Re: Query regarding S4U2Self protocol extension

Vipul Mehta <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.encryption.kerberos.general
Message-ID <CAMeQEL9PsKHvPBYb7mZBqRQxScwd8YNVBudYNCjcus8ibd66xg@mail.gmail.com>
Thank you.
This was a useful discussion for me.

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 4:36 PM Isaac Boukris <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 1:46 PM Vipul Mehta <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Now we know that behavior is unified and S4U2Self ticket should be
> forwardable to avoid vulnerability, i think we can add a check in MIT
> Kerberos API itself such that before sending S4U2Proxy TGS-REQ to KDC, if
> ticket is not forwardable it will fail in client itself.
> >
> > I can see that JDK has this check:
> >
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/739769c8fc4b496f08a92225a12d07414537b6c0/src/java.security.jgss/share/classes/sun/security/krb5/internal/CredentialsUtil.java
> -> line 105
>
> MIT used to have that as well before RBCD was added, although I don't
> think this was ever necessary, as that check should be done in the
> KDC. Also disabling NonForwardableDelegation can be a valid usage when
> relying on SIDs and not using protected-group, as in the original RBCD
> design:
>
>
> https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/windowsserverdocs/blob/master/WindowsServerDocs/security/kerberos/kerberos-constrained-delegation-overview.md
>


-- 
Regards,
Vipul
________________________________________________
Kerberos mailing list           [email protected]
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.