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: 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 hatethis phrase]expected behavior. 2. Have you tried using Kerbtray or another utility topurge the servers'tickets? 3. If you don't purge the tickets and get new ones, thenyou're stuck witheither waiting for about a week if you have the defaultKerberos settings inyour domain, or you have to reboot the servers. 4. This is the nature of Kerberos; it's not instantaneousin terms ofdeny/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 thatwe'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> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | SecurityFocus Microsoft Newsletter #238, Marc Fossi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | RE: Group membership / Kerberos tickets, Zack Schiel |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Group membership / Kerberos tickets, Zack Schiel |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Group membership / Kerberos tickets, Zack Schiel |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |