active directory – Change password complexity rules on GPO in windows server

I need to customize the password complexity requirement in active directory GPO. But I cannot find the way to change the password complexity in GPO. The default password complexity contains

  • Capital Letter (A-Z) –
  • Small Letter (a-z)
  • numbers(0-9)
  • Any Special character(!,@,#,^,etc.,)

But my requirement is

  • Capital Letter(A-Z)
  • Samll Letter(a-z)

I check about my requirement in internet. But in internet, there is no built-in tool to change the password complexity. The customization of password complexity can be achieved by install password filter dll file with our requirement.

If anyone know well the answer about my problem, kindly answer my question.

Thank you

wordpress.org – WP Htaccess file in root folder seem to overwrite the htaccess rules in Sub Directory folder

I’ll like to seek your help on htaccess.

I have WP installed at the root folder. eg: www.mywpsite.com I have the 2nd WP installed in the sub directory folder “hello”. eg: >> www.mywpsite.com/hello

Problem: Unable to access the subpages of the 2nd WP site. I will hit 404. However, when I try to connect to www.mywpsite.com/hello/contactus it gets redirected to the first website in the root folder www.mywpsite.com/contactus which is not what I want.

I’ve checked my htaccess file and I am not sure what is going wrong. It looks like the root folder htaccess supersede the sub directory folder. Any advice? Thanks!

Root Htaccess File

php_flag output_buffering on
php_value expose_php off
# BEGIN WordPress
# The directives (lines) between `BEGIN WordPress` and `END WordPress` are
# dynamically generated, and should only be modified via WordPress filters.
# Any changes to the directives between these markers will be overwritten.
<IfModule mod_rewrite.c>
RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^index.php$ - (L)
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
RewriteRule . /index.php (L)
RewriteEngine Off
</IfModule>
# END WordPress

Here is the Sub Directory Htaccess file

<IfModule mod_rewrite.c>
RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /hello/
RewriteRule ^index.php$ – (L)
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
RewriteRule . /hello/index.php (L)
</IfModule>

dnd 5e – Can I use area of effect targetting rules to Entangle a target 105 feet away from me?

This is correct.

There is a rule in the spellcasting section of the PHB that says:

Once a spell is cast, its effects aren’t limited by its range, unless the spell’s description says otherwise.

So the point of origin of entangle must be within 90 feet of you, but its effects are not limited by the 90 foot range.

dnd 5e – Are the “Touched” feats’ spells ever subject to a spellcaster’s class rules (such as regarding preparation, components, and focuses)?

The Fey Touched and Shadow Touched feats published in Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything each grant the use of two spells. Among other things, they say:

  1. You learn the [spells].
  2. You can cast each of these spells without expending a spell slot [once per long rest].
  3. You can also cast these spells using spell slots you have of the appropriate level.

The spellcasting ability for these spells is specific to the feat, so it may or may not be the same as the ability of the class that granted the spell slots.


My question applies to both feats and all spellcasting classes, but for the sake of clarity consider an artificer who has taken Fey Touched, which grants Misty Step. Artificers must add the M component to all spells they cast using the artificers’ spellcasting feature, but #2 above has nothing to do with their feature so shouldn’t require that. That’s good, because the reason the artificer can teleport is their prior exposure to the Fey, not some magical widget.

However, things get more complicated when they’re casting Misty Step as described in #3, because the artificer’s spell slots do come from their spellcasting feature. In that case, does the artificer simply use the spell slot as “fuel” and otherwise cast the spell exactly as it had been cast for #2? Or is this inherently different, for which we must assume the artificer studied the Misty Step effect and replicated it with a widget?

If the former, we can assume the spell never needs to be prepared; if the latter, it almost certainly does need to be prepared like all artificer spells.

Also, Misty Step is not on the Artificer Spell List, but the Invisibility spell granted by Shadow Touched is. Would that alter the answer in any way?


Potentially Related:

Does Magic Initiate allow the chosen spell to effectively be “always prepared” if the spell is on their spell list?

What makes a spell being cast considered to be a {class} spell?

If a spellcaster’s racial trait grants a spell that requires material components, can they use their class’ focus to cast that spell?

mail.app – Incoming emails going to trash (no rules set)

Lots of incoming mails skip the inbox and go directly to the trash folder (not the junk folder). When I visit my Trash folder I see a huge number of unread messages from legit senders.

  • I have Mail.app linked to my Exchange account for work (this is the only linked account).
  • Messages I send myself via my work’s SMTP server always go to trash.
  • Incoming messages that I manually flag as Junk sometimes go to the Junk folder, and sometimes they show up in the Inbox, but they never go to the Trash folder.
  • I have no rules of any kind set up in Mail.app, and I never did.

My question is, who is the culprit – Mail.app, Exchange, or my work’s SMTP server?
How do I find out?

complexity theory – What is the relationship between the number of transition rules for an NDTM and the resulting number of computational branches?

How can an NDTM have a growing number of branches with only finite number of transitions–what is the relationship between the number of branches and the number of transitions?

An NDTM has a finite number of states, a finite number of input symbols and a finite number of transitions–but presumably the number of branches used grows as you feed larger and larger strings to it–how, mechanically, can we have this?

if the number of branches keeps growing as word size grows does this not imply an infinte number of transitions to be spelled out in definition of NDTM (since there are an infinte number of word sizes)?

drupal 7 – hook_user_insert not fired rules

The operation should be as follows: trigger an event after registering a new user:

  • test_rules_rules_event_info (example_rule_event) it’s my event
  • test_rules_user_insert when a user is registered
  • test_rules_customFunction the function that is called by the rule

therefore
when a user is registered -> my event is triggered -> the test_rules_customFunction function is called by running the php code set by the rules interface

if I create the user from the drupal interface, this is done.
while if I create it through custom code, the event is not triggered

I wrote this code:

<?php
function test_rules_rules_event_info() {
  return array(
    'example_rule_event' => array(
      'label' => t('Regola test, quando un utente è registrato'),
      'module' => 'test_rules',
      'group' => 'test' ,
      'variables' => array(
        'current_user' => array('type' => 'user', 'label' => t('The current user.')),
      ),
    ),
  );
}
    
function test_rules_user_insert(&$edit, $account, $category) {
  watchdog("test_rules_user_insert", '<pre>' . print_r( $account, true) . '</pre>');
  rules_invoke_event('example_rule_event', $account);
}
    
function test_rules_customFunction($current_user){
  watchdog("test_rules_customFunction", '<pre>' . print_r( $current_user, true) . '</pre>');
  var_dump($current_user);
  exit;
}

TWRP tells me: adb: sideload connection failed: insufficient permissions for device: user in plugdev group; are your udev rules wrong?

❯ adb sideload lineage-17.1-20201108-nightly-guacamole-signed.zip
* daemon not running; starting now at tcp:5037
* daemon started successfully
adb: sideload connection failed: insufficient permissions for device: user in plugdev group; are your udev rules wrong?
See [http://developer.android.com/tools/device.html] for more information
adb: trying pre-KitKat sideload method...
adb: pre-KitKat sideload connection failed: insufficient permissions for device: user in plugdev group; are your udev rules wrong?
See [http://developer.android.com/tools/device.html] for more information

proxy – Detailed explanations on OWASP Zap Security scan rules

As an example, I have installed Anti-CSRF Scanning rule in ZAP proxy and scanned a POST request which does not verify the CSRF token value from the back end. Ideally, it is a CSRF vulnerability, but ZAP proxy scanner did not detect that. I am wondering whether I have done the scan correctly, but could not find any place to verify the configuration.

Can someone help me out?