From the Field: Windows Server Core

๐Ÿ”Ž ๐—™๐—ฟ๐—ผ๐—บ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—™๐—ถ๐—ฒ๐—น๐—ฑ โ€” Real-World Findings from Security Assessments

๐Ÿ’ฅ ๐Ÿณ๐Ÿญ.๐Ÿฐ%ย of infrastructures Iโ€™ve assessed ๐—ฑ๐—ผ ๐—ป๐—ผ๐˜ ๐˜‚๐˜€๐—ฒ ๐—ช๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ผ๐˜„๐˜€ ๐—ฆ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ ๐—–๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐—ฒ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป

To be honest, I donโ€™t even remember seeing it in use by most customers โ€” the 28.6% might just be environments I secured myself in the past and later reassessed.

So, is there really a benefit to using Windows Server Core?

๐—ฌ๐—ฒ๐˜€ โ€” ๐—ฎ๐—ฏ๐˜€๐—ผ๐—น๐˜‚๐˜๐—ฒ๐—น๐˜†.

โœ… ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐—ฑ๐˜‚๐—ฐ๐—ฒ๐—ฑ ๐—ฎ๐˜๐˜๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐—ธ ๐˜€๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐—ณ๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ โ€“ fewer components = fewer vulnerabilities.

Just compare running services:

โ€ข GUI: 72

โ€ข Core: 45

โ€ข Nano (for curiosityโ€™s sake): 32

โœ…ย ๐—Ÿ๐—ผ๐˜„๐—ฒ๐—ฟ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ ๐˜‚๐˜€๐—ฎ๐—ด๐—ฒ โ€“ needs less RAM, CPU, and disk.

โœ… ๐—™๐—ฎ๐˜€๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ฟ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฏ๐—ผ๐—ผ๐˜๐˜€ & ๐˜‚๐—ฝ๐—ฑ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ๐˜€ โ€“ perfect for patching cycles.

โœ… ๐—˜๐—ป๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐—ด๐—ฒ๐˜€ ๐—ฝ๐—ฟ๐—ผ๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ผ๐˜๐—ฒ ๐—บ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฎ๐—ด๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜ โ€“ manage through jump hosts or PAWs in the right tier.

โœ… ๐—ฆ๐˜๐—ถ๐—น๐—น ๐˜€๐˜‚๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐˜๐˜€ ๐— ๐— ๐—–๐˜€ โ€“ you can use Features on Demand to run tools like eventvwr, diskmgmt, etc., remotely.

Of course, it comes with a learning curve. If things break, you might need to troubleshoot via console (like in VMware) โ€” ๐—ฏ๐˜‚๐˜ ๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฎ๐˜ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น๐—น๐˜† ๐—ฎ ๐—ฑ๐—ผ๐˜„๐—ป๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ?ย Thatโ€™s how we learn.

๐Ÿ” So what do you think โ€” is Windows Server Core worth it?