Logical Network Defense – use tools like NAP to isolate “non-ideal” entities that are on your physical network to verify identity, antivirus and malware status. Perimeter Defense – use technologies like Microsoft’s UAG (ISA and IAG) and Cisco Pix to defend all external network access points and technologies similar to RSA or UAG for secure VPN access. Physical security of your network – don’t let people in your buildings unless they are supposed to be there. Port scanners can still detect port usage and will most likely be able to deduce information about your domain, but if you force all machines to encrypt all network traffic, there will be much less in terms of a carte blanche response from servers on your network. The mitigation strategies for this center a little around what you have and the security practices around managing and securing AD, but focus more on:Įncryption – implementing a PKI and forcing IPSEC on all machines will greatly aid in your fight. Pursuing this to perfection is going to be a very strenuous task and will most likely result in great expense, but it can be closely achieved. Basically, if someone is on your network, they are going to be able to poke around and use freeware scanning tools and see everything about your network. I have never gotten this completely locked down. Security is telling us this has to be fixed NOW! and I’m not sure what we can do. I can’t recreate the issue on the test domain to try the fix. The kicker is our test domain is configured the same way currently and it doesn’t show up on the scan as having these vulnerabilities? Has anyone seen this before? Our domain admins are worried about making the change (rightly so) because they think it must need to be this way and they don’t want to break the domain. It is currently set to (1) which limits some but not all null sessions. The only thing I haven’t done is set the restrictnullsessaccess key in the HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\LanmanServer\Parameters setting to (2). The Microsoft article Description of Dcpromo Permissions Choices () for more information regarding Pre-Windows 2000 The Health Secretary demanded answers after learning. If this vulnerability was discovered on a domain controller, please note that some of the recommended settings may not have any effect. Steve Barclay last night ordered an urgent investigation into new guidelines that tell NHS staff to treat all patients as gender-neutral. Read the Microsoft documents called How to Use the RestrictAnonymous Registry Value ( en-us 246261) and “It is recommended that you disable null sessions.īefore editing any configuration file in a production environment, the changes should be well tested in a rehearsal environment. I’ve followed most of the steps below in the MS articles listed below: Remote User List Disclosure Using NetBIOS (7) QID: 45003 Category: Information gathering CVE ID: CVE-2000-1200 Vendor Reference: - Bugtraq ID: 959 Modified: Edited: No Null Session/Password NetBIOS Access (7) QID: 70003 Category: SMB / NETBIOS CVE ID: CVE-1999-0519 Vendor Reference: - Bugtraq ID: - Modified: 10/08/īasically, it appears that anonymous users can generate a list of domain user names and that could be exploited via brute force attacks. Greetings, Our area uses Qualys for vulnerability scanning and our DCs are showing the following vulnerabilities:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |