Skip to main content

windows server 2008 - Security Cert issue with DNS Alias for RDP



I wonder if someone can help me - I'm a complete newbie when it comes to administering servers so apologies if I'm missing something obvious...



We've decided on a naming convention which uses Elements from the periodic table (with VM Hosts as molecules)




While this is okay for the time being, I'm not relishing the prospect of typing "Unununium" or "Ununnulium" when we've got that many servers. So... i've added some DNS entries for the chemical symbols (He->Helium, Li->Lithium, etc.)



When i attempt to RDP to the servers using the DNS alias, I get a certificate warning as (obviously) the name I'm connecting to doesn't match with the server in question.



Whilst this is only an annoyance for RDP I'm assuming it may have implications if i use the shortened names for other purposes.



So, my question is - Is it possible to have the server I'm connecting to use a certificate which covers both? or have 2 certs side-by-side and auto-select the correct one?



As I said, I'm new to this so am a little unclear as to what options are available to me and would appreciate it if someone would point me in the right direction for some useful documentation / guides.




Many thanks in advance for any help you can provide



I should've mentioned, the servers in question are running Windows Server 2008 Enterprise and the clients will all be either the same or Windows 7


Answer



You can generate certs that are good for multiple DNS names using the Subject Alternative Name property. It's not as easy as a single wildcard cert for all of your machines, but it's a lot more secure. Here's an article from DigiCert about Subject Alternative Names and how they're used.



Basically, you'll generate a cert for each server that contains SAN entries for each dns name you're likely to access it with.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?
Post a Comment
Read more

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,
Post a Comment
Read more

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able
Post a Comment
Read more