You are not logged in.
Hi,
Our small office-network is administered by a (very good) self-employed debian dev, and in the last six years I have learned a great deal by reading through configfiles on our server. I have even setup my own (modest) homeserver and am very interested in everything about networking.
Earlier this year there were the SSL-vulnerabilities, so I glanced through our own setup and I think I have found a weakness that I'm not sure of if it is serious or not.
Internal authentication is handled with LDAP / Kerberos, so at this level I see no problems, but connections to f.e. our LDAP-server are not protected with SSL or TLS and thus my question: should this not be mandatory on an office network that (although protected by iptables) allows connections with the internet?
Our server handles next to LDAP / Kerberos also apache, postgresql, imap, smtp, calDAV, NFS, cups etc...
THX!
Offline
If I understand your explanation correctly, the LDAP server is only used for queries in your internal lan? If this traffic is only between hosts on a trusted segment, then one can potentially argue/understand the choice for plain old LDAP.
However, if you have the resources (knowledge, capability/compatiblity to deploy this correctly onto clients, hardware that can handle it etc etc), encrypted LDAP is always an extra security layer which is usefull to have.
Burninate!
Offline
Our LDAP-server is used to authenticate users (LAN only), but also as an addressbook (LAN only, although exposed through a local web app).
But other services are exposed to the internet: imap, smtp, http, etc. Whenever I need to add a new device (smartphone f.e.), I'm confronted with the setting 'encryption', which has to be left blank for our setup. That's why I have my doubts...
But you seem to find encryption something 'optional' if I understand you completely. So my doubts are probably not warranted. THX for your reply!
Offline