SPNs pose a security risk?

So I was speaking with our "infrastructure guy" about implementing Service Principle Names for proper kerberos authentication with the identity pool accounts in some of or IIS websites. He starts rattling something off about SPN enabled accounts having "ring 0" access or something along those lines. Bascially some kind of low level OS access when used. Now, I understand what SPNs are and what they do but Ive never heard the "ring 0" reference used before and Im a bit confused as to what he is talking about in regards to SPNs somehow creating a security risk.

Confirm or disprove what he is saying? If he is correct, please explain to me hopefully with a little more detail why SPNs might pose a security risk. I see technet articles and such all over the place stating that this is a common and even best practice approach. But he's denying that based on his own "black hat" knowledge of active directory. Ive got nearly 10 years of experience with AD and I have never heard about SPNs being a security risk. Im not implying that I am correct, I simply would like to expand my knowledge if this is the case.
Zen_DragonAsked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Henrik JohanssonSystems engineerCommented:
Well, any network feature that is incorrectly configured is a security risk...

About the ring talk, see wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(computer_security)
0
Zen_DragonAuthor Commented:
Ahh thanks for the "ring" clarification. If he had just said kernel level privilges I would have better understood what he was talking about! haha I understand the technology and the concepts Im just horrible with all the "terminology."

Anyhow, to get back to the point. We are using low privilege domain accounts as for identity accounts in the application pools in IIS. These accounts have some rights usually on the box itself to read directories and such but otherwise are restricted in the domain. I understand the process of creating SPN's for service accounts, but I dont understand beyond the accounts configured access how it is possible that simply creating a SPN for an account gives that account "ring 0" priveleges. And if that was the case then why is this process so commonly documented without any warning or implication?

Stating that this is an incorrect use of this capability essentially implys that any access should be restricted to the web server itself. From a security perspective, I undersand that might be the safest way to server content. However one cannot imply that using domain accounts for application pools is incorrect, as it is a common and supported practice especially when used internally which is how we are currently utilizing it. So assuming that a domain account has no rights on the domain whatsoever other than on the box in which it is used, how would using an SPN pose a risk to the rest of the domain?
0
Mike KlineCommented:
I'm not sure how the SPN would pose a risk and not sure what your infrastructure guy was talking about.  He may have been talking out of his ass
...like you said the account has no rights.  In that case you may even have to manually create the SPN.
I looked at a few well known security guides and they don't mention it either
http://iase.disa.mil/stigs/stig/active-directory-stig-v1r1.pdf
DISA Active Directory STIG
 http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=2eaa45c7-d936-413e-9586-a8bb6ff739d9&DisplayLang=en
Best Practice Guide for Securing Active Directory Installations
 
I'm guessing if you talk to this guy and ask for concrete examples he won't be able to give any and then he will just start spouting off about how Windows sucks and Linux "pwns":)
Thanks
Mike
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
Henrik JohanssonSystems engineerCommented:
It sounds like you're aware of howto configure the permissions of the accounts with less privileges, and that shall be fine.
If service is run with administrator access on local server or domain, you have in any security perspective a big hole, but that isn't really a SPN problem.

I found this thread discussing SPNs being stated as a hole, but it's as I understand it the risk when server announces SPN on its own making it open for spoofing. If using service user accounts correctly, it shouldn't be the same risk.
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/kerberos/2008-January/012869.html

As Mike said, ask the infrastructure for concrete examples about why service account SPNs shall be a big security risk when it's used to increase the security.

To mention upcoming features, 2008R2 will have Managed Service Accounts
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd367859(WS.10).aspx
0
Zen_DragonAuthor Commented:
Thank you all for your time... sorry I didnt close this question sooner.
0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
OS Security

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.