Hello CheckMates community,
I’m currently reviewing the implementation steps described in sk33404 – Configuring Native AD Password Remediation on a Check Point R81.20 environment, and I would appreciate some clarification from the community or Check Point experts who may have encountered a similar scenario.
Based on TAC’s recommendations, prior to applying the configuration changes, we plan to perform:
- A full mds_backup of the MDS
- A virtual machine–level backup
As part of the procedure, the following parameter must be configured:
Microsoft_AD.Common.SupportOldSchema = 1
From TAC’s feedback and our understanding, this parameter is applied at the Microsoft_AD profile level, which is consumed by LDAP Account Unit objects. This implies that any modification to SupportOldSchema will impact all LDAP Account Units using the same Microsoft_AD profile within the same domain.
In our case, the change is required only for a specific LDAP account unit., and we want to avoid any unintended effect on the remaining LDAP Account Units that rely on the same Microsoft_AD profile.
We consulted the vendor regarding the possibility of cloning or duplicating the Microsoft_AD profile and associating only the required LDAP Account Unit to the new profile, in order to scope the change and minimize risk. However, we did not receive a conclusive answer.
Questions to the community:
- In R81.20, is it supported and safe to clone or create an additional Microsoft_AD profile for this purpose?
- If so, what would be the recommended or supported approach to do this without affecting existing LDAP Account Units?
- Has anyone validated the operational or security impact of enabling SupportOldSchema in environments where multiple LDAP Account Units share the same Microsoft_AD profile?
- Are there any best practices or alternative designs to limit the scope of this parameter change?
- What would exactly change when activating/deactivating the parameter "Microsoft_AD.Common.SupportOldSchema"?
Any guidance, real-world experience, or official recommendations would be highly appreciated.
Thank you in advance for your support.
Best regards,
Gerardo G.
Security Analyst