That's a pretty valid argument to put any access to your network into an
untrusted network segment, isn't it?  Remote access, wired access (what
about vendors that jack-in?)etc. 

There's some talk about using the reskit stuff to quarantine the network
access.  Some of the AP providers offer this type of usage as well.  One of
the better ways to accomplish authorized access only is to use strong
authentication.  WEP isn't it.  Cracking WEP is published and pretty quick.
MAC layer isn't all that great either since you can spoof the MAC address to
gain access. Certificates are nice, except that some of your downlevel and
handheld devices won't like it.  


I'd say this is a pretty valid argument to rethink security (for many
companies) from a "keep out the bad guys and we'll be fine" mentaility to a
"let's figure out what we need to protect on our network and add security to
those parts to protect from outside the firewall as well as the inside of
the firewall" mentality.  When you can sip coffee or favorite hot beverage
of choice downstairs and wander a company's network two floors above or
across the street, the possibilities are limitless.  

I favor the certificate method and VPN for wireless access, but that only
addresses part of the issue IMHO.

Al  



 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Kingslan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 12:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Wlan & AD Security

Chris,

We sometimes become off-topic city.  No worries there....

This is an interesting topic, and one that I will fall clearly on one side
of it because of my experiences at my company.

====**** Treat your access points like untrusted computers in the public
DMZ. ****====

There is really no way that one should treat an access point in any other
way.  Given that the signals coming into an AP cannot truly be verified,
then one must add extra methods to insure security.  The way that I prefer
to see this accomplished is by placing the AP's into an untrusted are of the
network, applying a 128-bit WEP key, then using some added methods
consistent with 802.1x.  This can either be PEAP (using RADIUS / IAS),
Cisco's LEAP, or other secure methods for providing strong authentication.
Obviously, stronger the better, and two-factor (RSA fob, smart card, what
have you) is magnitudes better than a single factor authN.

I'm still fighting to get my APs at work in the DMZ.  They are, at present,
on our internal network.  They are PEAP protected, but somehow I'm just not
all that heartened by the simple addition of PEAP to untrusted devices.

Rick Kingslan  MCSE, MCSA, MCT, CISSP
Microsoft MVP:
Windows Server / Directory Services
Windows Server / Rights Management
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
WebLog - www.msmvps.com/willhack4food
 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Blair
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 8:47 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ActiveDir] Wlan & AD Security

This maybe slightly Off Topic, Sorry. I am looking to deploy wireless access
points for our users to access our AD. I am currently reading the white
paper from Microsoft named "Enterprise Deployment of Secure 802.11 Networks
Using Microsoft Windows". Has anyone else implemented this? I have also read
about putting the AP's outside of the network and using VPN to access any AD
related resources. Sounds easier, but is it as secure? Does anyone else have
any other solutions?
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