<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Crossed Wires &#187; security</title>
	<atom:link href="http://veejoe.net/blog/tag/security/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://veejoe.net/blog</link>
	<description>Vic's Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 22:19:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Security blows</title>
		<link>http://veejoe.net/blog/2008/11/security-blows/</link>
		<comments>http://veejoe.net/blog/2008/11/security-blows/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:00:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vic</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Soapbox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[problem]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ssh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[synergy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vmware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://veejoe.net/blog/?p=111</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was about to post about how pleased I was with Synergy in helping me tidy up my desktop clutter (by removing a keyboard and mouse from the surface). Ironically, I&#8217;m instead posting about a problem with the configuration that will cause me to throw it out and look for something else. Why the title? [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was about to post about how pleased I was with <a href="http://synergy2.sourceforge.net">Synergy</a> in helping me tidy up my desktop clutter (by removing a keyboard and mouse from the surface). Ironically, I&#8217;m instead posting about a problem with the configuration that will cause me to throw it out and look for something else. Why the title? Because the default configuration of a Linux distribution nowadays has given me no way to fix this ridiculously simple problem without powering off the running PC, VMware guests and all.</p>
<p>The problem is that Synergy and the VMware console don&#8217;t play well together (I could have sworn that when I first started using Synergy I had no trouble with it, but there are a few hits around that describe problems like I&#8217;ve now hit). The problems people are reporting are that keys like Shift and Ctrl are not passed to the VM (some described <a href="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/synergy/+bug/215745">here</a> and <a href="http://communities.vmware.com/thread/110726">here</a>).</p>
<p>My problem is slightly different: the screen of my Synergy client (the one that&#8217;s running VMware) locked while a VMware guest had focus. Now, the Shift and Ctrl keys are not picked up by gnome-screensaver to unlock the screen. Even the real keyboard attached directly via USB doesn&#8217;t work. Big problem, for the following reasons:</p>
<p>* Thanks to password strength rules enforced on the Linux build I use, my password now has a Shift-obtained punctuation character.<br />
* I can&#8217;t switch to a virtual console, since that requires Ctrl (e.g. Ctrl-Alt-F1).</p>
<p>Okay, so the keyboard doesn&#8217;t work. This client machine just happens to be a tablet PC, and I had hacked gnome-screensaver (to display the onscreen keyboard to allow the screen to be unlocked in tablet mode). I grabbed the pen and tapped out my password, but it *still* didn&#8217;t work: even the output of the virtual keyboard gets the Shift modifier dropped. Hmm&#8230; Starting to fume now.</p>
<p>Never mind, I&#8217;ll connect via the network&#8230;</p>
<p>* Fedora does not start SSH by default (okay, yes, and I didn&#8217;t make sure it gets started after I&#8217;d finished the install).<br />
* There is no remote desktop (VNC server, XDMCP) configured.<br />
* The shiny web-based management interface on VMware Server 2.0 only listens on 127.0.0.1 (or is being blocked by the Fedora firewall).</p>
<p>So with no way to get access to the machine to try and fix it, a power-off is the only solution. Some readers are probably thinking &#8220;boo-hoo, diddums had to kill-switch his widdle poota, how tewwible,&#8221; but I <b>hate</b> having to do that; not because the system doesn&#8217;t recover, but it&#8217;s &#8220;problem resolution, Windows-style&#8221;.</p>
<p>Even though the real problem was between Synergy and VMware, I&#8217;m blaming the (perceived) need for security since without that I wouldn&#8217;t have a cryptic password that I can&#8217;t enter without Shift and a system I can&#8217;t administer over the network. Red Hat and Fedora doing everything in their power to ensure I don&#8217;t fall prey to nasty Internet fiends (rich analogies to <a href="http://matt.bottrell.com.au/archives/286-Government-Morning-Milk-Afternoon-Naps.html">governmental nannying</a>, but that&#8217;s probably over-thinking things).</p>
<p>So in summary: Synergy is great, just as long as you&#8217;re not using VMware console and have a password with punctuation or uppercase&#8230; Remember to have your SSH or other network access enabled before you play!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://veejoe.net/blog/2008/11/security-blows/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Active Directory accounts on Linux</title>
		<link>http://veejoe.net/blog/2006/05/active-directory-accounts-on-linux/</link>
		<comments>http://veejoe.net/blog/2006/05/active-directory-accounts-on-linux/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 May 2006 04:51:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vic</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[activedirectory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[samba]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://veejoe.net/blog/?p=1451</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Never thought I could get this excited about something to do with a Windows server!&#160;&#160;But there it is &#8212; one of my SLES 9 test servers is now supporting logons from a user account stored in Active Directory, with no Samba in sight! Before you say ANYTHING, this is not an indication that the Crossed [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Never thought I could get this excited about something to do with a Windows server!&nbsp;&nbsp;But there it is &#8212; one of my SLES 9 test servers is now supporting logons from a user account stored in Active Directory, with no Samba in sight!</p>
<p>Before you say ANYTHING, this is not an indication that the Crossed Wires campus is switching to the evil side.&nbsp;&nbsp;Any experienced Linux sysadmin will tell you that working with Windows systems can&#8217;t be avoided &#8212; and in some cases, welcomed (after all it&#8217;s better to have one or two Linux boxes in a sea of Windows than no Linux boxes at all).&nbsp;&nbsp;My main customer at work is essentially a Windows shop, but their main file servers are Linux on zSeries, which means that me as a Linux guy needs to know more than I thought I would want to know about bringing Linux and Windows together.</p>
<p>So they are doing a migration to Microsoft Active Directory, and the Linux systems need to be integrated into the AD setup.&nbsp;&nbsp;To our architects, Linux Windows integration equals Samba &#8212; they never bothered to look at making use of AD&#8217;s LDAP component to create a model that Linux can handle natively, instead of the (to me) less-than-optimal Winbind (don&#8217;t get me wrong, Winbind works, it just imposes some operational issues that I&#8217;d sooner do without, like SID-[UG]ID mapping, for instance).</p>
<p>So I proposed that the solution be updated to utilise LDAP, through the use of Microsoft&#8217;s own Services for Unix (SFU).&nbsp;&nbsp;I was told &#8220;yeah, dunno why it wasn&#8217;t designed that way, would be the best way to do it, but no&#8221;.&nbsp;&nbsp;Sigh.</p>
<p>So I decided to stick to my guns and set up something to show that it would work exactly as I said it would.&nbsp;&nbsp;And I have!&nbsp;&nbsp;I&#8217;ve worked around some inaccurate information on the &#8216;Net, some incomplete documentation from Microsoft, and some finger-checks on my part, to be able to show The Right Way to anyone who cares&#8230;&nbsp;&nbsp;Yep, sometimes the useless thing is just worth doing.&nbsp;&nbsp;:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://veejoe.net/blog/2006/05/active-directory-accounts-on-linux/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Veejoe goes LDAP</title>
		<link>http://veejoe.net/blog/2005/07/veejoe-goes-ldap/</link>
		<comments>http://veejoe.net/blog/2005/07/veejoe-goes-ldap/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2005 00:29:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vic</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ldap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://veejoe.net/blog/?p=1961</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We bit the bullet here at the new Ellendale data centre.&#160;&#160;LDAP authentication!&#160;&#160;Works like a bought one. Coinciding with the relocation of the prime server from Rubicon DC to Ellendale DC, we&#8217;ve implemented LDAP authentication for Linux and Mac OS X clients.&#160;&#160;There&#8217;s also automounted home directories to boot!&#160;&#160;It went quite smoothly, all things considered. Now will [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We bit the bullet here at the new Ellendale data centre.&nbsp;&nbsp;LDAP authentication!&nbsp;&nbsp;Works like a bought one.</p>
<p>Coinciding with the relocation of the prime server from Rubicon DC to Ellendale DC, we&#8217;ve implemented LDAP authentication for Linux and Mac OS X clients.&nbsp;&nbsp;There&#8217;s also automounted home directories to boot!&nbsp;&nbsp;It went quite smoothly, all things considered.</p>
<p>Now will come the dreaded data reorganisation (there&#8217;s about 1.5TB of storage across all the Crossed Wires machines).&nbsp;&nbsp;Also, I&#8217;ve been running Samba 3 for a while so there&#8217;s probably not much reason to keep putting off integrating the Windows boxes into LDAP as well&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://veejoe.net/blog/2005/07/veejoe-goes-ldap/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
