Free Activation Code For Accessf
Teodolinda Mattson
Hi all,
I made a free account a while ago, but I recently discovered my school gives access codes to Qualtrics for survey design. My free account trial will expire in 7 days. How can I make sure I don't lose the data on my free account? Can I just give the access code after the expiration date and keep the free trial account to continue my work? Thanks in advance.
In your account settings there is an option to upgrade. Just enter your access code there and you'll be upgraded. Changing the email id is a little complicated though. You'll have to get in touch with the support team and all.
Hello, I am a student. As you can see the submit button for me is unable to be clicked. This is not a problem for my peers, just me. I am the only person at my school who has this problem. I am using Chrome as my browser and have good internet connection. I also have tried the across multiple devices, my school issued lap top, my pc, and my personal laptop and it still won't work. For some reason, it will work on my phone and I can submit the access code and start my quiz. I'm worried about this when we go back to in school learning as I won't be allowed to use my phone. If anyone has any tips or solutions that would be really appreciated!
In your screenshot, no access code has been entered. One needs to be typed/pasted in before the submit button is activated. If the Submit button does not activate after you have actually entered the access code, then I can only suggest you submit a support ticket. Click Help, then choose "Report a problem".
I also have the same problem as this. Whenever I enter the access code in the field provided, the submit button is still disabled. But when I use my phone in answering quizzes, I can submit the access code without any problems. I am worried that this might affect my future exams since we will be using Respondus soon and it cannot be used on mobile phones.
Did you ever resolve this issue? I'm an instructor and have had several students experience this problem over the past 3 years using Canvas. Support has not been able to replicate the issue, so they haven't been able to help me with it. It's extremely frustrating and stressful for students who experience it.
CAS is useful when you are hosting 3rd party code. E.g. a web hosting company can use it to stop their customer's Asp.net code doing damage to the servers. (Office also make use of it when .NET is used as a replacement for VBA)
I encounter code access security quite often in the "real world", often when I least expect it. And in a way, SilverLight would be an excellent real-world application of it, were it not that SilverLight chose not to employ CAS at all in the end.
The places where you see it in action is where a secured environment is needed: ASP.NET itself of course, but ASP.NET hosting providers use a modified security model to prevent intrusion in their precious systems. I know for a fact that Webhost4Life uses this (no information on their site about it, but I've worked with them, it's there, really). Looking further, other ASP.NET hosting providers do the same, but they are not very clear about it either: thread on godaddy.com not wanting to change the CAS (and no clarity what's supported and what not) or this related discussion on 1&1. Some cloud hosting sites (rackspacecloud) took it a bit further and "worked with Microsoft for a modified full trust level" whatever that may be.
In short: if you find an ASP.NET host, most likely they've used CAS to prevent you from doing things they don't want you to do. They can even use it make difference between "basic" (many restrictions) hosting and "enterprise" (few restrictions) hosting which gives a whole other meaning to CAS.
So much for a few real-world situations that I encountered myself. A recent project I did had something similar: allow the user to upload a library, and test it for performance ("who makes the best algorithm"). Needless to say, we needed CAS heavily there. Other examples or interesting resources:
For any situation where you are simply in full control yourself, you build your own app and code (or have it built) and are in complete control of your system, I don't think you'll need CAS too often. It's more something you'd use the minute you get to run code from lesser trusted sources (which is basically everything that's not in your full control).
Default CAS settings limit the capabilities of code run from a network share or other non-local sources. This makes sense but the stringent restrictions make it hard to have a central repository for distributed application. .NET 2.0 introduced ClickOnce, which was supposed to elevate the security (discussion here).
In 2005, Microsoft summoned a survey to find out why CAS was so unpopular, hoping to improve it to make it better applicable. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the actual survey results, other then this post somewhat detailing why CAS is underused.
That post, however, does point at an intriguing niche: CAS applied to another world: Unix / Linux. They don't call it CAS, instead it's BitFrost. How's that for a real-world application: the "One Laptop Per Child" project, which relies on BitFrost as a replacement for the traditional Unix security model.
Technically, it's very useful as it allows a very fine grained permission specification. This is both good for you (as theoretically it makes exploiting security vulnerabilities a lot harder - even if an attacker gains full control over your app, he is still locked in the CAS Sandbox) and for your customer (as they can see exactly what your application can do and run their own security audit).
Note to reader: see the two comments below; it sounds like I'm accidentally inflating the definition of CAS to (incorrectly) include RBS. I'll leave the answer here for reference, but note the distinction.
There are two havles to CAS; the thing you'll see most about in that exam is all the nuances for code calling other code, which may be useful for partial trust, but most of the time it is simply a pain - and worse: if your code has full trust (which most / too-much does) none of it actually executes (it is skipped entirely).
This will be enforced even in full trust; you can define your own principal (tied to the user) by implementing IPrincipal (look at IsInRole()). And since principals are supported in most environments (winforms, webforms, mvc, wcf, etc) this can make for a very flexible way to double-check security at the business layer without having to reference the specific security model. Note that the above check would work in any environment.
You can also perhaps use this to drive your UI. I did have a usenet post that enabled / disabled winforms controls based on the principal (using runtime properties to specify the role per control, a bit like ToolTip etc) - I can't find it at the minute, though (edit: maybe this one).
The thing to understand about Code Access Security is that it is of very little use to an application developer beyond understanding how it is being used and at what permission level for API's that you may be calling. The only exception to this, that I have really found useful is a CAS called PrincipalPermission, it basically doesn't allow certain code to be executed if the right Role isn't defined for the current Principal. See this post on it:
The developers that really need to pay attention to CAS and how it should be implemented in their application is the framework and code library developers. Because there is certain levels of trust that you need to demand inorder for your application to work especially when dealing with unmanaged resources such as files, network streams, serial ports, etc. Or if you are creating the code for that unmanaged resource like some speicalized server, or any kind of low level access in to your assemblies you will want to create some code access security around it so that people aren't allowed to execute something that has been strictly denied to them.
It doesn't help that Microsoft hasn't really done that great of a job explaining how CAS should be used in every day application. So that is really the reason for lack of use. However CAS is one of the many reasons that .NET is such a secure language and suffers from a lot fewer problems than its competitors.
I was the development lead on a project to get JITC certification (US Department of Defense) for a .NET based solution, and the CAS settings were scrutinized very closely during the certification testing.
Code Access Security can no longer be relied upon to prevent the use of tampered assemblies in shipped products. This means that if your application is dependent upon Code Access Security to perform licensing checks, it is trivial for an attacker to replace your licensing assembly with another, thereby gaining free access to your application.
Although I've never used it, my understanding of CAS was that it could also be used to expand object-oriented design mechanics. For example, say you are developing a massive data access package for a bank that must implement database access and caching. Even though they are part of the same deployment package, given the hypothetical size of the project, the logic should be implemented in separate assemblies since they are sufficiently different problem sets that hinge on different external forces (database infrastructure vs consumer usage).
However, the caching code might need to access some sensitive classes or methods in the data access assembly that consumers of the overall package shouldn't have access to. Therefore these data access classes and methods can't simply be public. Protected methods in the data access assembly with subclasses in the caching assembly could get around some cases, but often times it's an abuse of inheritance. It might simply be more elegant to leave them public with LinkDemands placed on callers for a custom Permission (e.g. DataPackagePermisson) that administrators would only grant to the caching assembly.
7fc3f7cf58