On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 15:29 +0100, Sumit Bose wrote:
> In the sssd-ipa manpage, I think we should change the "please note"
> "Please note that this default differs from the traditional kerberos
> provider backend."
> I think that referring to the "underlying Kerberos provider" makes
> In create_send_buffer(), you assign buf->size based on sizeof(int),
> you're using uint32_t for the actual data. This is a waste of memory
> 64-bit integer systems, and a serious error on a 16-bit integer
> (Not that we ever expect to support such a system) If you're copying
> a 32-bit number, please guarantee that the space is allocated for a
> 32-bit number.
> Please add a comment in fork_child() stating why the value of
> KRB5_VALIDATE dictates whether to assume the user's identity.
> I think this is a serious error: you're only validating against the
> first entry in the keytab. It's possible for a keytab to have many
> different principals, as well as multiple enctypes for the same
> principal. We need to iterate through all keytab entries and test
> for the principal we need to validate against and not fail until all
> enctypes for the sought-after principal have been tried.
ok, I look for the first key with a matching realm or try the last one
in the keytab file.
> get_and_save_tgt(): Again a comment would be nice around
> noting that it was being done here after being deferred from earlier
> that we can validate the TGT.
> General question: if we're moving where become_user() is called,
> this affect our SELinux policy?
I think it will not affect the policy, because the krb5_child inherits
the SELinux labels from the parent, but I will check with Dan.
Looks good to me,
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York