|
View Full Version : Possible inside security breach
I have a strange situation that I really just need clarification on so here goes.
I am an IT consultant for a company that has remote users who connect via a VPN. One user, a recent contract (potientially to be an employee) needed access to the shared files/folders and e-mail. I gave him the instruction on setting up the VPN on his home PC and was going to get back to him on setting up the remaining items (I work for other clients also) later. Instead of waiting he and a friend logged onto the client's network via the VPN and using their own words, "hacked and guessed around about some things" so they could add his PC to the domain and give him access to what he needed! There are only two accounts on the domain that have Administrator rights and his was neither. When I questioned the user on this, suffice to say the friend did all the work and he knows nothing. What really puzzles me is that the client pricipal seems to think nothing of this?!? He basically said well I guess you have some competition.
Anyway my questions are:
1) I need to clarify that only an account with Administrative privilages can create new user and computer accounts in an AD domain?
2) Any possible ideas on how the hell they could have done this? Don't need specifics, just could/can it be done? I understand by the user having VPN access to the network he basically had a key so to speak, allowing them to bypass the normal things that discourage external attacks (i.e firewalls).
I am going to try and speak to the client principla that if they circumvented network security, then his network is basically open at this point. Unfortunetely the pricipal is high on this person and their abilities so I may be creating an acrimonius situation by bringin it up. My thinking is I don't want to be blamed for something down the line as I feel I no longer have control over the network. Thanks.
|
Paul Adare - MVP - Microsoft Virtual PC In article <1c8f01c48cde$b45f7680$a501280a@phx.gbl>, in the microsoft.public.win2000.security news group, G. Lentz says...
> 1) I need to clarify that only an account with > Administrative privilages can create new user and > computer accounts in an AD domain?
User accounts yes, computer accounts, no. This, to be quite honest, is a pretty basic AD concept, and I'd certainly expect any consultant working for me (that was doing anything at all with AD) to know this. In AD, every domain user account can add 10 workstations to the domain. Since the person in question obviously already has a domain user account, it is really just a matter of connecting to the domain through the VPN, and then adding his computer to the domain.
> > 2) Any possible ideas on how the hell they could have > done this? Don't need specifics, just could/can it be > done? I understand by the user having VPN access to the > network he basically had a key so to speak, allowing them > to bypass the normal things that discourage external > attacks (i.e firewalls).
See above. If this wasn't supposed to be allowed, it certainly wasn't the contractor's fault. It was whomever setup the remote access and allowed this to happen.
> > I am going to try and speak to the client principla that > if they circumvented network security, then his network > is basically open at this point. Unfortunetely the > pricipal is high on this person and their abilities so I > may be creating an acrimonius situation by bringin it up. > My thinking is I don't want to be blamed for something > down the line as I feel I no longer have control over the > network. Thanks.
Again, as above. Given what you've told of the story here, you _are_ responsible for this situation already.
-- Paul Adare This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|
Agreed. In fact, if you have a user account, you wouldn't even need to have your machine joined to the domain to gain access to data. Connection to the network is all that's needed and a VPN connection gave him that. So, as far as I can see, no "hacking" or "security breach" has taken place here. Oli "Paul Adare - MVP - Microsoft Virtual PC" wrote in message news:MPG.1b9a189b779474f7989a41@msnews.microsoft.com... > In article <1c8f01c48cde$b45f7680$a501280a@phx.gbl>, in the > microsoft.public.win2000.security news group, G. Lentz > says... > >> 1) I need to clarify that only an account with >> Administrative privilages can create new user and >> computer accounts in an AD domain? > > User accounts yes, computer accounts, no. This, to be quite honest, is a > pretty basic AD concept, and I'd certainly expect any consultant working > for me (that was doing anything at all with AD) to know this. In AD, > every domain user account can add 10 workstations to the domain. Since > the person in question obviously already has a domain user account, it > is really just a matter of connecting to the domain through the VPN, and > then adding his computer to the domain. > >> >> 2) Any possible ideas on how the hell they could have >> done this? Don't need specifics, just could/can it be >> done? I understand by the user having VPN access to the >> network he basically had a key so to speak, allowing them >> to bypass the normal things that discourage external >> attacks (i.e firewalls). > > See above. If this wasn't supposed to be allowed, it certainly wasn't > the contractor's fault. It was whomever setup the remote access and > allowed this to happen. > >> >> I am going to try and speak to the client principla that >> if they circumvented network security, then his network >> is basically open at this point. Unfortunetely the >> pricipal is high on this person and their abilities so I >> may be creating an acrimonius situation by bringin it up. >> My thinking is I don't want to be blamed for something >> down the line as I feel I no longer have control over the >> network. Thanks. > > Again, as above. Given what you've told of the story here, you _are_ > responsible for this situation already. > > -- > Paul Adare > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no > rights.
|
Paul Adare - MVP - Microsoft Virtual PC In article , in the microsoft.public.win2000.security news group, Oli Restorick [MVP] says...
> In fact, if you have a user account, you wouldn't even need to have your > machine joined to the domain to gain access to data. Connection to the > network is all that's needed and a VPN connection gave him that. >
That's not necessarily true all of the time, for example, if your internal network is secured via IPSec using Kerberos or Certificate auth.
But the bottom line here is that the lack of knowledge on the part of the consultant in the OP is the cause of the events that took place.
-- Paul Adare This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
|
Yes I realise that, but for someone who didn't know that any user can, by default, add 10 workstations to the domain, I doubt IPSec was being used. Agreed on your last point. Oli "Paul Adare - MVP - Microsoft Virtual PC" wrote in message news:MPG.1b9a217ee02d5513989a42@msnews.microsoft.com... > In article , in the > microsoft.public.win2000.security news group, Oli Restorick [MVP] > says... > >> In fact, if you have a user account, you wouldn't even need to have your >> machine joined to the domain to gain access to data. Connection to the >> network is all that's needed and a VPN connection gave him that. >> > > That's not necessarily true all of the time, for example, if your > internal network is secured via IPSec using Kerberos or Certificate > auth. > > But the bottom line here is that the lack of knowledge on the part of > the consultant in the OP is the cause of the events that took place. > > -- > Paul Adare > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no > rights.
|
By default "authenticated users" can add up to ten workstations to a domain which means that ANYONE that know a logon/password for a domain account can add a workstation to the domain. This is configured in Domain Controller Security Policy/security settings/local policies/users rights and the domain controller container is the only place this user right is applied. You can remove authenticated users if you do not want this to happen which I would suggest you do. Joining a computer to the domain in itself does not give a user any more permissions than credentials already do, though it may allow the computer to obtain a certificate or ipsec policy to use for network communications restricted to only domain omputers. --- Steve "G. Lentz" wrote in message news:1c8f01c48cde$b45f7680$a501280a@phx.gbl... >I have a strange situation that I really just need > clarification on so here goes. > > I am an IT consultant for a company that has remote users > who connect via a VPN. One user, a recent contract > (potientially to be an employee) needed access to the > shared files/folders and e-mail. I gave him the > instruction on setting up the VPN on his home PC and was > going to get back to him on setting up the remaining > items (I work for other clients also) later. Instead of > waiting he and a friend logged onto the client's network > via the VPN and using their own words, "hacked and > guessed around about some things" so they could add his > PC to the domain and give him access to what he needed! > There are only two accounts on the domain that have > Administrator rights and his was neither. When I > questioned the user on this, suffice to say the friend > did all the work and he knows nothing. What really > puzzles me is that the client pricipal seems to think > nothing of this?!? He basically said well I guess you > have some competition. > > Anyway my questions are: > > 1) I need to clarify that only an account with > Administrative privilages can create new user and > computer accounts in an AD domain? > > 2) Any possible ideas on how the hell they could have > done this? Don't need specifics, just could/can it be > done? I understand by the user having VPN access to the > network he basically had a key so to speak, allowing them > to bypass the normal things that discourage external > attacks (i.e firewalls). > > I am going to try and speak to the client principla that > if they circumvented network security, then his network > is basically open at this point. Unfortunetely the > pricipal is high on this person and their abilities so I > may be creating an acrimonius situation by bringin it up. > My thinking is I don't want to be blamed for something > down the line as I feel I no longer have control over the > network. Thanks.
|
|
|
|