[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Heimdal / MS kpasswd differences?

Port 464 is rfc3244 which is what wireshark displayed as ms kpasswd

I am intrigued by the other trace however that was also port 464 but
was not decoded at all.
Can you share that trace with me so i can see if this is a bug in wireshark?


As far as windows clients themself are concerned,  it is very very
rare that they use this protocol to set/change passwords, most of the
time they use sealed dcerpc interfaces instead.




On 9/3/06, Michael B Allen <mba2000@ioplex.com> wrote:
> I would like to set the password on an AD account using Heimdal client
> code. I see kpasswd has no problem doing this but I have one small
> concern.
>
> I took a capture of Active Directory Users and Computers creating an
> account and setting the password and compared it to Heimdal's kpasswd
> utility. Ethereal^HWireshark shows kpasswd sending a UDP request on port
> 464. It is not decoded. The ADUC capture also shows a UDP exchange on
> port 464 but ironically Wireshark does decode this packet and shows it as
> "MS Kpasswd".
>
> My question is, is Heimdal's kpasswd as compatible as MS's native kpasswd
> calls for setting a Windows account password or is there something I
> should watch out for?
>
> Mike
>
> --
> Michael B Allen
> PHP Active Directory SSO
> http://www.ioplex.com/
>