Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: Subdomain security |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 17 Dec 2004 13:25:49 -0500 |
The empty root domain does not offer any additional security since the security boundary for Active Directory is at the Forest level. As someone else has mentioned here already the Domain boundary is for Administration and Replication, not security. Starting out with an Empty root and two subdomains wouldn't be any more secure. I think that Devin got it right when he said that either you secure the entire environment, or you create a new forest for this subdomain and secure the forest as tightly as you can (including putting it behind a firewall if the data is that sensitive). Phil -----Original Message----- From: Wim_Remes@msp.be [mailto:Wim_Remes@msp.be] Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 5:24 PM To: Oren Held Cc: focus-ms@securityfocus.com Subject: Re: Subdomain security Hi Oren, First : you have to seperate network configuration from domain setup. As far as I know (from what I read) your initial domain setup is insecure by design. You should've created an empty root domain with an active sub-domain. That would've enabled you to create a new subdomain to the root domain and it would be secure from your other subdomain. Creating a new subdomain now doesn't offer any additional security. On the other hand you're talking 'network security' when you state that your domain would be behind a firewall. Whatever you implement in means of 'network security' wouldn't add any security to your domain resources, since all ports needed for normal W2K(3) operations will need to remain open and enterprise admins would still be able to 'manage' your resources. The question you need to answer is what you are trying to secure ? If you are trying to secure resources like an HR Office inside your company (for example a database server, a file & print server and some workstations classified as HR Controlled systems) I would choose to implement IPSec policies for these hosts. If you are trying to provide a secure working environment for some highly sensitive R&D department there's only one way to go and that is option #2 with the firewall (VLAN's or any other way of segmenting your network would work too). A final remark : management is management, you got to hit them with the bare numbers and prove to them that your solutions provide them what they asked for within budget and within time. Afaik, they don't care whether you employ monkeys to secure your network, as long as they don't have to pay a penny more than what's needed. (Oh, to create some extra workload ... you could move the resources from the root-domain to a new sub-domain and then create another new sub-domain to the , now empty root domain, which would seperate the two domains and offer you some higher level of security ...) Regards, Wim Remes MSCE:Security -----Oren Held <oren@held.org.il> wrote: ----- To: focus-ms@securityfocus.com From: Oren Held <oren@held.org.il> Date: 16/12/2004 00h24 Subject: Subdomain security Hello, I have to install a *secure* windows domain inside an insecure network. This means that my domain will be behind a firewall ofcourse. Now, I've got two possibilities for the domain configuration: Option 1: My domain would actually be a subdomain inside the insecure forest. Option 2: Create a totally new forest. So, surely option #2 is more secure, but the management pushes to choosing option #1. so.. few questions about option #1: a. Which ports should be opened by the firewall in order for the subdomain to function well but be the most secure? Any references? b. Does an admin (a member of the Enterprise Admin group) from the root-domain have access to my subdomain? Can I prevent it at all? c. Do you know any networks that implement option #1 with a firewall and think they're quite secure from the other domains, or is it a totally twisted idea? Thanks a lot people, - Oren ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: iisadmpwd/UPN, Bruno Jänes |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: iisadmpwd/UPN, Jordan Wiseman |
| Previous by Thread: | Subdomain security, Scott Mulcahy |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Subdomain security, Renouf, Phil |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |