Skip to main content

windows server 2008 - Changing user's last name in Active Directory and implications for redirected folders

itemprop="text">

I have an Active Directory domain,
running on Windows Server 2008 DCs. I have this user who got married and changed her
last name. I have already changed her last name in Exchange 2007, created a new alias
for her email and assigned it as Primary SMTP address, so i think Exchange is taken care
of.




Now, i haven't changed her user
name yet (the convention is flastname) because i have redirected folders with offline
files at this site. The user is using a Windows 7 based laptop and she uses it both
onsite and remotely, where she VPNs in with a Cisco VPN
Client.



What are the implications and
precautions for changing her username in this
environment?



If i went ahead and changed her
username, would redirected folders log her onto a blank profile? or would it redirect
her to her profile folder using her SID?


class="post-text" itemprop="text">
class="normal">Answer



These
questions depend on a more detailed explication of how the redirected folders are done.
Are they via GPO? If so how does the GPO map them? Via %username%? Is it just
documents/music/favorites/downloads, or the whole profile
root?



If that were all true except for the
profile root (which makes it more complicated), then yes it should be fine if you change
the network folder name at same time as username. It won't change anything until their
next login, and you may actually need to tell them to log in, log out, then log in a 2nd
time for offline files to fully engage. This process will be detailed in the Event Logs
of the client PC.




Note that their
local path on the client PC will not change for existing login's but that shouldn't
affect redirected folders or offline files.



If I
were you I'd test this with a test user rename, and then document the correct steps in
order for future occurrences of this.


Comments

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?

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,

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