I'll interject but one point here - there is belief in some camps that
the knowledge, technology, and perhaps the code already exists to
implement such an attack.

As it was put to me, "How else could a given vendor offer a migration
tool that allows migrations without Native Mode requirement?"

Rick Kingslan  MCSE, MCSA, MCT
Microsoft MVP - Active Directory
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone





> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tony Murray
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 8:58 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Empty root domain benefits?
> 
> 
> The point about the domain security issue is that, while it 
> would be very difficult to exploit the first time, it would 
> be much easier for others to do subsequently were the details 
> to be made public.
> 
> Tony
> ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
> From: Roger Seielstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date:  Wed, 19 Feb 2003 09:34:37 -0500
> 
> I'd have to disagree on two of your four points.
> 
> -Enhanced Security: it is indeed more secure to keep the 
> schema and enterprise admins group in a different domain. The 
> cross-domain security hole is relatively difficult to 
> exploit, and does require physical (or at least interactive) 
> access to a global catalog server.
> 
> -Longer names: There is no requirement for multiple domain 
> forests to exist in contiguous namespace. In fact, there is 
> no need for them to be related namespaces at all. In fact, it 
> is possible to set the root domain to be root.domain.com and 
> have the production domain named domain.com. The only 
> requisite here is that you have a sufficient knowledge of DNS 
> such that you can manage the DNS namespace.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
> Atlanta, GA
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gil Kirkpatrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 9:15 PM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Empty root domain benefits?
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Cliff,
> > 
> > There are two pros that I am aware of...
> > 
> > 1. In the case of radical naming hierarchy surgery, e.g.,
> > acquisition of
> > another company, it provides a convenient place to merge in 
> > the new domains.
> > 
> > 2. "Enhanced security" for the Enterprise Admins and Schema
> > Admins groups is
> > often claimed, but in practice an empty root buys you little 
> > with respect to
> > security.
> > 
> > Cons:
> > 
> > 1. Its not a single domain forest, which is the best of all
> > possible worlds
> > when you can do it.
> > 
> > 2. It makes names longer than the need to; a minor annoyance.
> > 
> > Unless you have some overriding reason for multiple domains
> > (multiple sites
> > and slow WAN links can be an issue), I would stick with a 
> > single domain
> > forest. It makes life much simpler.
> > 
> > -gil
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Clifford Airhart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 6:01 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [ActiveDir] Empty root domain benefits?
> > 
> > 
> > Hello Everyone,
> > 
> >     The simplest domain model is the Single Forest / Single
> > Domain. I
> > was thinking of using this model with an "empty" root domain? 
> > Does anyone
> > have any experience with "empty" root domain? Is it really 
> > beneficial? We
> > are only a small company with a few hundred users and have 4 
> > domains in a
> > multimaster NT domain model.
> > 
> > What are the pros and cons?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Cliff Airhart
> > Answer Financial Inc. 
> > Senior Systems Administrator - Server Support / eBusiness
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 818.644.4225 We answer to you.
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> > List archive: 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> > 
> > List info   : 
> > http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> > 
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> 
> List info   : 
> http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> 


List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

Reply via email to