Solved

how to make a specific windows 2003 GPO setting visible in a 2008 network

Posted on 2016-10-12
8
62 Views
Last Modified: 2016-11-18
I'm asked to make this setting in 50 windows server 2003 boxes:

'Network security: Minimum session security for NTLM
SSP based (including secure RPC) clients' to 'Require message
integrity,Require message confidentiality,Require NTLMv2 session
security,Require 128-bit encryption'

my problem is that the Domain Controller is Windows 2008.  in 2008, only the two last ones appear in the Group Policy Manager.
While this works with my Server 2008 servers, my 2003 servers still need the other two set.

Can I still do this?
Thanks
0
Comment
Question by:Evan Cutler
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 3
  • 3
8 Comments
 
LVL 40

Expert Comment

by:Adam Brown
ID: 41840493
Can you clarify what you've been asked to do? Is someone asking you to set the security setting to be all four of those at the same time? Because that isn't possible. You can only set one of those options to exist. Require Message Integrity and Require Message Confidentiality or lower security settings that are both accomplished by setting Require NTLMv2 Session Security or Require 128-bit encryption. Require 128-bit encryption is the highest security level that setting allows and effectively accomplishes the same thing as all the other settings. All you need to do is make sure all of your 2003 and 2008 systems are set to the same value, either Require NTLMv2 or Require 128-bit. Note that all systems are configured with the Require 128-bit encryption setting in local policy by default as long as they are running Windows Vista/2008 or later.
0
 
LVL 9

Author Comment

by:Evan Cutler
ID: 41840529
I've been asked to follow a series of guidelines to harden my environment.  Exceptions to policy are extremely difficult to obtain.

In this guideline, I'm asked to set all four in 2003,
and the other two (NTLMv2, 128-bit) for 2008 and 2012.

I have to be able to explain why I shouldn't or can't and what the mediation would be if I didn't follow the guidelines.

Thanks.
0
 
LVL 40

Expert Comment

by:Adam Brown
ID: 41840539
Sounds like the guidelines are poorly written. I would state that the setting "Require 128-bit Encryption" is already set by default and supercedes or includes the other 3 settings, and only one of the settings can be enabled at any time. From a hardening standpoint, you're using the highest possible setting, so it can't be hardened any further, as far as this particular setting is concerned.
0
Technology Partners: We Want Your Opinion!

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!

 
LVL 9

Author Comment

by:Evan Cutler
ID: 41840545
do you have an example URL where I can use that as doctrine?  That way I can send references in with my request?
0
 
LVL 40

Accepted Solution

by:
Adam Brown earned 500 total points
ID: 41840632
Oops. Did a little more digging on it. Sorry, it *is* possible to set all of them at the same time... https://books.google.com/books?id=jEZcFYmX0wYC&lpg=PA87&ots=g4omp-ZlCT&dq=require%20message%20integrity%20require%20confidentiality&pg=PA87#v=onepage&q=require%20message%20integrity%20require%20confidentiality&f=false has information on what the 4 settings *do*. Require Message Integrity requires a digital signature, which is *always* included in an Encrypted message. Require Confidentiality causes the system to require encryption, which is the same thing as Require 128-bit encryption. It's just that Confidentiality alone allows weaker encryption. NTLMv2 requires signing as well, so it includes the integrity requirement. You can set the two options for NTLMv2 session security and Require 128-bit security and achieve the same results as the two options that aren't available. Essentially, both options include the other two options. That's a big part of why they were eliminated. https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj852240(v=ws.11).aspx Explains the settings.
0
 
LVL 9

Author Comment

by:Evan Cutler
ID: 41840644
ok, so to get this straight.
your suggesting that since NTLMv2 and 128-bit includes encryption and integrity, then asking for a policy change would be easier than a registry change to include them as part of the policy.  This is more implementation streamlining, then policy differences, yes?
0

Featured Post

Ransomware-A Revenue Bonanza for Service Providers

Ransomware – malware that gets on your customers’ computers, encrypts their data, and extorts a hefty ransom for the decryption keys – is a surging new threat.  The purpose of this eBook is to educate the reader about ransomware attacks.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

A quick step-by-step overview of installing and configuring Carbonite Server Backup.
A procedure for exporting installed hotfix details of remote computers using powershell
This tutorial will walk an individual through locating and launching the BEUtility application to properly change the service account username and\or password in situation where it may be necessary or where the password has been inadvertently change…
This tutorial will walk an individual through setting the global and backup job media overwrite and protection periods in Backup Exec 2012. Log onto the Backup Exec Central Administration Server. Examine the services. If all or most of them are stop…

733 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question