Skip to main content

active directory - Remote branches and domain controller



I have a very small, but distributed network. In the central office, there's a Windows Server 2008 R2 VM with a few Linux VMs running on the same box. There are two client PCs running Windows7. In a remote location, there is a single client PC, currently connecting into the central office with OpenVPN via one of the Linux servers.



I would like to move from Workgroup to Administrative Domain for better group policy control. I will not be able to justify additional server hardware or Microsoft licenses (those things are ridiculous) but can easily add more VMs to the existing server.



The way I see it I have a few decisions to make, each with a few options.



Which server runs the domain





  1. Windows Server 2008


    • Traditional AD solution

    • Can't add a backup controller without another license

    • Windows server is also running FTP and AS functions; AD servers typically just host AD.


  2. One of the Linux boxes with Samba)



    • Not the traditional AD solution (am I giving up any features?)

    • Can easily (read: cheaply) add a backup controller

    • If necessary (not ideal), can add a DC at remote location




How do I authenticate / authorize the remote locations





  1. Add remote Linux DC at remote location (seems like overkill for one remote client)

  2. Somehow connect to the VPN prior to logging in to Windows (is this even possible?)

  3. Expose my AD to the internet without VPN. (seems like a terrible idea)



Are there any options I'm missing? This has to be a pretty common situation for small businesses, I can't imagine these IT-less companies are buying multiple WinServer boxes to setup the traditional solution of a standalone AD, a standalone backup AD, and then another box to host everything else....



I'm a Linux guy and have no problem getting my hands dirty, but don't have a wealth of IT experience.


Answer



The ideal solution would be to setup a site-to-site VPN tunnel and handle all the authentication against the DCs at the main site. (This would of course, depend on your network gear or any gateway servers you can set up at each site.)




If you put a second DC at the remote site, you'll have the same issues with connecting the two sites so the DCs can talk to each other. And, yeah exposing AD to the public net is all kinds of worst-idea-ever. And, let me add that using Linux as your secondary DC strikes me as a very not good idea too. I bet it can be done, but I wouldn't want to be around when the Windows DC fails and you have to try restoring your only Windows DC. Might be "good enough" but, well, like I said, I wouldn't trust it, and if I can't trust it, why bother having it around in the first place?



If you can't do a site-to-site VPN, depending on the exact VPN software you're using, it's actually possible to connect a remote client VPN without user context (before logging into Windows), yes, though I'd suggest that an easier idea would be to allow caching of the domain credentials and/or a non-domain limited user account. Caching the domain credentials for a client that only has VPN access can be a bit of a headache when the password needs changed though, so heads up on that.



And for what it's worth, the "common" solution to this problem seems to be to stay with workgroups, and/or cheap out on the IT admin they hire, as to ensure they end up with a domain that's effed up in more ways than I can count. So, kudos on taking the initiative to at least try to do it right.


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