RE: Any way to remove ADMIN$ only?

I'll take the first crack at this ....

>From an NT/2000 point of view, Zack is right.
Mixing the share permissions and the NTFS permissions generally cause problems for Administrators down the road. This is especially true in a large environment. Personally, I find it a better practice to have less share points, which means more groups/people access the same shares. An example of this would be group data - would you prefer 100 different shares (1 per group), or 1 share (with 100 group folders under it) and locking down the NTFS permissions? From a system point of view - the more shares, the more resources are used. NTFS rights are checked when you attempt to use the resource.

If you don't restrict access by NTFS, and rely on share level security - you are asking for trouble. The first thought that comes to mind is you have a share set (D:\dept_folders\Private\Finance) for the finance people to use. Along comes another admin that creates a share at a higher level in the directory tree (D:\Dept_Folders). That other administrator failed to set the share permissions (default everyone). Now if you didn't use NTFS - EVERYONE would have access to the Private\Finance data. In the same scenario - if you blocked all inheritance at the PRIVATE directory, nobody will have access - unless specifically given. Only the Finance people would have access in the Finance folder, because everyone else is blocked - and only their group is given access to it. This would be true at whatever level you created the SHARE.

The bottom line is share access is good for down level (95/98/ME) clients sharing things, but they don't have access control over their file systems. NTFS is much more secure then share level security.

Another thought to consider, is when an administrator is confused about security - they tend to make mistakes.
The KISS method should be used. Without the NTFS permissions - your not doing anything. Share level security can be mistakenly given at another level in the directory tree - that gives more access then you actually thought the user had.

A couple rules I think we should all live by:

1. Never anything off your SYSTEM partition (I also recommend removing all admin shares: C$, admin$)
2. Right after formatting a partition - the first thing you should do is remove the EVERYONE from the root.

The bottom line is NTFS permissions are much more granular the Share permissions - and harder to screw up.
NTFS is also the final check before allowing you access to a resource. Share permissions should be used only on FAT systems (don't tell me we still use those - do we?).

Do you need help?

In addition to our free technical library, Pantek provides professional IT services to companies who utilize Open Source software: Learn more about Pantek's Technical Support offerings Place an order for 24/7/365 Technical Support here Learn more about Pantek, who we are, and what we do Chat with a Live Operator Related securityfocus.com Links bugtraq certification focus-bsd focus-ids focus-ih focus-linux focus-ms focus-sun focus-unix-other focus-virus forensics incidents libnet linux-secnews ms-secnews pen-test secpapers secprog sectools secureshell security-basics securityjobs sf-news vuln-dev webappsec Request more information about Pantek

just my 0.02¢

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Evan Mann [mailto:emann@questinc.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:09 AM To: focus-ms@securityfocus.com
Subject: RE: Any way to remove ADMIN$ only?

Could this be elaborated more on the list by others? I do not recall any conversations about the practice of which is the "best practice" or "ideal" method of setting permissions between share level and file level within the past year and a half or so that I've begun monitoring the list. Perhaps its a good time to bring the subject up?

-----Original Message-----
From: Zack Berkovitz [mailto:zberkovitz@pga-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:27 PM To: Jim Harrison (SPG); Eric; Palumbo, Dave (Factiva); focus-ms@securityfocus.com
Subject: RE: Any way to remove ADMIN$ only?

The best practice is in fact to use default (Everyone=Full) share permissions and to set NTFS security on all drives (with inheritance for 2K and newer systems running NTFS 5 or greater). Share permissions should really only be used when absolutely necessary, such as on FAT volumes where ACE's cannot be applied. Conflicts between share and NTFS perms always cause headaches down the road, and NTFS perms secure the files and directories for locally logged on users as well.

If you are sharing C and D, of which one is the system drive, how will removing the admin$ share (winnt) make the system any more secure, if the drive it resides on is shared out? NTFS permissions seem like a more comprehensive solution. The presence of any of the administrative shares is a security hole, regardless.

• Zack

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Harrison (SPG) [mailto:jmharr@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:59 AM To: Eric; Palumbo, Dave (Factiva); focus-ms@securityfocus.com Subject: RE: Any way to remove ADMIN$ only?

Do you need more help?

In addition to our free technical library, Pantek provides professional IT services to companies who utilize Open Source software: Learn more about Pantek's Technical Support offerings Place an order for 24/7/365 Technical Support here Learn more about Pantek, who we are, and what we do Chat with a Live Operator Related securityfocus.com Links bugtraq certification focus-bsd focus-ids focus-ih focus-linux focus-ms focus-sun focus-unix-other focus-virus forensics incidents libnet linux-secnews ms-secnews pen-test secpapers secprog sectools secureshell security-basics securityjobs sf-news vuln-dev webappsec Request more information about Pantek

 The only problem with using "net share" to create shares is that it  applies default permissions to those shares it creates. These include  "Everyone=Full"; obviously not an ideal scenario, especially given the  default security of Windows drives (Everyone=Full). I've written a  script that will create shares that only allow those accounts listed  in the local server's administrator's group to have access to the  share you choose to create.

http://isatools.org/createshare.zip

• Jim Harrison MCP(NT4/2K), A+, Network+ Services Platform Division

The burden of proof is not satisfied by a lack of evidence to the contrary..

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric [mailto:ews@tellurian.net]
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:55 AM To: Palumbo, Dave (Factiva); 'focus-ms@securityfocus.com' Subject: Re: Any way to remove ADMIN$ only?

write a script that will launch each time upon machine bootup that 'unshares' that share.

'net share admin$ /delete'

I don't know of any registry setting that will remove only that share and
leave the others.

Understand also that anyone with admin privileges to that machine can recreate that share at any time.

Can we help you?

In addition to our free technical library, Pantek provides professional IT services to companies who utilize Open Source software: Learn more about Pantek's Technical Support offerings Place an order for 24/7/365 Technical Support here Learn more about Pantek, who we are, and what we do Chat with a Live Operator Related securityfocus.com Links bugtraq certification focus-bsd focus-ids focus-ih focus-linux focus-ms focus-sun focus-unix-other focus-virus forensics incidents libnet linux-secnews ms-secnews pen-test secpapers secprog sectools secureshell security-basics securityjobs sf-news vuln-dev webappsec Request more information about Pantek

At 01:11 PM 11/4/2002 -0500, Palumbo, Dave (Factiva) wrote:
>Hello,

>to accomplish this? If this is documented, please forgive me....but I
IPC$).
>Again, I'm just looking to remove ADMIN$.
Received on Fri Nov 8 22:42:35 2002