IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15237
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
(cherry picked from commit 621b8c3927b63776146940b183b03b3ea77fd2d7)
All of its callers, where necessary, take out a transaction covering the
entire password set or change operation, so a transaction is no longer
needed here.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14611
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
(cherry picked from commit 7981cba87e3a7256b12bfc5fdd89b136c12979ff)
We reread the account details inside the transaction in case the account
has been locked out in the meantime. If it has, we return the
appropriate error code.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14611
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
(cherry picked from commit 96479747bdb5bc5f33d903085f5f69793f369e3a)
Previously, there was a gap between calling dsdb_update_bad_pwd_count()
and dsdb_module_modify() where no transaction was in effect. Another
process could slip in and modify badPwdCount, only for our update to
immediately overwrite it. Doing the update inside the transaction will
help for the following commit when we make it atomic.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14611
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
(cherry picked from commit a65147a9e98ead70869cdfa20ffcc9c167dbf535)
This is more specific than NT_STATUS_UNSUCCESSFUL, and for the SAMR
password change, matches the result the call to samdb_result_passwords()
would give.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14611
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
(cherry picked from commit 336e303cf1962b56b64c0d9d2b05ac15d00e8692)
samdb_result_msds_LockoutObservationWindow() is split out of
samdb_result_effective_badPwdCount()
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14611
Signed-off-by: Gary Lockyer <gary@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
(cherry picked from commit 2087b0cd986b8959b2a402b9a1891472e47ca0b0)
If the message changes the sAMAccountName, we'll check dNSHostName and
servicePrincipalName values against the new value of sAMAccountName,
rather than the account's current value. Similarly, if the message
changes the dNSHostName, we'll check servicePrincipalName values against
the new dNSHostName. This allows setting more than one of these
attributes simultaneously with validated write rights.
We now pass 'struct ldb_val' to acl_validate_spn_value() instead of
simple strings. Previously, we were relying on the data inside 'struct
ldb_val' having a terminating zero byte, even though this is not
guaranteed.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14833
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
If we have an account without a trailing $, we should ensure the
servicePrincipalName matches the entire sAMAccountName. We should not
allow a match against the sAMAccountName prefix of length
strlen(samAccountName) - 1, as that could conflict with a different
account.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14833
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
When this control is specified, we'll assume we have Validated Write on
dNSHostName and servicePrincipalName, and Write Property on other
attributes.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14833
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
Passing this control will grant the right to set validated values for
dNSHostName and servicePrincipalName, and non-validated values for other
attributes.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14833
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
We need to be able to determine whether an object is a subclass of a
specific objectclass such as 'computer'.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14833
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
This function simulates an add or modify operation for an ldb message to
determine the final value of a particular single-valued attribute. This
is useful when validating attributes that should stay in sync with other
attributes, such as servicePrincipalName and dNSHostName.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14833
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Douglas Bagnall <douglas.bagnall@catalyst.net.nz>
To use memcpy(), we need to specify the number of bytes to copy, rather
than the number of ldb_val structures.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15008
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Currently, we can crash the server by sending a large number of values
of a specific attribute (such as sAMAccountName) spread across a few
message elements. If val_count is larger than the total number of
elements, we get an access beyond the elements array.
Similarly, we can include unrelated message elements prior to the
message elements of the attribute in question, so that not all of the
attribute's values are copied into the returned elements values array.
This can cause the server to access uninitialised data, likely resulting
in a crash or unexpected behaviour.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15008
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
This aims to minimise usage of the error-prone pattern of searching for
a just-added message element in order to make modifications to it (and
potentially finding the wrong element).
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15009
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Using the newly added ldb flag, we can now detect when a message has
been shallow-copied so that its elements share their values with the
original message elements. Then when adding values to the copied
message, we now make a copy of the shared values array first.
This should prevent a use-after-free that occurred in LDB modules when
new values were added to a shallow copy of a message by calling
talloc_realloc() on the original values array, invalidating the 'values'
pointer in the original message element. The original values pointer can
later be used in the database audit logging module which logs database
requests, and potentially cause a crash.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15009
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
LDB_FLAG_MOD_* values are not actually flags, and the previous
comparison was equivalent to
(el->flags & LDB_FLAG_MOD_MASK) == 0
which is only true if none of the LDB_FLAG_MOD_* values are set, so we
would not successfully return if the element was a DELETE. Correct the
expression to what it was intended to be.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15009
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
LDB_FLAG_MOD_* values are not actually flags, and the previous
comparison was equivalent to
(req_msg->elements[el_idx].flags & LDB_FLAG_MOD_MASK) != 0
which is true whenever any of the LDB_FLAG_MOD_* values are set. Correct
the expression to what it was probably intended to be.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15009
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
If an account has an SPN that requires Write Property to set, we should
still be able to delete it with just Validated Write.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15009
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
We now allow this to be via the ENCTYPE_AES256_CTS_HMAC_SHA1_96 hash instead
which allows us to decouple Samba from the unsalted NT hash for
organisations that are willing to take this step (for user accounts).
(History checking is limited to the last three passwords only, as
ntPwdHistory is limited to NT hash values, and the PrimaryKerberosCtr4
package only stores three sets of keys.)
Since we don't store a salt per-key, but only a single salt, the check
will fail for a previous password if the account was renamed prior to a
newer password being set.
Pair-Programmed-With: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Certain escape sequences are not valid in Python string literals, and
will eventually result in a SyntaxError.
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Tree-wide spellcheck for some common misspellings.
source3/utils/status.c has misspelled local variable (unkown_dialect).
"missmatch" is a known historical misspelling, only the incorrect
misspellings are fixed.
source3/locale/net/de.po has the spelling error (unkown) in two msgids -
it probably should be updated with current source.
Signed-off-by: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Since memcmp_const_time() doesn't act as an exact replacement for
memcmp(), and its return value is only ever compared with zero, simplify
it and emphasize the intention of checking equality by returning a bool
instead.
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
This helps to avoid timing attacks.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15010
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
This test often fails because the server takes too long to time out.
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Autobuild-User(master): Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu May 5 01:19:54 UTC 2022 on sn-devel-184
We need to ensure that even if NTLM is disabled, that the test
can still bootstrap and fail normally.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
This is mainly just to be clear, and was done while failing to work around compiler
warnings.
For the curious it was gcc version 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-44) (CentOS 7)
build with -O3, which gave with other, later patches:
../../source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/password_hash.c: In function ‘check_password_restrictions_and_log’:
../../source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/password_hash.c:3231:5: error: assuming signed overflow does not occur when simplifying conditional to constant [-Werror=strict-overflow]
if (ret == LDB_SUCCESS) {
^
Regardless, we make it clear that all values assigned to "ret" are
local small constants.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
The incorrect ordering was introduced in commit
b9c5417b523c4c53cb275c12ec84bbc849705bec.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15007
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
We should make sure that we use NTLMSSP or Kerberos consistently
for the tests and don't mix them.
We're also much stricter and symmetric_difference() to
check if the sets are actually the same.
Pair-Programmed-With: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
We're now sure that the security descriptor propagation happened
first for parent objects.
It means we can safely skip processing the same object twice in
descriptor_sd_propagation_object().
For the database with ~ 22000 objects it reduced the commit time
from 2m 50s down to 2m 24s.
The statistics are changed from:
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registrations=50000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registered=22000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_toplevel=5
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_processed=5200
descriptor_prepare_commit: objects: num_processed=68800
to:
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registrations=50000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registered=22000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_toplevel=5
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_processed=5200
descriptor_prepare_commit: objects: num_processed=22000
descriptor_prepare_commit: objects: num_skipped=41600
It means that we have "changes: num_registered" and
"objects: num_processed" exactly match the number
of replicated objects.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Wed Mar 30 12:06:21 UTC 2022 on sn-devel-184
For the hot code path, e.g. the commit after the initial replication,
we typically have one descriptor_changes for each object in the
database.
It means that we most likely have 5 naming contexts/partitions.
Except of their head/root object have a valid parent_guid,
so can move all of them into the tree structure.
Now we start the processing at the partition root objects,
which means that we also process all child objects in
the same run. While processing these objects we are most
likely able to mark their related descriptor_changes structure
as done removing it from the hierarchy.
With the 22000 object domain it reduces the time spend in
the commit stage from 3m 20s down to 2m 50s.
The statistics are changed from:
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registrations=50000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registered=22000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_processed=22000
descriptor_prepare_commit: objects: num_processed=80800
to:
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registrations=50000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registered=22000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_toplevel=5
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_processed=5200
descriptor_prepare_commit: objects: num_processed=68800
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
This is preparation to optimize the security descriptor propagation
in the following commits.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
During replication we may need to fallback to using DRS_GET_TGT,
which means that we'll get a lot of objects more than once,
the most important one it the partition root object.
It means we'll also do the security descriptor propagation more than
once for these objects, which is extrememly costly for the partition
root objects and other objects near the root.
I analyzed a domain where we collected ~ 50000 descriptor_changes
registrations for the initial replication of ~ 22000 objects
in the database.
For that domain we spend ~ 4 hours for the security descriptor
propagation in descriptor_prepare_commit(), while the replication
itself was finished in less than 2 minutes.
With this change we reduce the number of registered/processed
descriptor_changes down to ~ 22000, while is reduces the time
from ~ 4 hours to just ~ 3 minutes 20 seconds!
The statitics changed from:
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registered=50000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_processed=50000
descriptor_prepare_commit: objects: num_processed=12000000
to:
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registrations=50000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_registered=22000
descriptor_prepare_commit: changes: num_processed=22000
descriptor_prepare_commit: objects: num_processed=80800
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
In order to analyze the security descriptor propagation we remember
how much work we registered/processed.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
This will make it easier to add more details to the per transaction
state.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
