepAlive On
    5. Change line #261 to root@localhost
    6. Change line #275 to ServerName localhost:80
    7. Change line #337 to AllowOverride All
    8. Change line #401 to DirectoryIndex index.html index.php
    9. Change line #535 to ServerSignature Off
    10. Comment out the line #758 to something like this #AdDefaultCharset UTF-8
    11. Save the file /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf and get out of vi
    12. Type the command systemctl start httpd.service inside the terminal as root user to start Apache web server
    13. Type the command systemctl enable httpd.service to enable the starting of Apache web server on each fresh boot
    14. Install PHP by typing command yum -y install php php-mbstring php-pear inside a terminal as root user
    15. Type the command systemctl restart httpd.service inside a terminal as root user to restart Apache web server
    16. Configuring SSL for Apache to serve websites in SSL mode (i.e., HTTPS) by installing mod_ssl, so type the command yum -y install mod_ssl inside a terminal as root user
    17. Edit the file vi /etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf by typing in the command vi /etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf inside a terminal as root user
    18. Uncomment the line #78 to DocumentRoot “/var/www/html”
    19. Uncomment the line #79 to ServerName localhost:443
    20. Uncomment line #112 if it’s not yet uncommented, so the line should look like this SSLCertificateFile /etc/pki/tls/certs/localhost.crt
    21. Uncomment the line #119 if it’s not yet uncommented, so the line should look like this SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/pki/tls/private/localhost.key
    22. Save the file /etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf and get out of vi
    23. Type the command systemctl restart httpd.service to restart the Apache web server
  4. Create WebDAV server/protocol
    1. Inside a terminal as root user, type in the command mkdir /home/WebDAV to create a directory named WebDAV
    2. Change the owner for directory WebDAV by typing in the command chown apache. /home/WebDAV inside a terminal as root user
    3. Change permission for WebDAV directory to 770 by typing in the command chmod 770 /home/WebDAV inside a terminal as root user
    4. Make a webdav.conf file to configure WebDAV server by typing in the command vi /etc/httpd/conf.d/webdav.conf inside a terminal as root user
    5. Type the lines below into the file /etc/httpd/conf.d/webdav.conf using vi editor:
    6. Alias /share /home/WebDAV
    7. <location /share>
    8. DAV On
    9. SSLRequireSSL
    10. Options None
    11. AuthType Basic
    12. AuthName WebDAV
    13. AuthUserFile /etc/httpd/conf/.htpasswd
    14. <LimitExcept GET OPTIONS>
    15. Order allow,deny
    16. Allow from 192.168.1.
    17. Require valid-user
    18. </LimitExcept>
    19. </Location>
    20. Stop typing the stuffs into the file /etc/httpd/conf.d/webdav.conf and save it and get out of vi
    21. Type the command htpasswd -c /etc/httpd/conf/.htpasswd fedora inside a terminal as root user to add password for fedora user to use WebDAV server
    22. You will be asked to create a password and confirm password, so type in the same password twice
    23. Now you need to restart the Apache server by typing in the command systemctl restart httpd.service inside a terminal as root user

Log into the WebDAV server by using https://192.168.1.(enter the last bit of number for your server IP address here)/share.  You will be asked to enter username and password.  The username should be fedora, and the password is the password that you had created earlier.

Troubleshooting:  You should check to see if you can ping your Apache server. Check to see if Apache server has a daemon running (i.e., ps aux | grep httpd).  Check to make sure firewall ports 80 and 443 are opened.  Check to make sure SELinux is disabled.  Check to see the configuration file for httpd.conf is correctly configured.  Check to see the configuration file for webdav.conf is correctly configured.  If permission 770 for /home/WebDAV isn’t working, try to change it to 755 or 777.  Make sure you had enabled SSL for Apache correctly.  If all failed, you might want to reboot Apache and to see if problems could be resolved this way.

About these ads

Which Tablet Should You Buy On Black Friday?

Steve Jobs while introducing the iPad in San F...

Image via Wikipedia

I have a friend who concerns about should he buy an iPad 2 or some other tablets on Black Friday.  The truth about tablet is not all about the hardware!  It’s great to have great hardware on a tablet if one decides to play cutting edge games on a tablet.  My bet is that most hardcore gamers rather play their games on consoles and computers than on tablets.  My friend definitely isn’t a hardcore gamer, and so I don’t think his wanting to buy a tablet is for gaming.

Kindle Fire Large Image Has Some rights reserved by Courtbean On Flickr.comI figure my friend wants a tablet for other reasons and not for playing cutting edge games.  These reasons might be watching movies on Netflix, listening to music, using apps, playing casual games, reading news, checking emails, keeping notes, reading ebooks, and other trivial stuffs.  Anyhow, I explain to my friend that he should get a tablet according to his content needs, and so should you!

Let say if you have so much contents that are tying to iTunes already, and you also want to use iTunes Match and iCloud, then I suggest you buy an iPad 2.  If you have mostly Amazon contents or wanting to invest in Amazon contents such as buying Amazon ebooks, then I suggest you check out Kindle Fire.  Of course, there are other tablets besides the two that I’d mentioned, but none of those tablets could beat the two that I mentioned in regarding to contents.  For your information though, other tablets might have beefier hardware specifications than iPad 2 and Kindle Fire, and iPad 2 has beefier hardware specification than Kindle Fire.

I hope my friend will buy a tablet that fits his content needs, and so should you!  Good luck on finding a super deal for a tablet on Black Friday!

Kinect For Windows Hardware Will Be Different Than Kinect For Xbox 360, Allowing Users To Use At Closer Range, As Close As 50 Centimeters

Kinect sensor as shown at the 2010 Electronic ...

Image via Wikipedia

It’s not a surprise to see Microsoft announces that it will release Kinect for Windows in early 2012, but it’s a surprise to hear that Kinect for Windows will come with newer hardware and firmware.  According to LATimes’ article “Kinect is coming to Windows, but are TVs next?” — Unlike Kinect for Xbox 360, Kinect for Windows users will be able to use Kinect at close range (i.e., as close as 50 centimeters).  So, it seems Kinect for Windows is more flexible than Kinect for Xbox 360, because many computer users do actually stay nearer to their monitors.  Kinect for Windows will work with Windows 7 and Windows 8.

I think Kinect for Windows is great, but it might not be a must have!  Perhaps, I might be shortsighted on this matter, but I think Windows users who stay only inches away from their monitors might not think that it’s a good idea to wave their hands around to communicate with Kinect.  The plus side though that Kinect can recognize voices, therefore it might still be a good idea to use Kinect at close range through the use of Kinect voice recognition.  This makes me so wish to see Microsoft comes out something similar to Apple’s Siri and couples such technology with Kinect or builds it into Kinect so users like us can finally have a personal assistant while using our Windows.

Source:  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/11/kinect-for-windows-and-soon-tvs.html

Would It Be Better For Apple Users Had Steve Jobs’ Wish Of Creating A Wireless Carrier Came True?

Steve Jobs shows off iPhone 4 at the 2010 Worl...

Image via Wikipedia

Reading Steve Jobs‘ biography written by Walter Isaacson, one could see that Steve Jobs had wanted to create his own wireless carrier.  Steve Jobs had always obsessed with making sure that Apple would be the one that got the final say on user experience.  Steve Jobs had not wanted to have Apple’s partners dictated how the users would see Apple products, therefore he had decided to create his own retail stores (i.e., Apple stores).  The same thing could be said how Steve Jobs took the wall garden approach to Apple applications as these were and are being tightly integrated and guarded within Apple App Store.  So, it was painful for Steve Jobs to see that he had to put up with how things weren’t in his control when it came down to wireless network.  Perhaps for certain difficulties that proved to be too illusive to solve when it came to create a wireless carrier, therefore he had abandoned the approach and copulated with AT&T exclusively from the start.  Of course, now we know that Apple folks are at the point where they will work with just any carrier, and so the exclusivity which AT&T enjoyed earlier is no longer in place.  This explains how Verizon and the rest got to sell iPhone 4S.

Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson

Image by stevegarfield via Flickr

The question is this, is it wise to use Steve Jobs’ wall garden approach for everything, even with wireless carrier, so the business could provide better user experience and boost bottom line?  I think in some moving parts that responsible for the health of certain businesses, it’s not wise to use wall garden approach.  Why?  Perhaps, when a business is well known for not being talented with something might take the wrong approach and end up creating a disaster.  With that being said, I still think Steve Jobs is right about Apple should have its very own wireless carrier.  After all, what is important most to a business should be run by its own master to ensure the ultimate customer experience stays positive!

Just imagine several major wireless carriers could band together to form a coalition of sort to demand Apple to work with them in limited terms, would this be unreasonable to Apple?  Perhaps, because Apple might not be able to provide the ultimate customer/user experience when Apple could not dictate how their very own customers/users enjoy staying connected.  Some people might argue that Apple should be OK as long their products sell in millions.  Sure, Apple could make its competitors rage with envy when it comes down to selling products, but customers could eventually hate Apple for not providing better customer/user experience.  Perhaps this was why Steve Jobs knew and created Apple’s own retailer stores while his advisors were against the very idea in the first place.  Steve Jobs’s advisors and colleagues pointed out that Dell did not own retailer stores and yet had been doing fine; also, HP and others were doing fine without owning their own retailer stores for they worked with various retailer distributors such as Best Buy.  Steve Jobs was right as Apple stores boosted Apple sales.  As seeing the success of Apple stores, I have to wonder should Apple be even more successful if it had its own wireless carrier?

Wireless carriers are a major part of determining how customers/users feel about Apple products, this is why Steve Jobs might have been right about having Apple to run its own wireless carrier.  To explain why wireless carriers are a major moving part of Apple’s overall business strategy, one has to recognize that without reliable and fast wireless carriers, Apple products are just cumbersome and dull; perhaps with few self-contained software and games.  This might not be enough for today customers/users since today world emphasizes more on staying connected with the Internet (i.e., the world).  This explains why data can determine customers/users’ interests and joys and connections and social interactions and e-commerce and everything.  Therefore, Apple products end up just represent the hardware side, and we know when hardware have no software, nobody would care!  In today world, we also to have acknowledge that when hardware have no data, nobody would care!  This is why as one appreciates the wall garden approach of Steve Jobs, one has to recognize Apple needs to create its own wireless carrier.

As now, major wireless carriers complain users are using too much data that put strains on their networks.  Instead of finding real solutions to make customers/users stay happy, several major wireless networks have combatted heavy data by selling limited wireless plans; they think limiting how customers/users use data might deter users from using too much data.  Raising costs and limiting users the ability to use wireless networks freely, I fear one cannot say customers/users are having good experience with wireless carriers.  I don’t think the ultimate experience of using something is to be limited.  It is not so good experience when one can only watch half of a great film and not the rest.  It is not so good experience when one can only lick a cake but not eat it.  It is not so good experience when one can only smell the wine but not drink it.  So on and so on… Therefore it’s not so good experience when one cannot stream data on the go freely.  This is why it’s not a bad idea to see even if there is only one more wireless carrier enters the wireless market to boost competition, lower down the costs, and improve customer/user experience.  Should Apple be the one more wireless carrier to make Apple users happier?

It’s a hypocrite of me to support open movement and not so a fish tank approach to mobile apps and yet I wish Steve Jobs’ own wireless carrier should have happened.  Still, for Apple users’ greater good, I like the idea of Apple having its own wireless carrier (Hint: notice how I say for Apple users’ greater good only).  I think with Apple’s own wireless carrier, Apple can carry out its wall garden approach fully to improve customer/user experience.  Of course, I think wall garden approach only works when Apple truly wants to improve the customer/user experience and not just pushing for greater profits.  If what being read in Steve Jobs’ biography written by Walter Isaacson are mostly true, then one could see Steve Jobs were more interested in making excellent products than just making more money.  It also explained how the come back of Steve Jobs to Apple board had allowed Apple not only survived the almost bankruptcy but thrived and became one of the most valuable companies in the country.  So, my point is that Apple might continue to rise even more by putting Steve Jobs’ original intention to work as in creating Apple wireless carrier.

On the side note:  Even Google is slowly experimenting in building its own broadband.  Perhaps too Google will build its own wireless carrier.  Why?  I think Google knows that it cannot be too happy to allow today major broadband and wireless carriers have all the saying in how Google users should use Google data.  Just imagine what if Internet users experience data throttling by major broadband and wireless carriers, how Google be sure its users would be able to enjoy Google data fully?  Google is in the business of marketing and more, and when users could not reach an ad or two and a service or two, it might be costly for Google’s bottom line to not do something to prevent such things from happening.  Should Apple take note from Google on the matter of creating one’s own broadband/wireless carrier?  I think very yes so!

Even The FBI, CIA, And NSA Admit That Full Disk Encryption Is Hard To Crack

Category:WikiProject Cryptography participants

Image via Wikipedia

According to Extremetech’s article “Full disk encryption is too good, says US intelligence agency,” a study with a title “The growing impact of full disk encryption on digital forensics” suggests that CSI teams from intelligence agencies (e.g., FBI, CIA, NSA) are facing many difficulties in gathering evidences against criminals who use full disk encryption to lock out incriminatory data.  So, when the elite federal intelligence agencies within the United States think that full disk encryption is making their jobs too hard, then everybody should know full disk encryption can protect data appropriately against most hackers.  Just don’t let the hackers social engineering you to give out the password to unlock the encrypted data, OK?

Surprisingly, full disk encryption can be done so easily, but I doubt that many good citizens are willing to do so.  Sure, full disk encryption can take a very long time if the disk is huge, but by being patience enough to wait out for the encryption process to finish can actually pay off in the end in regarding to safeguard one’s data.  TrueCrypt is the best free software known to date which allows users to truly encrypting disks and files easily.  TrueCrypt is compatible to Mac, Windows, and Linux.  Besides TrueCrypt, Windows 7 Ultimate and Enterprise editions have full disk encryption known as BitLocker Drive Encryption; Mac OS X Lion has FileVault 2; and Linux has various free software to do full disk encryption.  So, it’s clearly that one can do a full disk encryption on any computer platform easily.

Nowadays, web services and businesses encourage customers and computer users to store data online (i.e., inside cloud networks).  As more people store their data online, it’s obvious that such data should be encrypted.  Online data can be stored in network structure known as cloud network.  Cloud network is like a farm of servers that work tightly together to store and compute data with ease.  Since cloud network provides a central hub to store data, and so it’s enormously attractive to hackers.  Hackers love to go after cloud networks; once they break through the cloud networks’ security measures, one fell swoop can reward the hackers with enormous amount of data.  What if the majority of information that store in any cloud network aren’t that valuable, does this mean hackers are wasting their time?  Not really, because stealing few important data from a cloud network might still yield more booties than targeting small banks of data one at a time.  So cloud network users, you all should encrypt your data before uploading such data to the cloud.

In summary, the bad guys love to use full disk encryption for protecting their illegal activities, and so the good guys too should take note and do the same to protect their valuable information from hackers.  Of course, the difference between the two is that the good guys are willing to give the authorities their passwords to unlock encrypted data when such requests are made.  Just make sure not to do the same for the hackers, OK?  It’s not hard to encrypt one’s data since there are too many freely downloaded free tools that allow full disk encryption.  A perfect example of a very good free tool which allows full disk encryption is TrueCrypt.

Source:  http://www.extremetech.com/computing/105931-full-disk-encryption-is-too-good-says-us-intelligence-agency

Spotify Has Lost 200 Plus Music Labels; Napster, Simfy, And Rdio Are Facing The Same Fate…

Spotify Logo

Image via Wikipedia

As I begin to worship Spotify as a God of music, suddenly a terrible news is being spread on Huffingtonpost which claims that a major distributor has just withdrew its entire catalogue of more than 200 music labels from Spotify.  According to Huffingtonpost, not only Spotify has suffered this nasty breakup, but it’s too that other Spotify competitors are facing the same breakup with this major music distributor.  These Spotify competitors are Napster, Simfy, and Rdio.  It seems that there is a study which suggests that all you can eat buffet music service/model hurts record sales, and so the breakup was a reaction to the news.  It’s unclear which music distributor had breakup with Spotify and others, because Huffingtonpost has not released the name of this music distributor.  (Update:  Could it be that Spotify has a breakup with STHoldings Labels?)

As a customer, this worries me much.  Spotify is a great music service, and to have see a regression, however small or big, in its advance is saddening me.  I love how Spotify allows me to listen to just about any song there is at any time and need not to worry of paying for each song, because I only have to pay my monthly subscription fee of $10 less.  Unfortunately, I fear the action of one music distributor might encourage many more to do the same which could be detrimental to Spotify’s overall music service.  After all, it isn’t so great if there isn’t a large enough music collections for music lovers to explore even though the price is right.  I’m crossing my fingers that Spotify and other similar music services will be able to weather the storms to come, because I rely on such a music service to pull me through unmusical days.

On the side note, I think this news greatly benefits so called music locker service.  Amazon’s music service, Apple’s iTunes Match, Google Music are the three key music locker services.

A confession of sort, I don’t like how one has to buy each song in order for one to enjoy as many songs as one can, and so music locker service kind isn’t my cup of tea.  The opposite is true for Spotify.  By being on Spotify, I’m able to explore new bands that I had never bothered with from beginning.  Why?  I usually picked up new artists and bands through my listening to radio stations while I traveled from place to place with my car, but the radio stations often played a short selection of artists and bands repeatedly thus explaining why I wan’t so familiar to less well known artists and bands automatically.  Since using Spotify, I’ve had a great time of exploring new artists and bands and enjoying hidden gems of music that I could never have done so with the radio stations.

Update:  Reading TechCrunch’s older article “Spotify Closing New Financing At €200 Million Valuation; Music Labels Already Shareholders,” this leads me to believe that Spotify is still in great shape if the facts are correct still.  The article suggests that several big music labels (i.e., Universal Music Group, Sony BMG, EMI Music, and Warner Music Group) have been investing in Spotify in millions of dollars.  So, it’s likely that Spotify will still carry huge collections of songs from various artists and bands.  Unfortunately, it might still be a discomfort for Spotify customers to know that they might miss out gems of music from music labels who had and might leave soon.

Source:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/19/

Source:  http://www.nextlevelofnews.com/2011/11/sthold


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 794 other followers