I can't sniff, my nose is plugged up. I ran out of Claritin-D.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 12:22 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
I have not been in many biometric/smart card discussions, but the ones I
have been in have never addressed one particular issue:
"Ok, so logons are now secured very nicely. So how secure is the
background mechanism that ties my fingerprint to my account?? Can Joe sniff
it off the network with net monitor?" (I'd put money on Joe.R being able to,
anyway :)
I believe that is at least one reason for some of the disclaimers around
certain products like I think it's a MS keyboard with fingerprint reader,
about being for home use only or for securing Internet passwords only, etc.
Rich
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich Milburn
MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform
Development Applebee's International, Inc.
4551 W. 107th St
Overland Park, KS 66207
913-967-2819
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to
do it." - Pablo Picasso
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob MOIR
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 10:14 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
Then we should be looking at user authentication by other means than just
passwords. But that isn't a utopia either.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Milburn
Sent: 06 October 2005 15:35
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
There seem to be several schools of thought on the password policy issue...
- the execs and exec admins who should have the 4th most complex passwords
(next to HR, accounting, and IT maybe) but lack the computer literacy to
understand why and so unfortunately want no passwords or their dog's name as
a password, and they have the political influence to be heard
- the security people who want 5 way complex passwords (including ASCII
characters) and understand the threats but not the user issues
- developers who don't want the [continued] blame for leaving an open
password policy, and who [might] now reasonably [from a technical and
security perspective] ask "why would you want to allow some people to have a
weak password policy if others require a strong one on the same network??"
- AD admins who have to figure out how to make everyone happy but may get
blamed if the network is compromised.
- and others of course.
Personally I tend to side with the developers on this, but then it probably
should not be mandated by the program, only set as an initial default to
protect the ignorant. IMHO.
Rich
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich Milburn
MCSE, Microsoft MVP - Directory Services Sr Network Analyst, Field Platform
Development Applebee's International, Inc.
4551 W. 107th St
Overland Park, KS 66207
913-967-2819
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to
do it." - Pablo Picasso
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 7:20 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
The way I can see different password policies for one domain being
implemented is if you have a product/tool in front of your directory
intercepting the passwords and enforcing different rules as the passwords go
through. The underlying directory (AD) will have to have no policy, or have
at least a very relaxed policy. This would be a sort of password servicing
provisioning system.
Sincerely,
Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I
Microsoft MVP - Directory Services
www.readymaids.com - we know IT
www.akomolafe.com
Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about
Yesterday? -anon
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Tyson Leslie
Sent: Wed 10/5/2005 4:54 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
In our case (empty root, 4 child domains, 3500 users), it was primarily
politics. We brought in two consultants (one from a VAR, one from
Microsoft), and the decision was that the best way to go, based on politics,
geographical location of the offices, and division of administration, was
the empty root and 4 child domains. Password policies was a small factor,
but not a driving force...
That said, I personally would love to see the ability to have multiple
password policies within a single domain.
Tyson.
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Renouf
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 1:37 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
My question would be: for a small directory of 5000 users, why do you have 3
domains? If it is for separate password policies, then perhaps a better wish
list item would be the ability to have multiple password policies in one
domain.
Phil
On 10/5/05, Rich Milburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think the biggest reason people want to be able to run multiple
domains on one server is the same reason practically no one (except
for
SBS) installs just one DC, and the same reason we always install a
minimum of 2 for a domain. We have a forest root and 2 child
domains
model, and it takes us 6 servers to run that - for basically 2
directories and fewer than 5000 users. That seems like a waste of
hardware in some situations - especially if you have multiple orgs
that
you run. The parallel might be for a web hosting company to have 2
full
web servers for each domain they host - in case 1 goes down, they
still
have a second. VS is an answer, yes, although you still need a full
server license for each VM. The thing with domains is you don't
want to
only have 1 online copy of the directory. MS didn't seem too
convinced
there was a good reason to have an online second server - they cited
backups as a good solution to the issue. In a big org the cost of
an
additional server to provide redundancy is negligible, but is having
an
online copy (second DC) really the BEST way to do this? And it
doesn't
help SBS users, since they can (correct me if I'm wrong) only have 1
DC.
I realize it may be the best way we have with W2K3, but how could
the
issue of redundancy be addressed with AD differently than having 2
DCs
minimum per domain? Anyone have any ideas?
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:20 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
Yeah I can say that it isn't in Longhorn. As the dev guys put it,
this
is a
tough one. It wouldn't just be a nobrainer if they had separate
instances of
AD, there are just tons of other things involved that make it
extremely
difficult. It was something that was brought up in the summit
though,
not
sure how much I can say around it other than no, it won't be there.
MS feels the focus of this is dramatically reduced now as well due
to
the
fact that VS is available and can run DCs. Also the Server Core DCs
helps
here as well as the DCs will have a smaller footprint. If folks are
NOT
in
agreement with that assessment, definitely speak up, it is too late
for
Longhorn but possibly the opportunity exists to convince them for
BlackComb.
joe
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charlie
Kaiser
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:37 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
I'd also like to see the ability to run DCs for multiple domains on
the
same
server. SMBs with limited resources balk at having to buy additional
server
hardware for redundancy on multiple domains, especially when the AD
load
on
the DCs is minimal. This feature sounds like an offshoot of your
list
below.
If you can run AD as a service, it might not be that hard to allow
multiple
domains similar to multiple websites/DBs on one server...
I remember discussing this with Stuart Kwan at DEC a couple of years
ago. I
hope it makes it into the mix...
**********************
Charlie Kaiser
W2K3 MCSA/MCSE/Security, CCNA
Systems Engineer
Essex Credit / Brickwalk
510 595 5083
**********************
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of joe
> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 4:25 PM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
>
> Vista is the client OS. I don't believe they have named Longhorn
> Server yet.I am voting for something like Windows Server 5.4.0 or
> something like that. I realize that the marketing group would have
> something to say about it but I figure the best thing from them is
if
> they pronounced their thoughts from the bottom of Lake Washington.
> People don't install servers because they have cool names.
>
> The biggest non-NDA pieces that I have heard announced in
conferences
> or seen on the web already is the Read Only DC to limit security
> exposure for WAN deployments, restartable AD that can be
> stopped/started as necessary, DA/Admin separation so that you can
have
> an Admin on a DC that "can't" achieve Domain-wide DA level rights,
and
> DCs running on Server Foundation or now its called Server Core
which
> is a GUI-challenged Windows Server.
>
> I can also say that there are a myriad of GUI updates for the
Admin
> tools though I can't state specifics. BJ Whalen who was involved
with
> the GPMC project has been brought in to work on admin experience
and
> anyone who has worked with GPOs with and without GPMC know that he
> really helped out.
>
> All in all, there is some very cool stuff and MS has really been
> listening to the community on what they want and need. I know that
> this list is watched for ideas and such and has been the source of
> DCRs internally. So if you have ideas, spout them here, they will
most
> certainly be heard. They may not make Longhorn as it is getting a
bit
> late to add major changes but your ideas could make it into a
later
> rev.
>
>
> joe
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven
Wood
> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 3:46 PM
> To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
> Subject: [ActiveDir] Active Directory wish list
>
>
> Hi,
>
> With Windows Vista on it's way what's on people's wish list as far
as
> Active Directory is concerned? Also are there any big enhancements
> due?
>
> Thanks
> Steven
>
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE-------
PRIVILEGED /
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or any
attachments.
This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to
attorney-client
privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the named
addressee. If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, unauthorized
forwarding,
printing, copying, distribution, or using such information is
strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this in error,
you should
kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately destroy
this message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal
criminal law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and
review the
content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address.
Messages sent to
or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's
International, Inc.
e-mail system.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
-------APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL, INC. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE-------
PRIVILEGED / CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message or
any attachments.
This information is strictly confidential and may be subject to
attorney-client privilege. This message is intended only for the use of the
named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this message,
unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or using such
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received
this in error, you should kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail and
immediately destroy this message.
Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal
law.
Applebee's International, Inc. reserves the right to monitor and review the
content of all messages sent to and from this e-mail address. Messages sent
to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Applebee's
International, Inc.
e-mail system.
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx
List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
