Unknown's avatar

About Michel de Rooij

Michel de Rooij, with over 25 years of mixed consulting and automation experience with Exchange and related technologies, is a consultant for Rapid Circle. He assists organizations in their journey to and using Microsoft 365, primarily focusing on Exchange and associated technologies and automating processes using PowerShell or Graph. Michel's authorship of several Exchange books and role in the Office 365 for IT Pros author team are a testament to his knowledge. Besides writing for Practical365.com, he maintains a blog on eightwone.com with supporting scripts on GitHub. Michel has been a Microsoft MVP since 2013.

Ignite 2016: September 26-30, Atlanta


image

Out of nowhere, news came yesterday from the Chicago Tribune that Microsoft cancelled the Microsoft Ignite event at Chicago for 2016. Originally, the Ignite event, replacing former events like MEC, LyncCon, MMC and SPC, was said to be held for 4 consecutive years in Chicago, starting in 2015. Even at Ignite 2015, it was confirmed Ignite 2016 was going to take place in Chicago from May 9th to May 13th, 2016.

Without any reason given for this change of plans, although rumors are that either bad feedback on this year’s event or product release schedules could be the reason for changing plans, today Microsoft announced that Ignite 2016 will take place in the Georgia World Congress Center in Atlanta, from September 26th to 30rd, 2016.

This date is perhaps a bit too close for comfort to that other well-known event, the independent IT/DEV Connections which is scheduled for September 19th to 22nd, 2016 in Las Vegas. It remains to be seen if Penton – organizer of the IT/DEV Connections – moves their event or not.

Apart from potential schedule issues, though there are worse things than potentially staying half the month September in the US, it could pressure budgets for organization who want to have people attend both events, without the option to spread those investments.This is of course also true for those that are self-employed.

Other Microsoft events lined-up for 2016 are:

  • Build: Spring 2016 in San Francisco
  • Convergence: April 4-7, 2016 in New Orleans
  • WPC: July 10-14, 2016 in Toronto

You can pre-register for Ignite 2016 here. More information on Ignite is available here.

Blocking Mixed Exchange 2013/2016 DAG


Ex2013 LogoIn the RTM version of Exchange 2016, there’s an issue in that it is allows you to add Exchange 2016 Mailbox servers to Exchange 2013 Database Availability Groups, and vice-versa. As stated in the Release Notes (you do read those?), creating such a mixed version DAG is not supported. In theory, you could even jeopardize your Exchange data, as database structures from both versions are different. This action is also not prevented from the Exchange Admin Center, requiring organizations to have very strict procedures and knowledgeable Exchange administrators.

If you are worried about this situation and you want to prevent accidently adding Mailbox servers to an existing DAG consisting of members of a different Exchange version, there is a way (until this is blocked by the product itself, of course). Cmdlet Extension Agents to the rescue!

The Scripting Agent not only allows you to add additional instructions to existing Exchange cmdlets, but also to provide additional validation before cmdlets are executed. I did two short articles on Cmdlet Extension Agents’ Scripting Agent here and here, so I will skip introductions.

First you need to download a file named ScriptingAgentConfig.xml from the location below. If you already have Scripting Agents, you need to integrate the code in your existing ScriptingAgentConfig.xml files. The code checks if the server you want to add using the Add-DatabaseAvailabilityGroup cmdlet is of a different major version than one of the current DAG members.

Next, you need to copy this ScriptingAgentConfig.xml file to $ENV:ExInstallPath on every Exchange 2013 and Exchange 2016 server in your organization, e.g. C:\Program Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\V15\Bin\CmdletExtensionAgents\ScriptingAgentConfig.xml.  To help your with this process, Exchange fellow Paul Cunningham made a small script to push this XML from the current folder to every Exchange server in your organization, PushScriptingAgentConfig.ps1.

Last step is to enable the Scripting Agent using:

Enable-CmdletExtensionAgent ‘Scripting Agent’

After distributing the scripting agent file and enabling the scripting agent, when you try to add an Exchange 2016 (version 15.1) server to an Database Availability Group consisting of Exchange 2013 Mailbox servers, using Add-DatabaseAvailabilityGroupServer, you will receive an error message:

DAGCheck

This also works vice-versa, thus when you inadvertently try to add Exchange 2013 servers to an Exchange 2016 Database Availability Group, provided you distributed the XML on the Exchange 2013 servers as well. The error is also thrown when you try to perform this action using the Exchange Admin Console.

You can download the ScriptingAgentConfig.XML for blocking Mixed Exchange 2013/2016 DAGs from the TechNet here.

Exchange 2010-2013 Migration and OAB


Ex2013 LogoLast year, Exchange fellows Andrew Higginbotham, Paul Cunningham as well as the Exchange Team reported on checking, and when necessary configuring, your Offline Address Book (OAB) in your current Exchange Server 2010 environment, prior to installing Exchange Server 2013. Not doing so could result in a complete download of the Offline Address Book created by Exchange Server 2013, titled ‘Default Offline Address List (Ex2013)’.

Today I received a report that there is a different symptom of configuration absence. In this case, the customer reported on the inability to download the offline address book, and upon further inspection the Autodiscover server did not report back on the offline address book URL to use. In other words, OAB information was absent from the Autodiscover response, and Outlook gets confused. Note that this issue was reported in Outlook 2010 after installing Exchange Server 2013 Cumulative Update 10. I’m not sure if this change in behavior was introduced in these later builds of Exchange 2013 or Outlook, but it’s still a good thing to know.

The remedy here of course is to configure any (Exchange 2010) mailbox database with unconfigured Offline Address Book setting, and point them to the default offline address book using:

Get-MailboxDatabase | Where-Object {$_.OfflineAddressBook -eq $Null} | Set-MailboxDatabase -OfflineAddressBook (Get-OfflineAddressBook | Where-Object {$_.IsDefault -eq $True})

OWA vulnerable to backdoor hack?


fudLast Update: October 10th, 2015

Yesterday, news rose of a security vulnerability in Outlook Web Access (OWA). A company called Cybereason claimed to have discovered an OWA backdoor hack of which they published in a report, “Webmail Server APT: new persistent attack methodology targeting Microsoft Outlook Web Application (OWA)” (APT stands for Advanced Persistent Threat). Supposedly, an OWA backdoor in ‘OWA Server’, the term used for Exchange Server in the report, allows a hacker to collect clear text usernames and passwords.

News sites quickly picked up the story, with catchy headlines such as:

  • New Outlook mailserver attack steals massive number of passwords (Arstechnica)
  • Microsoft OWA falls victim to password-pinching APT attack (Inquirer)
  • Potent OWA backdoor scores 11000 corporate creds from single biz (The Register)
  • Hackers Breach Microsoft OWA Server, Steal 11,000 User Passwords (SoftPedia)
  • Researchers find credential-stealing webmail server APT attack (ComputerWeekly)

The news was copied a lot without fact checking, and Microsoft felt the need to publicly make a statement: “No new security vulnerability in Outlook Web Access (OWA)”. Unfortunately that doesn’t stop media from reporting, as they are driven by a model based on page views and clicks. And such headlines most certainly will attract viewers.

Looking closer at the report, I’m inclined to think the company wanted to push for business and free publicity by spreading FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), not uncommon in the security world. The report states that it is required to have installed (report does not disclose how) a malicious ISAPI filter on the ‘OWA Server’, without details on how this was achieved. Most likely they have used (or are referring to) the OWAAuth ISAPI filter also mentioned in a threat report (TG-3390) from Dell, dated August, 2015. The OWAAuth.dll filter authenticates users through Forms-Based Authentication against Active Directory.  Capturing and decoding client traffic is what these ISAPI filters can do, so that’s not worrying. Unfortunately, Cybereason report does not state the version of the ‘OWA Server’ or operating system. Was it current, and fully patched?

Key question is how did this filter get on the Exchange server in the first place? A properly managed environment does not allow for this type of access. So, the problem is likely not with the ‘OWA Server’ or the operating system. In a response on a blog reporting on this issue, Cybereason clarified that, “The hackers managed to obtain access to this server using stolen credentials.” Well, there is the confirmation of the real issue at hand: This is not an ‘OWA Server’ issue. The person could in theory have done anything with those stolen credentials.

In their response, the Cybereason spokesperson also stated that:

“The problem is that this server was in a very unique position. On one hand it’s completely internet facing and on the other hand, it is a focal point for the full credentials of all employees in the organization. Companies should be wary of using this server without requiring VPN (although this is usually its biggest advantage) and at the very least, require 2FA (2 factor authentication).”

I agree on the multi-factor authentication statement, especially for administrative or high profile accounts. However, claiming that VPN would prevent the issue is strange, as with most typical organizations that same set of stolen credentials would allow for setting up a VPN connection, maybe requiring some guesswork on the endpoint, but in the end enabling access to the same environment and practicing the same malicious behavior. Also, it is best practice to use a  more regular account for e-mail and connectivity, requiring another set of credentials for administrative privileges.

So, while the report may be based on a real world scenario, always have a healthy dose of common sense when reading these ‘research reports’ from companies selling security products and services. Manage your Active Directory and Exchange environment properly, use MFA for privileged accounts and remote access, and life should be good.

Other Exchange fellows also debunked the report:

Update (Sep9): If you are nevertheless still concerned, and want to do a quick scan of the currently loaded ISAPI modules on your Exchange servers, you can run the cmdlet below (be advised it’s a one-liner!). You should be able to spot ISAPI modules loaded from unusual locations or reporting an unexpected version number:

Get-ExchangeServer | ForEach-Object { Invoke-Command -ComputerName $_.Name -ScriptBlock { Get-WmiObject -Namespace 'Ro
ot\MicrosoftIISv2' -Class IISFilterSetting -Authentication 6 | ForEach-Object { (Get-Item $_.FilterPath | Select -ExpandPropert
y VersionInfo) } } } | Sort-Object PSComputerName,FileName | Format-Table -AutoSize PSComputerName, ProductVersion, FileName

isapifilt1

Update (Sep10): Cybereason provided some more details through Twitter and will publish a FAQ next week. However, more details were already given in an interview with ThreatPost (by Kaspersky Lab), in which Cybereason states that:

  • The harvesting took place over a period of months.
  • Stolen credentials were used to load a malicious, unsigned ISAPI filter, OWAAuth.dll.
  • The malicious OWAAuth.dll was residing in a non-standard location.
  • The malicious OWAAuth.dll was persistently loaded by modifying the registry.
  • Other modules were loaded, amongst them PlugX which has been around for a while, and which is the actual backdoor providing remote control mechanisms.

There are lots of similarities with the Cybereason case and Dell CTU’s TG-3390 analysis (use of PlugX, OWAAuth.dll). Since the harvesting took place over a longer period, were administrators not aware of the theft or not paying attention. Could it be that there’s a sudden increase of organizations and administrators not properly dealing with stolen passwords and password policies in general?

Meanwhile, Cybereason also claims the report, “was a malware analysis report and never about an OWA exploit”. While they have no control over the media, wording like “Cybereason Labs Reports on OWA Backdoor Attack” implies something differently. They also state one of the main concerns is, “Corporate Microsoft OWA servers are high prevalence in financial institutions”, which seems odd statement. Possibly, it’s a clue on where they hope to push business from, but from my personal experience these organizations are the most likely to have implemented multi-factor authentication and provide limited – if any at all – remote access functionality.

Knowledgebase RSS feeds


Update: Added Exchange 2016 and Skype for Business 2016 feed.

rss[1]Note: This is an update of an article from January, 2010.

Like most people I still use RSS feeds to keep track of news and updates from various sources. But did you know you can also keep track of Microsoft’s knowledgebase articles per product using RSS feeds? Great for keeping track of updates in RSS readers like Outlook or sites like Feedly, or creating triggers on sites like IFTTT (If-This-Then-That) to automatically send e-mail notifications.

Here are some RSS feeds on knowledgebase articles that might be of interest to you:

Exchange Server

Outlook

Office 365

Lync/Skype for Business

For a complete list of the knowledgebase articles RSS feeds check here.