Re: [Full-disclosure] RDP, can it be done safely?

["J. Ottosson" <j-006@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10 Jun 2010 at 9:30, Marsh Ray wrote:

> On 6/10/2010 9:10 AM, Thor (Hammer of God) wrote:
> > To be specific, it actually doesn't require a "client" cert in the
> > strictest sense.
> 
> But I thought it could be configured to require a client cert?

Some users would probably be content using stunnel (+OpenSSL) as SSL wrapper on 
server side and the "-v 3" option in config which I think should force 
validation against locally installed certificates.

/J





> 
> > You can configure certificate parameters on the
> > server in such a way that certificate trust chains must be honored
> > (close enough)
> 
> I don't get your meaning here. What cert chains would the server be
> validating if not client certs? The server's own?
> 
> Or are you saying it's still the client's option to not present a client
> cert?
> 
> > but if you want true client authentication based on a
> > certificate, you would have to publish the RDP over RPC/HTTP(s) via
> > something like ISA where you can specifically configure a listener to
> > require client authentication certificates to be "presented" to the
> > publisher, but that's not really the same thing.
> 
> I kind of thought we had it configured something like that (but I
> haven't gotten in too deep yet).
> 
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc731264%28WS.10%29.aspx
> 
> Thanks for the heads-up, I'll definitely look at this more closely as I
> have some projects at work which involve MSTS and TSG.
> 
> - Marsh
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/