I have many snmp devices that has their community string set to "public".
Is there a way to change the community string of an snmp device?
I suppose it's just a conceptual question (As you don't provide us any information regarding the type of devices you are trying to configure)
So the answer is:
Sure!, there is a way to change SNMP community in almost any device. Such way depends on the device you are configuring (Network devices, workstations, servers ...)
For example, if you are configuring a linux machine:
Edit snmpd config file (normally located in /etc/snmpd) and change rocommunity and rwcommunity parameters.
Restart the snmp daemon.
Related
Hello fellow community,
I'm currently trying to differentiate between multiple HID input sources connected to a RDP client running Windows 10 Business build 19045.2251. The server itself is a Microsoft Windows Server 2019 build 17763 running a custom C# 4.7 .NET application.
The application shall then differentiate betweeen a barcode reader, an RFID reader and a keyboard respectively.
My naive idea is to only allow inputs coming from the barcode reader and only when an authorized person gives permission by means of his/her RFID chip, keyboard inputs are permitted.
Running the application locally for testing purposes allowed to perform the distinction using the vendor and product ID of a given input device using raw inputs.
Unfortunately, this breaks once I move the application onto the server and try obtaining raw inputs from the device connected to the client, as shown below:
raw information of USB device connected to client
So far I tried activating remoteFx in the hope of gettig device specific information, but to no avail.
I could not find any helpful resources on the internet and thus I am turning to you, hoping anybody could provide me with some hints on how to go on.
Also if this approach is flawed to begin with, I am happy to adapt the logic in order for it to work.
Thanks in advance for any input!
I have a custom i.MX6Q-based board with working U-Boot and Linux (Ubuntu) setups. The micro and board have support for USB-OTG and one serial port; currently, the serial port serves the console for both U-Boot and Linux. However, we may need to use the serial port for another purpose, but we don't want to lose the console for U-Boot and Linux. Is it possible to use the USB-OTG port for the system console for both U-Boot and Linux?
I've done some research and found a couple of promising articles here and here, though the second article says this tidbit:
Unfortunately it won't work as system console as the gadget driver is loaded as a module, but we can use it for serial console.
I'm not sure I understand this, but it sounds like the method won't meet my needs, which is to use USB-OTG for both U-Boot and Linux system consoles. I did try these methods, but without luck, which may mean that U-Boot and Linux aren't built properly for the desired functionality.
So here are my questions:
Can this work for U-Boot?
Can this work for Linux?
Am I insane for contemplating this path?
For either, any guidance (e.g. tutorials, examples, etc.) would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Can this work for U-Boot?
Yes, at least since U-Boot version 2008.10, the README file has stated:
Define the below if you wish to use the USB console.
CONFIG_USB_DEVICE
Define this to build a UDC device
CONFIG_USB_TTY
Define this to have a tty type of device available to
talk to the UDC device
CFG_CONSOLE_IS_IN_ENV
Define this if you want stdin, stdout &/or stderr to
be set to usbtty.
Note that these configuration symbols are not accessible using the menuconfig, and must be enabled in a configuration file.
Currently at least five boards use this U-Boot capability, based on the occurrence of CONFIG_USB_TTY in files in include/configs/, for example include/configs/ti_omap4_common.h.
This USB configuration requires non-default definitions for the stdin and stdout environment variables. Refer to the README documentation for the details.
Can this work for Linux?
Yes, Linux (at least since version 4.5) can have a serial console on a USB connection, either a USB-to-serial adapter on a host port or a USB serial gadget on a device port (using CDC/ACM).
For instance, in drivers/usb/gadget/Kconfig there's the selection:
config U_SERIAL_CONSOLE
bool "Serial gadget console support"
depends on USB_G_SERIAL
help
It supports the serial gadget can be used as a console.
In the Linux 5.7.8 kernel only two boards have default configurations that use this capability, for example see arch/arm/configs/aspeed_g4_defconfig.
Besides a proper configuration to build the necessary drivers, a serial-gadget console requires (1) the kernel parameter specification (e.g. console=ttyGS0,...), and (2) a login session initiated by a getty command (e.g. in the inittab file).
Am I insane for contemplating this path?
No comment.
Beware that should you encounter a kernel boot issue, the Linux serial-gadget console does not support earlycon nor earlyprintk capability.
Personally I prefer to use a serial link that is persistent regardless of the target board's state. That ensures the terminal emulator program does not complain about lost connections.
Addendum
Unfortunately this Linux console on a USB serial gadget does not display boot messages generated by the kernel (before the login prompt), even if all drivers are statically linked in to the kernel image.
Although the syslog has messages like
console [ttyGS0] enabled
g_serial gadget: g_serial ready
...
gs_open: ttyGS0 ((ptrval),(ptrval))
before the salient Freeing unused kernel memory message, the host side does not receive any console messages until userspace is active.
This shortcoming is also reported in this guide: https://linux-sunxi.org/USB_Gadget/Serial
I have a piece of software written "out there" (e.g. no source code available) that allows me to use it in multicast mode. I'm trying to use this software on a network that, for technical reasons, can only use IGMP Version 2.
My OS is Windows 7 (64-bit, though I doubt that makes a difference). So far my searches have only given me Windows XP & Windows Server solutions, all of which involve editing the registry. In addition to the usual reasons (aka "registry paranoia"), I hesitate to edit the registry in this case because this particular network is not the only one that I will be using; I have not problems at all in all the other networks I try using multicast on.
Is there a straightforward way to force this software onto IGMP V2?
Thanks!
John Price
As far as I remember, adding IGMPVersion=3 to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters is the only way to solve your problem.
Anyway, there is another creepy solution - just write a little daemon, that will sniff for IGMPv3, parse data from it and send IGMPv2 packets =)
I need to write an app on Mac OS X that would send remote command to Windows applications to perform some tasks. The computers will be sitting on the same subnet and the Mac and Windows computers all have a fixed IP.
The data sent over really are just some string or boolean parameters so that the Windows app can perform specific tasks.
Someone will be writing the Windows app and I will be writing the Mac app.
I can find in the developer's doc about Mac to Mac communication, but nothing about what I need.
What's the best way to achieve this? What protocol is best suited for this?
Take a look at the Bonjour SDk for Mac and Windows: http://developer.apple.com/opensource/
There are (at least) two separate problems here:
#1 is how you discover the other app. Bonjour is one possibility, as is a local broadcast, as is explicitly configuring the hostname of the peer
#2 is how you talk to the other machine once you find it. For that part, I would suggest:
a) use TCP instead of UDP (in most cases), so you don't have to worry about retransmissions & sequencing
b) rather than inventing your own client-server protocol on top of TCP, use an existing one. I hear there's something called "HTTP" that's starting to catch on...
Could you just use UDP to broadcast a message out to the network? Your apps (regardless of whether they are running on Mac or Windows) can listen for the message and process them as needed.
I'm developing a project that has a number of hardware sensors connecting to the deployment machine through RS232 serial ports.
But ... I'm developing on a machine without an physical RS232 serial ports, but I would like to make fake serial ports that I can connect to and output data from with the aim of faking input from hardware sensors.
Does anyone know of a way to create a fake serial port and control it on Windows XP?
If you are developing for Windows, the com0com project might be, what you are looking for.
It provides pairs of virtual COM ports that are linked via a nullmodem connetion. You can then use your favorite terminal application or whatever you like to send data to one COM port and recieve from the other one.
EDIT:
As Thomas pointed out the project lacks of a signed driver, which is especially problematic on certain Windows version (e.g. Windows 7 x64).
There are a couple of unofficial com0com versions around that do contain a signed driver. One recent verion (3.0.0.0) can be downloaded e.g. from here.
I know this is an old post, but in case someone else happens upon this question, one good option is Virtual Serial Port Emulator (VSPE) from Eterlogic
It provides an API for creating kernel mode virtual comport devices, i.e. connectors, mappers, splitters etc.
However, some of the advertised capabilities were really not capabilities at all.
EDIT
A much better choice, Eltima. This product is fully baked. Good developer tech support. The product did all it claimed to do. Product options include both desktop applications, as well as software development kits with APIs.
Neither of these products are open source, or free. However, as other posts here have pointed out, there are other options. Here is a list of various serial utilities:
com0com (current)
com0com - With Signed Driver (old version)
Yet another place for com0com with Signed Driver (Pete's Blog)
Tactical Software
Termite
COM Port Serial Emulator
Kermit (obsolete, but still downloadable)
HWVSP3
HHD Software (free edition)
I use com0com - With Signed Driver, on windows 7 x64 to emulate COM3 AND COM4 as a pair.
Then i use COM Dataport Emulator to recieve from COM4.
Then i open COM3 with the app im developping (c#) and send data to COM3.
The data sent thru COM3 is received by COM4 and shown by 'COM Dataport Emulator' who can also send back a response (not automated).
So with this 2 great programs i managed to emulate Serial RS-232 comunication.
Hope it helps.
Both programs are free!!!!!
There's always the hardware route. Purchase two USB to serial converters, and connect them via a NULL modem.
Pro tips:
1) Windows may assign new COM ports to the adapters after every device sleep or reboot.
2) The market leaders in chips for USB to serial are Prolific and FTDI. Both companies are battling knockoffs, and may be blocked in future official Windows drivers. The Linux drivers however work fine with the clones.
Another alternative, even though the OP did not ask for it:
There exist usb-to-serial adapters.
Depending on the type of adapter, you may also need a nullmodem cable, too.
They are extremely easy to use under linux, work under windows, too, if you have got working drivers installed.
That way you can work directly with the sensors, and you do not have to try and emulate data.
That way you are maybe even save from building an anemic system.
(Due to your emulated data inputs not covering all cases, leading you to a brittle system.)
Its often better to work with the real stuff.
i used eltima make virtual serial port for my modbus application debug work. it is really very good application at development stage to check serial port program without connecting hardware.