May be time to look for a new rope on a different ship.  Been there done
that got the scars to prove it.  Sometimes you just have to move on.

Jon

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Ziots, Edward <[email protected]> wrote:

>  Yep, the hole DCMA trick defintely is a eye-opener, but that has also
> been dealt with accordingly, and folks understand that risk quite well.
>  That and the BSA stuff defintely will wake up folks accordingly.
>
>
>
> The part I get frustrated about is trying to do things by the best
> practices and apply the correct security principles to my systems, and being
> sniped at and second guessed every second of the way, does not make one
> happy at all, even though implementing these foundations will seriously
> raise the bar security wise, even though some people are going to lose
> access they should have never had in the first place, but can’t seem to win
> that argument accordingly.  Like I said at the end of my rope.
>
>
>
> Z
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> CISSP, Network +, Security +
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> Email:[email protected] <email%[email protected]>
>
> Cell:401-639-3505
>
>
>
> *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Friday, November 12, 2010 3:19 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Questions on the Application of Restricted Groups to Local
> Groups on Servers, Workstations
>
>
>
> That is one diatribe that does not get old at least to me.  Another thing
> that would get the powers to be to see the light is an audit of software by
> a vendor that cost the company big time for violation of
> agreement/copywrite.  You know like someone in the company getting caught
> with unlicensed music, video, or software.  That also seems to get them on
> board with killing off advanced permissions.
>
>
>
> Jon
>
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Ziots, Edward <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Well that has already been dealt with ( common admin credentials, no more)
> the real problem is permissions beyond ones job responsibilities, and the
> risk that it entails, and the politics that goes with it. I think every
> organization has that issue to some degree, but as we have seen in various
> instances lately, failure to apply least privilege, and separation of duties
> comes back to bite those organizations accordingly in a big way.  ( Just
> remember the incident in SF with the Rogue Network admin that basically held
> the cities network at ransom)
>
>
>
> Nothing moves as fast or as well as I would like to see them or how they
> need to do it correctly, so the frustration level goes up through the roof.
>
>
>
> Simple part, if you do the right things and stay diligent then  the bad
> stuff is less-likely to happen to you, but as Jim said, it takes a
> catastrophe until someone “gets it”.
>
>
>
> Ok enough of my diatribe,
>
>
>
> Z
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> CISSP, Network +, Security +
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> Email:[email protected] <email%[email protected]>
>
> Cell:401-639-3505
>
>
>
> *From:* Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Friday, November 12, 2010 2:45 PM
>
>
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Questions on the Application of Restricted Groups to Local
> Groups on Servers, Workstations
>
>
>
> You need a virus outbreak that hits every box in a whole building across
> the wire using the local admin credentials that are common between the
> boxes. That was what it took here.
>
>
>
> *From:* Ziots, Edward [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Friday, November 12, 2010 2:37 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* RE: Questions on the Application of Restricted Groups to Local
> Groups on Servers, Workstations
>
>
>
> Actually, not when the cards are stacked against you…
>
>
>
> Z
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> CISSP, Network +, Security +
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> Email:[email protected] <email%[email protected]>
>
> Cell:401-639-3505
>
>
>
> *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Friday, November 12, 2010 1:57 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Questions on the Application of Restricted Groups to Local
> Groups on Servers, Workstations
>
>
>
> Keep trying and don't give up that fight it will be worth the effort in the
> long run as you know.
>
>
>
> Jon
>
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Ziots, Edward <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks guys,
>
>
>
> Reviewing it now and testing out the OU to start ripping and removing the
> bloat in the local admins group, even though I lost my battle with further
> restrictions of those groups, and following the least privilege best
> practices.
>
>
>
> Z
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> CISSP, Network +, Security +
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> Email:[email protected] <email%[email protected]>
>
> Cell:401-639-3505
>
>
>
> *From:* KenM [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Friday, November 12, 2010 1:00 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Questions on the Application of Restricted Groups to Local
> Groups on Servers, Workstations
>
>
>
> There are a few ways you can do this. One would be in the restricted group
> settings, create new group. The name would be the local group of the server
> so Administartors and "Power Users". Add the local admin account and
> whatever domain accounts in there.
>
> The other way would be to add a Domain Group in the GPO and set that as a
> member of the local groups. The difference between the two is that the first
> one will clear the group membership and the second one will just add to the
> local group. Here are a few links.
>
>
>
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc785631%28WS.10%29.aspx
>
> http://www.frickelsoft.net/blog/?p=13
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Ziots, Edward <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> For those that have worked with the Restricted Group Functionality in
> Windows 2003, Windows 2008 R2.  I have the following questions.
>
>
>
> I am looking to create some group polices that will affect the local
> administrators, power users groups on a set of computer objects (servers) in
> particular OU’s.
>
>
>
> I am looking at using Restricted Groups to allow this to happen, so my
> scenario would be the following.
>
>
>
> 1)      How to designate the Local administrators group of the
> Server/Servers within the GUI of the group policy Object, so I can say that
> Group X in Domain X should be a member of the local administrators group
> enforced by this group policy which is applied to the OU in which the
> computer objects apply. ( Same would go for Power Users).
>
>
>
> Any white papers, or KB articles that have been of use in your application
> of this feature would be greatfully appreciated, since the management here
> needs this to happen in short order.
>
>
>
> Please advise,
>
> EZ
>
>
>
> Edward E. Ziots
>
> CISSP, Network +, Security +
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Lifespan Organization
>
> Email:[email protected] <email%[email protected]>
>
> Cell:401-639-3505
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
>
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>
>
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
> ---
> To manage subscriptions click here:
> http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
> or send an email to [email protected]
> with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

---
To manage subscriptions click here: 
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to [email protected]
with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin

Reply via email to