Page 1 of 1
NTLMv2 support in UBCD?
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:23 pm
Our Active Directoruy network has is dropping support for NTLMv1 later this month for security reasons.
Does anyone know if Bart's network disk or any of the network utilities will allow NTLMv2 authentication to a network? If not, we would just need to authenticate locally to the server.
Thanks for any help.
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:19 pm
Not sure about the answer to your question. Though, this is the wrong forum for your question. I presume you are refering to the UBCD4Win due to your barts comment. If so, may I redirect you to ubcd4win.com and post in those forums? If not a ubcd4win question, I would still recommend that than here as this is for the Ultimatebootcd of which is a dos based collection of utilities.
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:44 pm
The poster of the question refers to Bart's network boot disk, and since that one is included (in a revised way) his question is on target and there should be no need to raise it at the UBCD4WIN forums.
Now to the question itself.
No, Bart's network disk can not handle NTLMv2. This is very unfortunate but true. This boot flop is based on Microsoft's DOS client for accessing Microsoft servers and shares (SMB). And it only handles NTLMv1. This is also the reason why some admins started to complain that they could not reach their new W2K3 servers anymore with their old dos-client-boot-flops. Because W2K3 was the first MS-OS that would utilize NTLMv2 by default. As we are talking about Microsoft there is also no chance of ever adding NTLMv2 to the dos client because Microsoft's policy has always been that all its customers should upgrade to the newest OS-iterations as soon as possible, so they try to cut the downgrade path wherever they can.
I assume Linux will be able to handle NTLMv2 but I have no clue if this is included and usable on the full UBCD version. And I can only guess if this maybe-linux-route will actually solve your particular problem of authenticating to NTLMv2 secured ADS.
Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:49 am
My apologies then. I was unaware that Barts was in a fashion in this forum. I will remember that. Thank you for the clarification.