I have an application server (webservice or remoting, not yet decided) on a remote machine and a client on the same domain. I want to authenticate the user as a domain user on the server.
I can ask the user to enter their Windows username/password and send those to the server and get the server to check them against Active Directory but I would rather not. Is there any way I can get the client to send some kind of token which the server can then use to identify which domain user is sending it a request? Obviously I want to protect the server against someone sending a fake user ID and impersonating another user.
Clarification
The client on computer A will communicate with the server on computer B. I think I will probably using .NET remoting for this communication. On the server I merely need to know the ID of the user on computer A; if the app on computer A must send the ID I need to be sure that it hasn't sent the ID of a different user.
I don't need to impersonate the other user, I merely need to know (for certain) who it is.
Are you saying that the client communicates against your server, and you need to use the client's privileges at a third server? That scenario describes The Double-Hop Problem. The blog most describes it in detail, and what can be done to circumvent it (domain modifications).
[...] you can get around the problem and use proper delegation if you set up your network to use Kerberos and set up the web server in question as trusted for delegation.
Added:
I know of no way you can identify the user on computer A. Would it be enough if it was just the user executing your program? You could use windows authentication in a domain scenario, but that would only give you the privileges used by the program to authenticate, which may differ from the actual evil user in front of the keyboard.
Added:
Your comments to this post indicates that windows authentication with impersonation would work for you. Check http://community.bartdesmet.net/blogs/bart/archive/2006/08/26/4277.aspx for code examples.
Related
In Azure DevOps services, when you connect an agent to the server, you have different types of ways to authenticate to the server. You can see here for example, about connecting a Linux agent, that you have these 4 types:
Alternate (Basic authentication)
PAT
Negotiate - Connect as a user other than the signed-in user via a scheme such as Kerberos or NTLM.
Integrated - Not supported in Linux
The integrated type is mentioned in the page about connecting a Windows agent as "Windows default credentials"
Bare with me please.
In my organization, we have a Active Directory domain with a Single-Sign-On, I suppose it uses Kerberos as the authentication protocol. Sometimes I use Powershell scripts to access the API of our internal Azure DevOps Server, and I use the -UseDefaultCredentials flag so the user won't have to enter username and password - it will just authenticate based on the logged-in user.
That got me thinking that the -UseDefaultCredentials flag is using Kerberos to authenticate.
But from the above, it seems that Integrated is using "Default credentials", which is something else than "Negotiate" which uses Kerberos.
Can someone help me understand this?
The UseDefaultCredentials flag tells the underlying system to try and use the caller's SSO credentials, which in most cases is the credential used to log into the system interactively or otherwise.
Strictly speaking it does not indicate which protocol to use. What it's actually saying is "dear system internals: please figure it out for me". The way this works is by selecting the negotiate protocol, which as it's name suggests negotiates the use of specific authentication protocols based on the client credentials as well as information from the server. This is called the SPNEGO protocol. It is transparent to the caller.
SPNEGO is fairly simple in nature. The client has a list of known authentication protocols (Kerberos, NTLM, etc.) and will send that list to the server saying 'pick one please'. The server can select any of them and respond telling them what to use, and the client then goes and uses it. Fin.
SPNEGO is also relatively smart because it can reasonably predict what it thinks the server will accept and will attempt to optimistically provide a token up front using the first protocol in the list. So if it thinks it needs Kerberos it'll go and get a Kerberos ticket up front and send it first. The server might think that's fine, or it might fail and return a response saying
"no, I really need NTLM", and so the client tries again with NTLM.
Is there any way to keep client third party service password secured from others being able to access server machine?
Password is used to send messages between two system, from A->B. There are 3 actors:
client - owner of the infrastructure and user of system A and B
provider A - author of system A which have ablitity to RDP into client server and administrate it to keep system A working
service B - service providing access to system B, secured with password known to client which provider A shouldn't directly know
Every solution based on encryption and storing password in configuration/database is not an option because provider A will always have access to decrypting algorithm and mangled password.
Best solution right know is based on keeping password in server Windows Credential Manager. Provider A can use it inside message sender process by its code but password itself is not directly visible in server. It always can be retrived by provider A but it is a bit safer.
I work as a student web developer for my computer science department and I've been asked to look into a modification of our password reset procedure for linux accounts. Currently users will log in with their university credentials (via Active Directory) and after being authenticated they get a temporary password through email which they are forced to change as soon as they log in. This way eben if the temporary password it intercepted there is a very short time span in which it could even be used.
Now the idea has been posed that instead of using a temporary password that we might allow the user to pick a new permanent password and set it directly through the web utility. It is my understanding that https is more of "the best we have" than "a great way to secure information". Are there any other avenues I can explore for securing the new password so that we can feel comfortable implementing such a system?
Basically, if you communicate with a server over HTTPS and the private key of the server isn't exposed to someone else, you can be sure that anything you transfer (e.g. the new password) can only be decrypted by the server. Additionally the server certificate assures, that the server you are communicating with, really is the server you want to communicate with.
So, using HTTPS provides authentication and prevents eavesdropping.
If you are working with Active Directory, it is my understanding that the Password Modify Extended Operation (which requires the existing password) is not supported. Therefore, the password must be changed with the LDAP modify request. One solution would be to use the UnboundID LDAP SDK with a web application to execute the LDAP modify with the new password. The modify request should be transmitted over a secure connection, or a non-secure connection promoted to a secure connection using the StartTLS extended operation.
see also
AD password change
Using ldapmodify - this article is about the command line utility ldapmodify but the concepts are useful.
I have a DCOM client and server applications which use OLE automation marshaller. They work fine when run on the same PC but when the server is on a different PC not in the same domain I get E_ACCESSDENIED (0x80070005).
Server PC is configured with dcomcnfg to give all access to any DCOM object to the user whose login and password I specify on the client. ServerApp and its type library are registered on the server pc.
Type library is also registered on the client PC. I specify server name directly in the ClientApp so no dcomcnfg configuration is needed on the Client PC as far as I understand.
CreateInstanceEx() with server name, login, domain and password works fine. It returns IUnknown and at the same time starts ServerApp on server PC.
But when I try to QueryInterface() for the interface which server supports, I get E_ACCESSDENIED.
Analyzing the Security Event Log, I have two records there:
First, a successful network login by the user whose credentials I specify in ClientApp. This happens when I call CreateInstanceEx().
Next, a failed login attempt by the user under which I'm logged in on a client PC. Since two PCs are not in a domain, this user is unknown to server PC.
Now, why the heck would THIS user be logging into server, especially when I call QueryInterface of all things?
Studying CreateInterfaceEx params, it appears there's some kind of impersonation mechanism going on. But it's unclear who impersonates who. There are THREE user credentials involved:
User under which ServerApp runs on the server PC (as configured in dcomcnfg).
User whose credentials ClientApp specifies when connecting.
User under whose credentials ClientApp runs on client PC.
No matter how you look at it, if #3 is involved it's one user too much. If DCOM is going to identify/impersonate #3 on server PC anyway, why do I need to specify #2's credentials? To what point?
It would have seem logical for DCOM to impersonate #2 because this is what I have explicitly specified as my credentials. But why the second login attempt then?
Can someone please explain how exactly the impersonation works, and also if there's a way to just ignore it and run as user which is specified in dcomcnfg?
Answering my own question. After much exploration it became apparent that DCOM has TWO different identification cases:
Authorization for object creation (CoCreateInstanceEx)
Authorization for method calls.
For reasons unknown, #2 doesn't inherit #1 settings. By default it uses the credentials of the client process, hence strange logins.
There are two ways to specify credentials for #2. First one is CoSetProxyBlanket. It sets credentials for a specified proxy (marshaller-unmarshaller) only:
CoCreateInstanceEx(IID_IObject1, /*login, pass*/, obj1); //Success!
//Logged in and recevied IObject1 proxy in obj1
obj1->DoSomething();
//IObject1 proxy in obj1 now tries to login under process credentials.
//Failure! E_ACCESSDENIED
CoSetProxyBlanket(obj1, /*login, pass*/); //Success!
//IObject1 proxy is now authorized.
obj1->DoSomething(); //Success!
obj1->QueryInterface(IID_IObject2, obj2); //Success!
obj2->DoSomethingElse(); //Failure!
//This different proxy for IObject2 have not yet been authorized.
CoSetProxyBlanket(obj2, /*login, pass*/);
//etc.
It's important to note that while CoCreateInstanceEx requires impersonation level to be at least IMPERSONATE, CoSetProxyBlanket doesn't seem to work on anything except IDENTIFY.
Another option is to use CoInitializeSecurity to set default credentials for the whole process. Then you don't have to call CoSetProxyBlanket on every proxy:
CoInitializeSecurity(/* login, pass */);
CoCreateInstanceEx(IID_IUnknown, /*login, pass*/, obj); //Success!
obj->DoSomething(); //Success!
When using CoInitializeSecurity on the client you have to specify asAuthSvc too, even though MSDN says you don't.
The drawback of this method is obviously that if you have several DCOM objects from different PCs you're going to have to specify all the credentials in this call and those are probably going to be tried against every computer every time you open a different proxy.
It also is not reliable when you're running from a DLL (what if a process has different default security?). So, it's probably better to implement a QueryInterface wrapper which CoSetsProxyBlanket before returning from every call.
For those who are working in Delphi there is one little note that can save a lot of your time. After you did obj as ISomeInterface operation, you have to call CoSetProxyBlanket for the new instance. This could be not very obvious, but all we know that as operator calls QueryInterface method, and it can return new instance.
What is the best way to send a password to a Windows Service? Our application needs a password in order to start. I don't care that services are "normally" supposed to run without user interaction. Its good enough for us that an operator can start the application and then log off.
On a unix system, I would just echo the password over stdin but the service has no stdin.
Currently, we use the DPAPI to just store the password using CryptProtectData. While this, works, it presents other problems that are beginning to become troublesome.
I'm guessing that I'll need to use some form of IPC between the service and the application that is sending the password but I'm not sure which method is appropriate, if any.
Thanks
Two main options:
You could listen on a socket on startup and wait for the required password to be supplied (maybe embed an SSH server in there, so that the password cannot be snooped over the wire)
My preferred option would be to read the password from a configuration file (that can be secured to the minimum readership) or registry setting (again, sufficiently secure such that only your service and administrators can read/change it)
Thanks for responding Rowland.
You could listen on a socket on
startup and wait for the required
password to be supplied (maybe embed
an SSH server in there, so that the
password cannot be snooped over the
wire)
I considered that but without certificate verification, wouldn't that leave us open to a man in the middle attack?
My preferred option would be to read
the password from a configuration file
(that can be secured to the minimum
readership) or registry setting
(again, sufficiently secure such that
only your service and administrators
can read/change it)
We're trying to follow "defense in depth" as much as possible such that if an attacker compromised the machine, he would not able to access our application.
You can use kerberos mutual authentication. There are few options and examples there.
But just wondering. On a compromised machine, There may be a key logger. So typing the password is never secure if you want to maintain security in this environment. The same problem exist afaik for unix terminals.
DPAPI in UserMode is really the best option, and storing the encrypted data in a protected location, e.g. registry key with limited ACL.
What exactly were the problems that are beginning to be troublesome? Maybe we can just solve those...
What exactly were the problems that
are beginning to be troublesome? Maybe
we can just solve those...
Currently, the application runs as the Local System account.
Our application stores a number of credentials in an encrypted file and uses the DPAPI (in UserMode) for the encryption.
Thus, when the application is installed, the installer is run as the Local System account. We also have a set of tools that ship with the application, some of which need access to this encrypted file and thus, they too need to run as the Local System account.
By the time the application is installed and started, we're heavily dependent on that account.
We're running into problems because one of our users wants to use the application to access a shared network drive. The Local System account has no such privileges and we can't simply run our service as a different user because our encrypted information is protected under the Local System Account.
We've tried to avoid the process of setting up a user account just for our application because it is installed across many different customers and environments, all of whom have wildly different security policies.
You can access a remote drive from a service running under system account. However, you will need to have credentials & share information to connect to the remote machine. You can use the API wnetaddconnection to gain access. Probably your encrypted file can store this credential as well.