<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: ISE - EAP-FAST certificate for machine and MSCHAP for user authentication in Network Access Control</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4149261#M562778</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello, Greg.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;One concern:&lt;BR /&gt;On my screenshot if I disable the 2nd rule (MSCHAP_AUTH_USER) the "Default" one matches for user authentication.&lt;BR /&gt;In this case if a user enters &lt;STRONG&gt;wrong&lt;/STRONG&gt; credentials, ISE shows an issue in logs:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;FONT color="#FF0000"&gt;22045 Identity policy result is configured for password based authentication methods but received certificate based authentication request.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;Then if a user enters &lt;STRONG&gt;correct&lt;/STRONG&gt; credentials ISE authenticates the PC only after 60 seconds (I can see that on ISE Radius logs).&lt;BR /&gt;However, if the 2nd rule is enabled nothing happen in logs if enter wrong credentials.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Correct me if I am wrong:&lt;BR /&gt;First a PC has machine authentication successful based on a certificate.&lt;BR /&gt;Then user logs in and enters credentials and the PC (using&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;EAP-FAST) sends a&amp;nbsp;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;EM&gt;machine certificate again along with user authentication.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;For your example:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;assuming I am using a non-domain PC without a trusted&amp;nbsp;certificate for machine authentication ( so machine authentication will fail).&lt;BR /&gt;Will authentication with user AD credentials (only) successfully pass and let PC to the network even without successful machine authentication ?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The whole idea is to use a stronger certificate based verification for a machine and for a user, but because of limitations for NAM connections we cannot user certificate for user authentication:&lt;BR /&gt;(&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/vpn/anyconnect-nam-eap-fast-user-certificate-issue/td-p/4145877#M1879" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://community.cisco.com/t5/vpn/anyconnect-nam-eap-fast-user-certificate-issue/td-p/4145877#M1879&lt;/A&gt; ) .&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2020 16:47:40 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>fedor.solovev</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-09-10T16:47:40Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ISE - EAP-FAST certificate for machine and MSCHAP for user authentication</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4148708#M562753</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;BR /&gt;Does anyone know what is the correct way to configure&amp;nbsp;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;Policy Set&lt;/STRONG&gt; for EAP-FAST when NAM uses &lt;FONT color="#FF00FF"&gt;certificate machine&lt;/FONT&gt; authentication and &lt;FONT color="#FF00FF"&gt;MSCHAP user&lt;/FONT&gt; authentication ? &lt;BR /&gt;I have this policy but I doubt this is the correct one.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;DIV class="mceNonEditable lia-copypaste-placeholder"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="2020-09-09 17-08-49 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/83136i095EB045AA8CFC01/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="2020-09-09 17-08-49 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome.png" alt="2020-09-09 17-08-49 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2020 22:14:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4148708#M562753</guid>
      <dc:creator>fedor.solovev</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-09T22:14:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE - EAP-FAST certificate for machine and MSCHAP for user authentication</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4148836#M562761</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You don't want to use a Cert Auth Profile for EAP-MSCHAPv2 as the client does not present a certificate. For this scenario, I would create an Identity Source Sequence with the CAP and AD Join Point (ISS_LabAD_Cert) to use for the EAP-TLS (Computer) session and use just the AD Join Point (LabAD) for the EAP-MSCHAPv2 (User) session. I would then use the EAP method to differentiate between the two.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Example:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Screen Shot 2020-09-10 at 2.27.54 pm.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/83160i4EDDC5635201759C/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Screen Shot 2020-09-10 at 2.27.54 pm.png" alt="Screen Shot 2020-09-10 at 2.27.54 pm.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You can use additional checks against the certificate (CN, Issuer, etc) if you choose, but ISE will verify that the certificate is signed by a CA in its Trusted Store as part of the AuthC process.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2020 04:38:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4148836#M562761</guid>
      <dc:creator>Greg Gibbs</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-10T04:38:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE - EAP-FAST certificate for machine and MSCHAP for user authentication</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4149261#M562778</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello, Greg.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;One concern:&lt;BR /&gt;On my screenshot if I disable the 2nd rule (MSCHAP_AUTH_USER) the "Default" one matches for user authentication.&lt;BR /&gt;In this case if a user enters &lt;STRONG&gt;wrong&lt;/STRONG&gt; credentials, ISE shows an issue in logs:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;FONT color="#FF0000"&gt;22045 Identity policy result is configured for password based authentication methods but received certificate based authentication request.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/FONT&gt;Then if a user enters &lt;STRONG&gt;correct&lt;/STRONG&gt; credentials ISE authenticates the PC only after 60 seconds (I can see that on ISE Radius logs).&lt;BR /&gt;However, if the 2nd rule is enabled nothing happen in logs if enter wrong credentials.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Correct me if I am wrong:&lt;BR /&gt;First a PC has machine authentication successful based on a certificate.&lt;BR /&gt;Then user logs in and enters credentials and the PC (using&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;EAP-FAST) sends a&amp;nbsp;&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;EM&gt;machine certificate again along with user authentication.&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;For your example:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;assuming I am using a non-domain PC without a trusted&amp;nbsp;certificate for machine authentication ( so machine authentication will fail).&lt;BR /&gt;Will authentication with user AD credentials (only) successfully pass and let PC to the network even without successful machine authentication ?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The whole idea is to use a stronger certificate based verification for a machine and for a user, but because of limitations for NAM connections we cannot user certificate for user authentication:&lt;BR /&gt;(&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/vpn/anyconnect-nam-eap-fast-user-certificate-issue/td-p/4145877#M1879" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://community.cisco.com/t5/vpn/anyconnect-nam-eap-fast-user-certificate-issue/td-p/4145877#M1879&lt;/A&gt; ) .&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2020 16:47:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4149261#M562778</guid>
      <dc:creator>fedor.solovev</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-10T16:47:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE - EAP-FAST certificate for machine and MSCHAP for user authentication</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4149420#M562780</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,Greg.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;One concern:&lt;BR /&gt;For your example will this Policy with your rules authenticate users without machine certificate ?&lt;BR /&gt;Because it looks like if AD credentials are correct certificate will not be checked by ISE.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;For EAP-FAST first authenticates with a machine certificate. Then user logs in by signing credentials. A PC sends both a machine certificate and user credentials. For that reason I used a profile with certificate. It should be only AD credentials checking ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2020 21:50:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4149420#M562780</guid>
      <dc:creator>fedor.solovev</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-10T21:50:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE - EAP-FAST certificate for machine and MSCHAP for user authentication</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4149437#M562781</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes, a user without a machine certificate will authenticate if MSCHAPv2 is configured, but EAP Chaining controls are done in the AuthZ Policy, not the AuthC Policy.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;You would configure an AuthZ rule that uses the 'User and machine both succeeded' condition as per the below example. If you prefer, you could fine-tune the policy with matches on specific EAP protocols and/or create another rule below to redirect users that fail the EAP Chaining condition to a BYOD flow, etc. It all depends on your requirements.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Screen Shot 2020-09-11 at 8.39.20 am.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/83260iE5828251BF9659AD/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="Screen Shot 2020-09-11 at 8.39.20 am.png" alt="Screen Shot 2020-09-11 at 8.39.20 am.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2020 22:46:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4149437#M562781</guid>
      <dc:creator>Greg Gibbs</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-10T22:46:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE - EAP-FAST certificate for machine and MSCHAP for user authentication</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4153353#M562886</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello, Greg.&lt;BR /&gt;Thank you for your answers.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 20:28:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4153353#M562886</guid>
      <dc:creator>fedor.solovev</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-17T20:28:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: ISE - EAP-FAST certificate for machine and MSCHAP for user authentication</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4153354#M562887</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Let me share my masterpiece of Policy Set configuration and comments. I tested a lot and not it works.&lt;BR /&gt;Please correct this if there is something missing.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So we are doing EAP-FAST with machine certificate and user MSCHAP authentication.&lt;BR /&gt;Authentication should contain a cert verification for both MACHINE authentication and then for USER auth with MSCHAP otherwise the result for authz is always "&lt;EM&gt;user succeeded and machine failed&lt;/EM&gt;".&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-center" image-alt="2020-09-17 15-09-15 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome.png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/84153iAAF5222BFD228C28/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="2020-09-17 15-09-15 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome.png" alt="2020-09-17 15-09-15 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For my scenario POSTURE is verified.&lt;BR /&gt;So there should be some references to that in order to match the correct policy.&lt;BR /&gt;At the same time we don't need any non-domain PCs to be able to connect to the LAN.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-center" image-alt="2020-09-17 15-15-58 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome (3).png" style="width: 999px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.cisco.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/84156i20EC35EECF75A9F2/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="2020-09-17 15-15-58 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome (3).png" alt="2020-09-17 15-15-58 Identity Services Engine - Google Chrome (3).png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For my test the first state for posture before assessment is &lt;STRONG&gt;Posture Status ==NotApplicable&lt;/STRONG&gt; so we cannot use UNKNOWN to match the rule.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;NOT_CONTAINS == Comp&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;liant&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;or&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;NOT_ENDS_WITH == Compliant&lt;/STRONG&gt; works to match the rule POSTURE_UNKNOWN for that state AND to skip it WHEN the status is changed to Non-Compliant or Compliant in order to match lower rules.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Other details are on the screenshots.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 20:40:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-access-control/ise-eap-fast-certificate-for-machine-and-mschap-for-user/m-p/4153354#M562887</guid>
      <dc:creator>fedor.solovev</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-09-17T20:40:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

