[THIN] Re: CAG AAC 4.2 fallback connection policies
- From: "Pavlo Ignatusha" <Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 11:01:24 -0400
Jeff,
Please see comments inline.
Thanks,
Pavlo Ignatusha
Systems Network Coordinator
Pembroke Regional Hospital
tel. +1 (613) 732-3675 ext.6150
fax. +1 (613) 732-9986
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jeff Pitsch
Sent: April 5, 2006 6:23 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG AAC 4.2 fallback connection policies
But if something is causing the continuous filter to fail, wouldn't you want to
err on the side of caution and reauthenticate the user? [I would like to error
it but what will re-authentication give me? If user can not fix his/her
conditions required by continuous scan then upon re-authentication user will be
denied access to NavUI anyway.]Isn't the fact that the watermark you have
chosen has been compromised mean you may want to be extra cautious? They would
have access to minimal resources based upon when they authenticate again. Does
that make sense? To me, if a watermark fails (in this case a continuous scan
filter) i wouldn't trust that the person who logged in is still the person at
the console. Why did it fail? I've always been burned by 'assuming' and in
this case your assuming the watermark failing is nothing to worry about. [And I
agree with you on this.]
As for you scenario of going from valid workstation to kiosk, that's what the
EPA's are for. I guess I'm confused as to why you wouldn't have a failsafe
access policy that ONLY gives the bare minimum if nothing can be validated.
[This is exactly what we wanted to do. In fact we have already set it up with
EPAs. What we are upset about is the fact that if you add continuous scan to
the list of things you require then this user totally looses ability to utilize
non-trusted devices. If you are using EPAs only they will fall back and get you
the level of access you need. When there is continuous scan involved - user is
denied VPN and NavUI if this scan is failing. Re-authentication will not get
this user NavUI because if VPN client is up it is looking for
http://aac_servername <http://aac_servername/> as a portal.]
Again, if our continuous scan is failing why is it failing? Why are you
getting so many helpdesk calls? Is it possible your watermark is not the best
possible choice? As well, why not simply put an EPA on the policy if that is
what will make it work?
I'm not trying to be argumentative but really trying to understand the
reasoning and maybe, just possibly, maybe it will help you.[I really appreciate
your input Jeff as it gives us a different view at this topic. I guess we were
trying to make the best use out of both EPA and continuous scans. What
ultimately screwed us were the connection policies that were not applied at the
same fashion as access policies. If they could do continuous scans using EPA
the setup would be a breeze]
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
On 4/5/06, Pavlo Ignatusha <Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
See comments inline
Thanks,
Pavlo Ignatusha
Systems Network Coordinator
Pembroke Regional Hospital
tel. +1 (613) 732-3675 ext.6150
fax. +1 (613) 732-9986
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jeff Pitsch
Sent: April 5, 2006 12:01 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG AAC 4.2 fallback connection policies
That makes a little more sense. NavUI within a VPN connection. Logically it
makes sense as well, if the scan fails, do you want them having access? (Yes,
of course you do. Picture a user, working from a home access or an external
site. They've installed all the proper protection and everything that we ask
for (or, see it as a company system that we've setup and deployed to their
home/satellite site) to access their applications, network shares and network
resources. All of a sudden, they go to an internet café (or some other kiosk
that is locked down), and they just want to jump on and check their email. We
don't want the kiosk blindly having access to all sorts of resources that they
shouldn't have access to, nor do we want them accessing these things if the
system is not protected the way we want. So why would we just tell them too
bad so sad? We wouldn't. We'd give them minimal access, ability to jump on,
check their email, and get off, no hassle.) If they are a node on the network,
why would you give them the external address for the AAC? (Well, what happens
when the continuous scan that's setup fails? Then your VPN fails and your user
is out of luck. We want them to still be able to hit the portal, and like we
mentioned above, check their email or access MINIMAL company resources. This
is not the route we are taking anymore though, as simply using the EPA scans to
figure whether or not to bring up the VPN is our main tool, and continuous
scans are not being used anymore.) Why give them NavUI if they are VPN'd in?
(This question is throwing us for a loop. When you connect to the fqdn of the
appliance, the VPN connection (if your user has the associated connection
policy) turns on, and then your put through to the portal to access published
apps, email, network shares, etc... Why would we make users login through the
portal page, and then close that Window, open this and that, just to get what
they can get from the portal? It's completely redundant and makes for n number
of extra helpdesk calls that we wouldn't need to deal with if we keep it
simple.) Is it for email and WI or are you doing more? (Email, published apps
(WI), network shares, and selected users network resources) In other words, if
they are already a node on the network, why do they need NavUI? (It gives the
user a nice and easy central area to access all the published apps, email, and
network shares.)
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com <http://jeffpitschconsulting.com/>
On 4/5/06, Pavlo Ignatusha < Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Jeff,
You are correct in saying "Even with a continuous scan filter on the Connection
policy, it fails over just fine if the EPA is not met."
We think the problem is that you are having the same trouble we had in
recognizing the difference between continuous scans, EPA's, the different
filters, access policies and connection policies. It is all about timelines
when each thing happens during logon to AAC. We believe that when you log in
this is what happens:
1. User opens browser and types URL on the appliance.
2. EPA scans are performed and logon page is displayed to user
3. User type in username and password.
4. IF Connection Policy associated to that user:
a. IF the VPN client is told to launch (selecting 'Launch Secure
Access Client if access allowed').
i.
Continuous Scan begins
ii. IF there
are Continuous Scan Filters associated with that Connection Policy (these are
different then normal Filters)
1. User passes Continuous Scan, NavUI page is displayed using
http://acc_server_name <http://acc_server_name/> and works as normal
2. User fails Continuous Scan, VPN fails, NavUI page tries to connect to
http://acc_server_name <http://acc_server_name/> STILL, but fails due to no
VPN connection being made, so, you get a 404
b. IF the VPN client is NOT to launch
i. NavUI
acts as no VPN is up and works as if no connection policy is associated (if you
actually create a connection policy like this, it will indeed inform you that
your Connection Policy is useless and does nothing, but in fact, doing nothing
is still doing something).
ii. NavUI is
displayed using https://appliance_fqdn <https://appliance_fqdn/> and
everything works.
5. IF there is no Connection Policy associated to that user
a. NavUI is displayed using https://appliance_fqdn
<https://appliance_fqdn/> and everything works.
You can easily see that if you assign multiple connection policies with EPA
scans to the user there is a fallback because EPAs happen before NavUI. If you
have multiple connection policies with continuous scans they happen after the
login when NavUI link in the browser is already pointed to
http://aac_server_name <http://aac_server_name/> . Sure in this case if your
continuous scan fails, VPN fails and subsequently NavUI link to
http://aac_server_name <http://aac_server_name/> fails as well.
How about we tell you what we did and what was the result of this?
1. Set up network resource and associated access policy granting access
(don't bother with EPA scans like IE versions).
2. Create continuous scan for a registry entry (and filter).
3. Create connection policy to bring up VPN client. And include this
filter as condition.
4. Create second connection policy that brings up the VPN client but do
not include the filter.
5. Make connection policy with filter (created in step 3) higher priority.
6. Add your test user to access and both connection policies. Add this
user to other policies for accessing the AAC NavUI.
7. Connect from PC with registry entry. Watch NavUI and VPN working well.
NavUI will be connected using http://AAC_server_name <http://aac_server_name/>
...
8. Being connected, delete the registry entry and watch being denied from
both VPN and portal. Close the browser.
9. Now try to connect back using same PC without registry entry.
Connection policy with continuous registry scan filter will be processed first
(as it has higher priority). Since the watermark is not there this connection
policy will fail and the next connection policy (without continuous registry
scan) will not be processed. This will essentially leave user without both VPN
and NavUI (as the portal doesn't know that the VPN failed, so it's acting as if
you have that network resource).
The conclusion we made after extensive testing is that to guarantee users with
VPN privilege at least minimal NavUI access in case they came from non-trusted
device we needed to set up the very basic connection policy that just brings up
VPN client, abandon using any continuous scans (to make sure users will not
fail this policy under ANY circumstances) and manage access to network
resources through access policies with EPA scans.
Thanks,
Pavlo Ignatusha/Curtis Brunet
Pembroke Regional Hospital
tel. +1 (613) 732-3675 ext.6150
fax. +1 (613) 732-9986
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jeff Pitsch
Sent: April 4, 2006 1:29 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG AAC 4.2 fallback connection policies
I'm not seeing the problem. Even with a continuous scan filter on the
Connection policy, it fails over just fine if the EPA is not met.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com <http://jeffpitschconsulting.com/>
On 4/3/06, Jeff Pitsch < jepitsch@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:jepitsch@xxxxxxxxx> >
wrote:
Got it. I'll definately be testing this out. That's definately going in next
weeks presentation ;)
Jeff
On 4/3/06, Pavlo Ignatusha < Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Jeff,
I think I know what's happening.
You have a connection policy that does NO continuous scans. You are using
connection policy only to invoke the VPN client. This is why in your scenario
your user never failed the connection policy simply because you are not
checking for anything in the connection policy. All your checks are EPA checks
in the access policies. There you can Allow or Deny access to the network
resources.
Thanks,
Pavlo Ignatusha
Systems Network Coordinator
Pembroke Regional Hospital
tel. +1 (613) 732-3675 ext.6150
fax. +1 (613) 732-9986
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jeff Pitsch
Sent: April 3, 2006 11:29 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG AAC 4.2 fallback connection policies
I'm still confused on that because I've had that situation working or my
understanding of what your saying. Maybe we are doing it differently. I have
a connection and access policy that gives users access to VPN if they are able.
i also have a another access policy that is the exact opposite of the above
(using the NOT operator) and that gives them the NavUI if they are not eligible
for full VPN. Is that what your talking about?
Jeff
On 4/3/06, Pavlo Ignatusha < Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Jeff,
IE checks are the EPA scans not the continuous scans and you use them in access
policies. If you don't assign any continuous scans in the connection policies
users are fine.
Let's say you have a user that has connection policy applied with filter
containing a continuous scan that checks for a registry entry (your watermark).
If user connects from a PC with watermark, VPN client comes up, checks the
watermark and user is into the NavUI (note that NavUI url in this case in
http://aac_server.... <http://aac_server..../> ). If user connects from PC
without the watermark VPN client comes up checks for the watermark, fails the
connection policy and NavUI is not coming up at all (mostly because IE is
trying to connect to http://aac_server <http://aac_server/> ... Address and not
https://appliance_fqdn... <https://appliance_fqdn.../> ).
Citrix promised to get us a workaround that in the scenario above user will
still get NavUI.
Thanks,
Pavlo Ignatusha
Systems Network Coordinator
Pembroke Regional Hospital
tel. +1 (613) 732-3675 ext.6150
fax. +1 (613) 732-9986
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jeff Pitsch
Sent: April 3, 2006 10:33 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG AAC 4.2 fallback connection policies
#2 I'm confused on. I can get a user to a portal if they do not fall into the
connection policy. for example, they need IE version 6 but connect with IE
version 5.5, they will get portal page (portal as in NavUI) instead of VPN.
Are we talking about the same thing?
Jeff
On 4/3/06, Pavlo Ignatusha < Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Hi group,
Just wanted to finalize this thread with information I obtained from latest
conference call with Citrix support. I will go by each question we asked
earlier.
1. Citrix confirmed that connection policies were not cumulative. If a
user has 2 connection policies assigned (ex. With different endpoint scans)
only the policy with highest priority is processed.
2. Citrix promised a workaround so user can get portal when connection
policy fails. I'll keep you posted.
3. Continuous scans are coming from Net6 appliance and EPA scans are
coming with Citrix MSAM. That is why you need VPN client up to do continuous
scans (thanks Carl).
4. Citrix will only continue to support a few major AV vendors in their
EPA scans. The rest is given away as an opportunity for partners like
www.epafactory.com <http://www.epafactory.com/> . These scans from partners are
not cheap though. Or you can use SDK from Citrix at your own risk.
Long story short AAC turned out to be an uncompleted marriage of Net6 appliance
and Citrix MSAM. Citrix rushed it to the market without a lot of testing. Along
the way we encountered some other interesting confirmed bug when AAC portal
login is case sensitive for home directory share access. We are waiting for a
hotfix for that as well. That's all the story for now.
Thanks,
Pavlo Ignatusha
Systems Network Coordinator
Pembroke Regional Hospital
tel. +1 (613) 732-3675 ext.6150
fax. +1 (613) 732-9986
________________________________
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Jeff Pitsch
Sent: March 21, 2006 1:15 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: CAG AAC 4.2 fallback connection policies
1) not sure on this as still investigating but I'm guessing your using either
policies or endpoint analysis wrong when setting up.
2) It's a vpn connection meaning your now local to the protected network. if
it was going to the CAG you'd be going outside of that. I would think it's
working the way it should.
3) Dunno, have to ask Citrix which I will do tonight since I'm chatting with
them on AAC.
4) download the SDK and good luck. I've heard it's not easy. This link:
http://support.citrix.com/forums/thread.jspa?forumID=101&threadID=73893&tstart=0
has other links in it you may be interested in.
Jeff
On 3/21/06, Pavlo Ignatusha < Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:Pavlo.Ignatusha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Hi group,
Lately we were working on CAG with AAC policies. Along the way we
encountered a few difficulties and we thought we'd ask for your input.
Environment: CAG with AAC option v4.2 (no hotfix AAC420W001). PS4
3-server farm. Windows Server 2003 SP1 AD.
We would like to use some endpoint analysis and continuous scans in our
AAC policies. We also would like to configure a fallback type of access
so if the client device does not pass the requirements they still get
AAC portal with minimum of "Preview" access. Here is what we found:
Continuous scans seem to only work with Citrix Secure Access client
(VPN). In other words if you want to use continuous scan, the user must
fall under the requirements for a connection policy that launches the
client. You can have multiple connection policies, but it will only
look at the policy with the highest priority. Once that either fails or
passes, it will react accordingly. So, if you have one connection
policy that would say to launch the VPN client under restrictive
conditions (they have a certain antivirus running and a watermark in the
registry), and a connection policy with a lower priority that says not
to launch it under a less restrictive condition (such as that antivirus
is not installed, or that the watermark is not present), once the first
one passes or fails, it simply reacts to that policy rather then going
to next policy if the previous policy failed.
Now, when that initial policy that tries to connect to the VPN fails due
to the non-restrictive conditions, no VPN connection is made. This
would be satisfactory if the portal didn't react a certain way with a
VPN connection. Basically what happens is that when the Secure Access
client is launched, the portal automatically tries to redirect its
connection to:
https://aac_server_fqdn/citrixlogonpoint/logonpoint_name
And not the usual
https://appliance_fqdn/citrixlogonpoint/logonpoint_name
And that's not a problem if the VPN connection is established, but when
it fails, you suddenly don't have this network resource, and hence,
can't hit the portal anymore. This is also true if a continuous scan
detects an error after a VPN connection is established.
(Just an aside: When the VPN does make a connection and the user doesn't
have any network resources assigned through access policies, they have a
default resource of the AAC server. That way, when a VPN client is
connected, the users can then hit the AAC server fine, we're just not
sure WHY this happens this way.)
Using access policies and Endpoint Analysis scans it seems possible to
give different levels of access depending on the conditions that are
present on the client device (antivirus running, certain browser,
etc...). It is not too straightforward either as we had to create 1
filter for the condition of antivirus, and 1 filter with NOT antivirus
(using the 'not' operator in the filter). Then we created 2 access
policies, one with each of the filters, so that when a user has an
antivirus present (that is based on our endpoint analysis), they receive
certain capabilities, and if they don't have it present, they receive
restricted capabilities.
So we have some questions...
1- How to configure fallback between connection policies?
So far we think that the server looks at the highest priority connection
policy, and then reacts accordingly without looking at any other
connection policy that is associated with that specified user. This way
it is completely useless to have a connection policy priority list and
also to have different connection policies applying to the same user
when they come from different devices (such as a less secure
environment).
2- Why does the portal try to connect to the FQDN of the AAC rather then
the FQDN of the appliance if the Citrix Secure Access client is engaged
(whether it be a successful connection or not, see previous question)?
Frankly, if this did not happen, then we really wouldn't be too worried
about a fallback connection policy when the initial connection policy
fails, as the user would still be able to access the portal as normal,
just not any network resources. This is exactly what we would setup as a
fallback connection policy anyways.
3- Why can't we also use continuous scans on access policies?
Is this simply because it needs a VPN connection to the user to
continuously check for these things?
4- How do we create custom endpoint analysis scans?
Ideally, if we can't get the continuous scan and fallback connection
policy stuff figured out, then we'd still like to check for registry
watermarks. This ability (registry checking) only seems to be in the
continuous scan, although, in the endpoint analysis, there is a section
for custom endpoint analyses. The problem with that is, is it's looking
for a *.cab file, which I have absolutely no idea how to create.
Thanks,
Pavlo Ignatusha & Curtis Brunet,
Pembroke Regional Hospital
tel. +1 (613) 732-3675 ext.6150
fax. +1 (613) 732-9986
--
The information in this email belongs to the Pembroke Regional Hospital
and may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use
of the individual or organization to which it is addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying or distribution of the contents of this email is prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and
destroy all copies of the original message.
************************************************
For Archives, RSS, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
//www.freelists.org/list/thin
************************************************
--
The information in this email belongs to the Pembroke Regional Hospital
and may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use
of the individual or organization to which it is addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying or distribution of the contents of this email is prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and
destroy all copies of the original message.
--
The information in this email belongs to the Pembroke Regional Hospital
and may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use
of the individual or organization to which it is addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying or distribution of the contents of this email is prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and
destroy all copies of the original message.
--
The information in this email belongs to the Pembroke Regional Hospital
and may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use
of the individual or organization to which it is addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying or distribution of the contents of this email is prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and
destroy all copies of the original message.
--
The information in this email belongs to the Pembroke Regional Hospital
and may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use
of the individual or organization to which it is addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying or distribution of the contents of this email is prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and
destroy all copies of the original message.
--
The information in this email belongs to the Pembroke Regional Hospital
and may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use
of the individual or organization to which it is addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying or distribution of the contents of this email is prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and
destroy all copies of the original message.
--
The information in this email belongs to the Pembroke Regional Hospital
and may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use
of the individual or organization to which it is addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying or distribution of the contents of this email is prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and
destroy all copies of the original message.
Other related posts:
