[SSSD] [PATCH] AD: Handle cases where no GPOs apply
Jakub Hrozek
jhrozek at redhat.com
Fri Jul 24 19:44:13 UTC 2015
> On 24 Jul 2015, at 18:41, Michal Židek <mzidek at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 07/23/2015 09:46 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (20/07/15 10:41), Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>> It is possible to have a machine where none of the GPOs associated with
>>> it include access-control rules. Currently, this results in a
>>> denial-by-system-error.
>>>
>>> We need to treat this case as allowing the user (see the test cases in
>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/wiki/DesignDocs/ActiveDirectoryGPOIntegra
>>> tion
>>>
>>> We also need to delete the result object from the cache to ensure that
>>> offline operation will also grant access.
>>>
>>> Resolves:
>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2691
>>
>>> From 06e58a26fd5b59631b479f2f076e80ecfae425b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh at redhat.com>
>>> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:29:19 -0400
>>> Subject: [PATCH] AD: Handle cases where no GPOs apply
>>>
>>> It is possible to have a machine where none of the GPOs associated with
>>> it include access-control rules. Currently, this results in a
>>> denial-by-system-error.
>>>
>>> We need to treat this case as allowing the user (see the test cases in
>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/wiki/DesignDocs/ActiveDirectoryGPOIntegration
>>>
>>> We also need to delete the result object from the cache to ensure that
>>> offline operation will also grant access.
>>>
>>> Resolves:
>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2691
>>> ---
>> This patch fixes ticket #2713.
>>
>> I need to better test #2691. because it works sometimes and sometime doesn't
>> work. I assume there can be bug in as tests. (some leftovers from previous
>> execution)
>>
>>> src/providers/ad/ad_gpo.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/src/providers/ad/ad_gpo.c b/src/providers/ad/ad_gpo.c
>>> index 974fd04b99709055f25ed2a3b77821b3caec09ad..0d310b87696feb810b6a096d31adede38c72d16a 100644
>>> --- a/src/providers/ad/ad_gpo.c
>>> +++ b/src/providers/ad/ad_gpo.c
>>> @@ -1947,15 +1947,37 @@ ad_gpo_process_gpo_done(struct tevent_req *subreq)
>>>
>>> talloc_zfree(subreq);
>>>
>>> ret = sdap_id_op_done(state->sdap_op, ret, &dp_error);
>>>
>>> - if (ret != EOK) {
>>> + if (ret != EOK && ret != ENOENT) {
>>> DEBUG(SSSDBG_OP_FAILURE,
>>> "Unable to get GPO list: [%d](%s)\n",
>>> ret, sss_strerror(ret));
>>> - ret = ENOENT;
>>> + goto done;
>>> + } else if (ret == ENOENT) {
>>> + DEBUG(SSSDBG_OP_FAILURE,
>>> + "No GPOs found that apply to this system.\n");
>> I'm not sure about this debug level.
>>
>> There is a plan to increase default debug level to SSSDBG_OP_FAILURE.
>> An if the user does not have any GPOs on AD server then
>> this message will be printed after each login.
>>
>> LS
>
> Hi Lukas,
>
> I am sending Stephen's patch updated according to
> your request.
>
> I have not tested the patch however.
Me neither, but if the debug level was the only complaint, then I vote for pushing the patch.
>
> Michal
>
> --
> Senior Principal Intern
> <0001-AD-Handle-cases-where-no-GPOs-apply.patch>_______________________________________________
> sssd-devel mailing list
> sssd-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
More information about the sssd-devel
mailing list