[OpenAFS] Fixing old screw-ups, then adding Active Directory Domain
Tue, 4 Oct 2011 15:41:58 +0200
Hi to all,
I write here in search for some conceptual advice (the actual help
will be needed far further down the road).
First, a bit of background.
My company started work as a contractor. One of our clients' security
requirements was to create physically separate network, just for
people working for this contractor. This way, we initially had 2
internal networks: one is "ours", and the other "contractors". This
way, when OpenAFS has been introduced, two separate "worlds" has been
created - complete with separate LDAP and Kerberos databases, and
separate OpenAFS systems.
As if that wasn't enough, short-sighteness of my precursors caused
them to name BOTH of those worlds the same name - let's say
"TEST.INT". That surely was *great* idea at the time, because it
reduced administrative overhead a bit. Also, DNS space is doubled - so
there are e.g. two afs servers, named the same, just in different
networks. What noone saw coming, was a bit of relaxation from our
contractor - and some time ago they agreed that IPs from "ours"
network can (after all) be accessible from "contractors" - but not the
other way round.
Let me point the areas of problem:
- user authentication - in both "worlds" users are named the same,
they are in realm that's named the same, but is a different one
- AFS servers - they too are named the same; furthermore, the one from
"ours" network can't "see" one from "contractors", but the one from
"contractors" can see "ours" just fine (think of it as iptables
related,established - type - firewall)
- two separate DNS instances
- oh, and currently we've got ~1000 users and 1,5k computers in our network
What's more, now we've got plans to introduce AD domain in "ours"
network. Great, another Kerberos, another AAA system in place. How
about I (and my fellow sysadmins) will try to fix and simplify it as
much as possible?
I've already put in motion a plan to "flatten" DNS space, so names
will be unique - so we can treat that as nearly non-issue.
Next idea is to allow "contractors" network users to use AFS resources
from "ours" network (already a handful requests about that). What I
- I have to change at least one of Kerberos realms to some other name
- I have to move AFS infrastructure to the new realm
Those are already two things I have no idea how to do smoothly (I
mean, 1 weekend service window tops - you know, there are people
working there :-) ). So, any advice would be appreciated.
- I *think* that after that, having access from CONTRACTOR.TEST.INT to
TEST.INT will be a piece of cake - if every user will re-authenticate
with name@TEST.INT after logging to his/her workstation as
name@CONTRACTOR.TEST.INT. Acceptable, but I'd like to be better than
that - I would like to allow access to TEST.INT if one is already
authenticated for CONTRACTOR.TEST.INT. From what I've seen, it's quite
possible (of course, if stupid firewall won't come in between :/)
Next: (actually, it may happen that it'll be the first thing to do):
stupid Windows Domain. I already figured I need to move away from
OpenLDAP to 389 Directory Server, so the AD can be kept in sync with
LDAP; what I haven't figured is "is it possible to use just one
Kerberos login", and "which Kerberos should it be".
As far as I know, Microsoft decided to add some custom bits to its
Kerberos implementation, which would mean that if I want to keep just
one user password database, it will be AD's. So, in fact, I'd need to
move away from my precious MIT Kerbers TEST.INT towards AD
implementation. But I'm not sure what that'd mean for OpenAFS - i.e.
can I run OpenAFS user auth from AD Kerberos?
Another possibility (one I hope for) is that my lack of extensive
experience with Kerberos and OpenAFS means I'm missing something
simple. Or maybe what I devised is simple, it just seems complicated?
I'll just re-iterate my goal: "flat" address and realm space, one (or
two) user databases.
Comments are very welcome.