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.




Network Security Focus-Microsoft
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Group membership / Kerberos tickets

Subject: RE: Group membership / Kerberos tickets
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 19:51:23 -0400
The problem here isn't one of OU structures- it's one of construction of
access tokens, when that is occurring, and which group SIDs are made part of
the access tokens/Kerberos PAC information. The quickest/dirtiest solution
is, as Zack found, to reboot the servers as this purges all of their tickets
and they obtain new ones at startup. Remember the old "you have to log off
and log back on to get new group memberships" axiom with Windows? That
really hasn't changed, with some specific exceptions that aren't relevant to
this situation (cross-domain resource access for the first time, etc.). The
problem Zack is experiencing is that because the existing Kerberos tickets
are simply being renewed rather than regenerated, the new group SIDs are not
being passed in the PAC information passed via Kerberos. The only way for
the servers' group memberships to be updated is to force reissuance of PAC
information (SIDs). 

If Zack can purge the servers' tickets without rebooting, then the servers
would have to get new tickets and would generate new access tokens/obtain
new TGTs, etc. I imagine this could be scripted through WMI, but to be
honest, I've not dug around to determine this with certainty.

Laura 

-----Original Message-----
From: Zack Schiel [mailto:ZSchiel@blueandco.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 4:23 PM
To: focus-ms@securityfocus.com
Subject: RE: Group membership / Kerberos tickets


We have an OU structure similar to this as well, however in 
this particular case we're talking about SUS server GPOs, 
which ideally should be set according to a machine's 
*current* location rather than its 'usual' place of 
residence.  The issue we're addressing is that of mobile 
users being in the 'wrong' office when large updates are 
approved; the way around this is to determine the local SUS 
server by site.  

-Z-

________________________________________
From: mcurole@shawinc.com [mailto:mcurole@shawinc.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:59 PM
To: focus-ms@securityfocus.com
Cc: Zack Schiel
Subject: RE: Group membership / Kerberos tickets


What is your OU structure like? We have on OU for servers 
e.g. ou=server,dc=company,dc=com and an OU for our PC e.g. 
ou=workstations,dc=company,dc=com. Then you just link your 
GPO to the workstations ou. 

Mark 



"Laura A. Robinson" <larobins@bellatlantic.net> wrote on 
04/28/2005 01:19:40 PM:

1. Yes, you are on the right track; this is [cringe- I hate 
this phrase]
expected behavior. 
2. Have you tried using Kerbtray or another utility to 
purge the servers'
tickets? 
3. If you don't purge the tickets and get new ones, then 
you're stuck with
either waiting for about a week if you have the default 
Kerberos settings in
your domain, or you have to reboot the servers.
4. This is the nature of Kerberos; it's not instantaneous 
in terms of
deny/grant/group population changes. 

Laura

-----Original Message-----
From: Zack Schiel [mailto:ZSchiel@blueandco.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 10:52 AM
To: focus-ms@securityfocus.com
Subject: Group membership / Kerberos tickets

I'm hoping that someone here can confirm this for me and 
possibly give a deeper explanation for the behavior that 
we're seeing.

Essentially, we are in the process of creating a series of 
site GPOs; the default Authenticated Users permission 
remains, and we've also denied Read and Apply Group Policy to 
a new group containing certain computers, mainly servers.  
The problem that we're running into is that these servers 
don't appear in RSoP reports as members of the new security 
group (even though they have been for nearly 24 hours now), 
and thus they are receiving and applying these GPOs.  When 
the machines are rebooted, they correctly add the group to 
their list of security groups to which they belong, and the 
GPOs are denied.  

The obvious solution is to reboot the servers before linking 
the GPO.  We would of course prefer to avoid rebooting dozens 
of servers, however.  

I believe the reason this happens is that a machine receives 
its TGT at startup, and the TGT contains SIDs for groups to 
which the machine belongs.  This TGT is then simply renewed 
every X number of hours for several days, and thus the list 
of SIDs isn't updated until the ticket is actually reissued 
at restart.  Am I on the right track here?  Is there a 
relatively easy way to force a machine to reissue its TGT 
without rebooting or causing other issues?  

Aside from our current predicament, this seems to be a bit of 
a security hole-machines can actively receive GPOs to which 
they have been denied access, long after they are denied that 
access.  

Thanks,

-Zack-

______________________
Zack Schiel
Network Support
Blue & Co., LLC 



--------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
-------------




--------------------------------------------------------------
-------------

--------------------------------------------------------------
-------------


**********************************************************
Privileged and/or confidential information may be contained 
in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in 
this message (or are not responsible for delivery of this 
message to that person) , you may not copy or deliver this 
message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this 
message and notify the sender by reply e-mail.
If you or your employer do not consent to Internet e-mail for 
messages of this kind, please advise the sender.
Shaw Industries does not provide or endorse any opinions, 
conclusions or other information in this message that do not 
relate to the official business of the company  or its subsidiaries.
**********************************************************


--------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
-------------



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>