using IIS 6
I have the default web site that works and can authenticate users to the domain when they connect.
I have created a second website, siteb, put a host (a) record into DNS, I can browse to it as long as I have use anonymous access, when I select windows authentication, it fails...
not sure what i'm missing here...
Thanks.
This goes beyond just IIS if you're using Integrated Windows Authentication. You've created "siteb" in DNS which allows your users to connect to it so this is good. However, when their browser requests a Kerberos ticket for "siteb" from Active Directory, AD is probably responding that it cannot find "siteb". You can verify this with Wireshark.
The fix is to add "siteb" (and any other permutations with which you expect users to access the site) as an additional servicePrincipalName for the server's machine account in AD. You can accomplish this with the "setspn.exe" utility. It should be available on your domain controller. If not, you can install it from the Windows 2003 Support Tools.
Some examples of adding a UPN alias with setspn on the DC are:
setspn.exe –A HTTP/siteb <server hostname>
setspn.exe –A HTTP/siteb.acme.com <server hostname>
This should take effect immediately. The final step is ensuring that the browser "trusts" the new website name. In Internet Explorer, for IWA to occur automatically, the server name should be listed in either the Trusted Sites or Intranet zone.
Of course, you could avoid all this hoopla by having the 2nd website just run on a different port under the same name, e.g.: http://sitea:81
Related
I would like to host a password protected static website on a server, and meet the following 2 requirements:
The static website credentials MUST NOT give any additional access to the hosting server.
The hosting must play nicely with other IIS hosted websites
The hosting server is running Windows 10 Pro.
I've identified 4 options:
Host it in IIS with Basic Authentication enabled
Host it in Apache, separate port, secure with .htpasswd file
Host it in Apache in a VM, use a bridged network, secure with .htpasswd file
Develop a middleware/route request authentication application
Option 1:
Evidently, this option requires a whole new User on the computer.
I do not understand the limitations of a new user's access.
When I hit WindowsKey + R, and run netplwiz, I can configure the user to belong to one of these groups:
Users(default): Users are prevented from making accidental or intentional system-wide changes and can run most applications.
Guest: Guests have the same access as members of the Users group by default, except for the Guest account, which is further restricted as described earlier.
IIS_IUSR: Built-in group used by Internet Information Services.
I can not find the following information in any Microsoft docs:
How IIS_IUSR is "used" by IIS
If any of these groups restrict all access, other than viewing the Basic Auth website
An exhaustive list of permissions granted by the user login credentials, and each group
This method seems confusing and annoying at best, and a complete security failure at worst.
Option 2:
This seems more secure to me, because I can understand the limitations of the user access better.
Option 3:
This seems even more secure, because the hosting server is not directly accessed.
I do not know if this creates other security vulnerabilities though.
Option 4:
This one seems the most secure, because I have full understanding and control over the website's access.
This could take a lot of work though.
An organization can adopt the following policy to protect itself against web server attacks.
Patch management– this involves installing patches to help secure the server. A patch is an update that fixes a bug in the software. The patches can be applied to the operating system and the web server system.
Secure installation and configuration of the operating system
Secure installation and configuration of the web server software
Vulnerability scanning system– these include tools such as Snort, NMap, Scanner Access Now Easy (SANE)
Firewalls can be used to stop simple DoS attacks by blocking all traffic coming the identify source IP addresses of the attacker.
Antivirus software can be used to remove malicious software on the server
Disabling Remote Administration
Default accounts and unused accounts must be removed from the system
Default ports & settings (like FTP at port 21) should be changed to custom port & settings (FTP port at 5069
I've been trying all day to set up my instance of TFS2017 to work with HTTPS.
I've read the official setup guide, but it didn't help much.
My instance is attached to a domain and configuration has been made with an Administrators group user. The domain account is referenced as an administration console user properly.
The setup has been made with default 8080 port and domain account user can access the website as expected (hosted at http://machine-name:8080/tfs)
Now, when I change the IIS website settings binding to use HTTPS on port 443 with a valid wildchar certificate + set the hostname to be tfs.mydomain.com + ask for SSL require, I cannot have my user to authenticate anymore.
I make TFS Public Url point to https://tfs.mydomain.com/tfs.
I get prompted for the authentication box, but after many attempts, the site would just fail with 401.
The tests are made into the server environment to avoid Firewall confusions.
My instance has two network cards with 2 separate networks. First resolves to public IP, second resolves to private IP. I noticed the configuration works with the machine names, while it fails with the DNS resolution on the public IP. Could this be a reason ?
Thanks for your help
To perform the procedures in your requirements, you must first meet some prerequisites such as required Permissions and so on. Please double check this first. Also please make sure you have set up the corresponding ports such as below prompted.
Important:
The default port number for SSL connections is 443, but you
must assign a unique port number for each of the following
sites: Default Website, Team Foundation Server, Microsoft Team
Foundation Server Proxy (if your deployment uses it), and SharePoint
Central Administration (if your deployment uses SharePoint).
You should record the SSL port number for each website that you
configure. You will need to specify these numbers in the
administration console for Team Foundation.
There is a very detail tutorial about configuring HTTPS with SSL, please refer Setting up HTTPS with Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) for Team Foundation Server
To narrow down the issue with IP, you could disable one of your two network cards. Give a test with only using one network card each time.
I would like to be able to run/debug locally. The machine is a laptop that is on a domain, however at times I do take it home. I have IIS installed as well as SQL Server. Everything is running correctly. I just have one issue, I must be on the domain so that the MVC site that configured to use Windows Authentication will run. I would like to figure out how I can remove this dependency on the domain controller. Specifically I would use local users when I am not connected to the domain, or only use local users in development testing.
Add this to your web.config file for your website:
<add key="AuthorizedADGroup" value="Administrators"/>
Anyone in your local Administrators group will then be able to access the site through Windows Authentication. Alternatively, you can also create a local group called say "Developers" or "Testers" or "Engineering", add local users to those groups, and sub one of those groups in for Administrators instead.
Context
I developed an application deployed in a Glassfish 3.1. This application is accessed only by https and sometimes it must connect to third-party webservices located out the customers networks. The customer have other applications inside his network; mine is only a new one "service".
Topology approximation
Big-ip F5 is the ssl end point. The customer have in this device the valid certificate
IIS redirects by domain to the respective service
glassfish is the machine with the application (over, of course, a glassfish 3.1)
How it works
When a user try to connect to _https://somedomain the request arrives to the F5 where the SSL encryption ends; now we have a request to _http://somedomain. In the next step F5 redirects this request to the IIS and this, finally, redirects to glassfish. This petitions are successfully processed.
Points of interest
I've full control over glassfish server and S.O. of the vm where it is located. Not other applications are or will be deployed on this server; it's a dedicated server for the app and some services it needs. The Glassfish runs on a VM with a Debian distribution as S.O. This VM is provided by a VM Server but I don't know the brand, model, etc. The glassfish have the default http listeners configuration.
I don't have any more information about network and other devices and i can't access to
any configuration file of any other device. I can't modify any part of the network for my own but maybe ask, suggest or advice for a change. Network's behavior should not change.
Actually users reach the application without problem.
The used certificate is a simple domain certificate trusted by Verysign
The customer have no idea of how to solve this.
The problem
All the third party WS the application must access have an unique https access and, in some cases, the authentication required is mutual (two-way) and here we find the problem. When the application wants to connect to WS with mutual ssl authentication it sends the glassfish local keystore configuration targeted certificate. Customer wants, if possible, use the same cert for incoming and outcoming secure connections. This cert is in the F5 and i can't add to the glassfish keystore because if I do this I would be breaking Verysign contract requirements. I've been looking for a solution at google, here(stackoverflow), jita,... but only incoming traffic solutions I've found. I understand that maybe a SSL proxy is required but I haven't found any example or alternative solution for the outcoming ssl connections.
What I'm asking for
I'm not english speaker (isn't obvious?) and maybe i doesn't use the correct terms in my search terms. I can understand that this context can be a nightmare and hard to solve but I will stand... The first think I need is to know if exists a solution (or solutions) for this problem and if it (or they!) exist where or how can I find it/them. I've prepared different alternatives to negotiate with the customer but I need to known the true. I've spent tones of hours on this.
There are a couple of solutions.
1)pay verisign more money for a second "license/cert". They will be happy to take your money for the "privilege". :)
2)Create a different virtual server listening on 443 which points to a pool that has your client's server address as the pool member. Then on the virtual server, attach a serverssl profile that is configured to use the same cert you are using for the incoming connections. Then the F5 would authenticate with the same cert along with your app server would not need a client cert installed. Also, if they need to initiate a session to you, you would have to setup a virtual server with a clientssl profile that uses the same cert and requires a client cert to connect.
If your destinations may not be static addresses, then an irule(s) would have to be created to deal with that. Can be handled in 10 or later code with a DNS call in the irule and setting a node for the session to go.
So I'm setting up a dedicated server using Debian 5 Lenny. I will be using some Atlassian Tools (JIRA, Confluence, Bamboo, and Fisheye). I want to use a local LDAP server to store information for the users that will be accessing these software titles, so that they can use one set of credentials to log in.
I also want webmail users to be configured using LDAP.
However, this is a small operation. Three people. That's why all of the software, including the ldap server, will all be on the same machine.
That said, is it safe to use LDAP to store user credentials (including passwords) in LDAP without using Kerberos? I'm confused as to when Kerberos should be used.
Hypothetically, let's say I had two servers on a subnet. Server A received requests from the outside world, for atlassian tools. Server a communicates to ldap server (internally) on server b. In that case, would I use kerberos?
When do I use Kerberos? When do I not?
I am not setting anything like "Active Directory" up. No Samba either. Users do not need to login to a domain (with access to files on the domain), they just need to login to webapps. But if I was doing LDAP on it's own dedicated machine, then I might want Kerberos?
:confuzzled: :(
-Sam
The simplest possible answer is yes, it is possible to store user names, user ids, and passwords without using Kerberos, and in fact directory services accessed via LDAP are an excellent tool for storing this sort of authentication and authorization information.
Update:
In my opinion, if you do choose an open source server, you will find OpenDS to be superior to OpenLDAP or Apache.
Basically, if you have Kerberos, you do not need any directory server. If you aren't in a corporate environment and are looking for an identity management store, you should definitively go for a directory server like OpenLDAP or Apache Directory. Kerberos require running a correctly set up DNS and NTP server. This might be way to much. Even if you do, those lazy morons from Atlassian still did not implement Kerberos support into their products. You can't even go with that.
I just noticed that there are only three of you, maybe a simple database setup with MySQL would suffice instead of running a full-blown directory server?