On 05/15/2015 01:33 PM, Brian Topping wrote:
> In the (apparently) first message to the list in 2014,
> addressed questions about securing IPA and I don't see much other talk about
> it. Now that 4.x is prevalent, I wanted to bring it up again.
This is the default by design. However, note that in FreeIPA 4.0+ you can
change that default (permission-mod) and let users or some of the user
attributes be only shown for authenticated users.
So, from my POV, this is not a flaw.
> I'd like my installation to be allow hardened machines (i.e. in the cloud
> with encrypted filesystems) to be a part of the domain. I believe this means
> that I need to expose Kerberos and LDAP to the world, since the machines
> could live anywhere. I don't believe I need to worry about KRB5, but I am
> concerned about 389-DS since it seems somewhat difficult to force TLS
> (https://blog.routedlogic.net/?p=119 <https://blog.routedlogic.net/?p=119>)
> and maybe that's a bad idea under IPA for reasons I thought I'd ask here
> about. Last year's thread also referenced
> and I thought I would check to see if that's still necessary under 4.x.
389-DS and TLS should be also fixed, since FreeIPA 4.1 (RHEL/CentOS 7.1):
This is an nmap test against the FreeIPA public demo (4.1.x):
$ nmap --script ssl-enum-ciphers -p 636 ipa.demo1.freeipa.org
Starting Nmap 6.47 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2015-05-18 11:08 CEST
Nmap scan report for ipa.demo1.freeipa.org (220.127.116.11)
Host is up (0.19s latency).
PORT STATE SERVICE
636/tcp open ldapssl
| TLS_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA - strong
| TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA - strong
| TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256 - strong
| TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 - strong
| TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA - strong
| TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA256 - strong
| TLS_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_MD5 - strong
| TLS_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA - strong
|_ least strength: strong
Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 6.19 seconds
> Setting up the firewall to allow cloud networks in is always an option, but
> if I can get a secure IPA setup going, it would also allow road warriors to
> kinit and use their credentials for configured intranet sites without having
> to turn on the VPN (which can really slow things down from remote parts of
> the globe).
BTW, if you are concerned about exposed Kerberos traffic, FreeIPA 4.2 plans to
offer Kerberos-over-HTTP functionality by default:
Even now, it can be manually configured. This is what GNOME used:
So, if I am reading my notes correctly, there should be no blockers in using
FreeIPA in your environment. If yes, please let me know.
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-users mailing list:
Go to http://freeipa.org for more info on the project