sssd-users June 2024

sssd-users@lists.fedorahosted.org

7 participants
13 discussions

Re: Starting automount invalidates sssd cache
by Filip Slunecko 27 Jun '24

27 Jun '24

Found the reason for the behaviour. https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/commit/1bcb68cc3069a6bd539289e68a87a0815aa2a1be I think my question changes more to -> Is there a recommended way to use automount in docker? Thanks! Filip

1 0

Starting automount invalidates sssd cache
by Filip Slunecko 27 Jun '24

27 Jun '24

Restarting autofs -> systemctl restart autofs.service sets dataExpireTimestamp to 1 which invalidates the cache. The problem is that we are running multiple docker containers and every time we start a new one and run /usr/local/sbin/automount --pid-file /run/autofs.pid & in it the whole cache gets invalidated. Is there a way to prevent that?

1 0

[SSSD] Announcing SSSD 2.10.0-beta2
by Pavel Březina 26 Jun '24

26 Jun '24

# SSSD 2.10.0-beta2 The SSSD team is announcing the release of version 2.10.0-beta2 of the System Security Services Daemon. The tarball can be downloaded from: https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/releases/tag/2.10.0-beta2 See the full release notes at: https://sssd.io/release-notes/sssd-2.10.0-beta2.html RPM packages will be made available for Fedora shortly. ## Feedback Please provide comments, bugs and other feedback via the sssd-devel or sssd-users mailing lists: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-users # SSSD 2.10-beta2 Release Notes ## Highlights ### General information * A number of minor glitches of `sssd-2.10.0-beta1` around building and packaging were fixed. ### Packaging changes * `sssd_pam` binary lost public `rx` bits and got `cap_dac_read_search=p` file capability to be able to use GSSAPI

1 0

how to apply custom password prompt?
by seojeong kim 26 Jun '24

26 Jun '24

ubuntu 20, 22, 24 sssd.conf [prompting/password] password_prompt = my_password : ubuntu 20, 22, 24 [prompting/2fa] single_prompt = False first_prompt = 2fa_Password : second_prompt = 2fa_otp : But when I try ssh testuer@localhost always it asks me "Passowrd:" I tried to change sssd.conf and also tried /etc/pam.d/ /etc/pam.d/sshd @include common-auth account required pam_nologin.so @include common-account ..... /etc/pam.d/common-auth auth [success=2 default=ignore] pam_unix.so nullok <-------- I changed it as auth [success=2 default=ignore] pam_unix.so nullok authtok_prompt=my_password: auth [success=1 default=ignore] pam_sss.so use_first_pass auth requisite pam_deny.so auth required pam_permit.so auth optional pam_cap.so But everything doesn't work. How can I change the default password prompt ??

2 2

SSSD problem one-way trust GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information (Server not found in Kerberos database)
by Omnis ludis - games 25 Jun '24

25 Jun '24

Good afternoon, please tell me there is such an infrastructure windows domain and samba domain between them, one-sided external outgoing trust relationships are set up, so that users from the windows domain can freely enter the samba domain, I entered the client into the samba domain and all users from the samba domain can safely pass to this client, but that's not the task of users they do not want to authenticate from the windows domain in any way when I try to log in to a client from the samba domain under them, I get the following error in sssd on the client, GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information (Server not found in Kerberos database), do I understand correctly that this works like this, the client accesses the samba domain controller, since there is no given user in samba, the request is redirected to the windows domain controller and that in turn must provide information about this to users from its database kerberos? but for some reason this does not happen, does anyone have at least some information on this error, I have already tried many different scenarios and can not log in as a user in any way, as if samba does not process information correctly, while if you build a two-way trusting relationship, then everything works as it should

1 0

Re: 2FA is being enforced after upgrading 2.9.1->2.9.4
by Sumit Bose 24 Jun '24

24 Jun '24

Am Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 08:23:54AM +0000 schrieb Grzegorz Sobański: > Hi, > Thanks for working on this. > Could you please share a source diff for this change? We can’t use this private build - we will need to build it ourselves. Hi, please check https://github.com/sumit-bose/sssd/commit/464a7ec2793a82c83330cb3a10b114d1c… HTH bye, Sumit > > Regards, > > Grzegorz > www.payu.com<http://www.payu.com/> > > > From: Sumit Bose <sbose(a)redhat.com> > Date: Friday, 21 June 2024 at 16:18 > To: End-user discussions about the System Security Services Daemon <sssd-users(a)lists.fedorahosted.org> > Subject: External : [SSSD-users] Re: 2FA is being enforced after upgrading 2.9.1->2.9.4 > Attention: This email originated outside trusted domains. > > > Am Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 11:47:54AM +0000 schrieb Grzegorz Sobański: > > > Am Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 10:14:29AM +0000 schrieb Grzegorz Sobański: > > > > Hi, > > > > after updating Rocky Linux from 9.3 to 9.4 sssd started to enforce 2FA for our sudo configuration, while before it was optional, and we can’t find why did it change. > > > > We downgraded sssd packages from 2.9.4 to 2.9.1 and 2FA went back to being optional, so we are sure it’s because sssd version change from 2.9.1->2.9.4, all other configuration is the same. > > > > > > > > I looked through changelogs and skimmed through the list of commits, but I couldn’t find anything obvious that should change this. Has anyone seen something similar? Do you know if it’s a result of an intended change or some side-effect of other changes? Or a bug? > > > > > > > > We are using IPA as Kerberos provider, users do have OTP set up. > > > > Up to 2.9.1 sudoing worked either with only password or password+otp. > > > > On 2.9.4 (and 2.9.5) sudoing is not working with only password, both password+otp are required. > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > this might be related to https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co…<https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/issues/7152but> > > > this should be fixed in 2.9.5. Would it be possible to send full debug > > > logs for sssd-2.9.5 with `debug_level = 9` at least in the [domain/...] > > > section of sssd.conf covering a failed login attempt? > > > > Hi, > > I attach full debug logs with level 9 from sssd 2.9.5. > > Hi, > > thanks for the logs, please find a test build which should fix the issue > at > https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsbose.fed…<https://sbose.fedorapeople.org/otp_password/sssd-2.9.4-6.el9_4.1sb1.tar.gz>. > Please let me know if it works for you or not. > > If you don't mind it would be nice if you can open a ticket for this > issue at https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co…<https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/issues/new>. > > Thanks. > > bye, > Sumit > > > > > Bye, > > Grzegorz > > > > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > > sssd-users mailing list -- sssd-users(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to sssd-users-leave(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.fedo…<https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/> > > List Guidelines: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffedorapro…<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines> > > List Archives: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.fed…<https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/sssd-users@lists.fedorahosted.…> > > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpagure.io…<https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue> > -- > _______________________________________________ > sssd-users mailing list -- sssd-users(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > To unsubscribe send an email to sssd-users-leave(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.fedo…<https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/> > List Guidelines: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffedorapro…<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines> > List Archives: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.fed…<https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/sssd-users@lists.fedorahosted.…> > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpagure.io…<https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue> > -- > _______________________________________________ > sssd-users mailing list -- sssd-users(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > To unsubscribe send an email to sssd-users-leave(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/sssd-users@lists.fedorahosted.… > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

2 2

sssd have problem GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information (Server not found in Kerberos database)
by Omnis ludis - games 24 Jun '24

24 Jun '24

1 0

GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information (Server not found in Kerberos database)
by Omnis ludis - games 24 Jun '24

24 Jun '24

1 0

Re: 2FA is being enforced after upgrading 2.9.1->2.9.4
by Sumit Bose 24 Jun '24

24 Jun '24

Am Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 11:47:54AM +0000 schrieb Grzegorz Sobański: > > Am Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 10:14:29AM +0000 schrieb Grzegorz Sobański: > > > Hi, > > > after updating Rocky Linux from 9.3 to 9.4 sssd started to enforce 2FA for our sudo configuration, while before it was optional, and we can’t find why did it change. > > > We downgraded sssd packages from 2.9.4 to 2.9.1 and 2FA went back to being optional, so we are sure it’s because sssd version change from 2.9.1->2.9.4, all other configuration is the same. > > > > > > I looked through changelogs and skimmed through the list of commits, but I couldn’t find anything obvious that should change this. Has anyone seen something similar? Do you know if it’s a result of an intended change or some side-effect of other changes? Or a bug? > > > > > > We are using IPA as Kerberos provider, users do have OTP set up. > > > Up to 2.9.1 sudoing worked either with only password or password+otp. > > > On 2.9.4 (and 2.9.5) sudoing is not working with only password, both password+otp are required. > > > > Hi, > > > > this might be related to https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/issues/7152but > > this should be fixed in 2.9.5. Would it be possible to send full debug > > logs for sssd-2.9.5 with `debug_level = 9` at least in the [domain/...] > > section of sssd.conf covering a failed login attempt? > > Hi, > I attach full debug logs with level 9 from sssd 2.9.5. Hi, thanks for the logs, please find a test build which should fix the issue at https://sbose.fedorapeople.org/otp_password/sssd-2.9.4-6.el9_4.1sb1.tar.gz. Please let me know if it works for you or not. If you don't mind it would be nice if you can open a ticket for this issue at https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/issues/new. Thanks. bye, Sumit > > Bye, > Grzegorz > -- > _______________________________________________ > sssd-users mailing list -- sssd-users(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > To unsubscribe send an email to sssd-users-leave(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/sssd-users@lists.fedorahosted.… > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

2 1

Re: 2FA is being enforced after upgrading 2.9.1->2.9.4
by Sumit Bose 21 Jun '24

21 Jun '24

Am Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 10:14:29AM +0000 schrieb Grzegorz Sobański: > Hi, > after updating Rocky Linux from 9.3 to 9.4 sssd started to enforce 2FA for our sudo configuration, while before it was optional, and we can’t find why did it change. > We downgraded sssd packages from 2.9.4 to 2.9.1 and 2FA went back to being optional, so we are sure it’s because sssd version change from 2.9.1->2.9.4, all other configuration is the same. > > I looked through changelogs and skimmed through the list of commits, but I couldn’t find anything obvious that should change this. Has anyone seen something similar? Do you know if it’s a result of an intended change or some side-effect of other changes? Or a bug? > > We are using IPA as Kerberos provider, users do have OTP set up. > Up to 2.9.1 sudoing worked either with only password or password+otp. > On 2.9.4 (and 2.9.5) sudoing is not working with only password, both password+otp are required. Hi, this might be related to https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/issues/7152 but this should be fixed in 2.9.5. Would it be possible to send full debug logs for sssd-2.9.5 with `debug_level = 9` at least in the [domain/...] section of sssd.conf covering a failed login attempt? Thanks bye, Sumit > > I attach excerpts from logs, they are similar for both 2.9.1 and 2.9.4, with one difference standing out: > On 2.9.1: > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [sss_krb5_prompter] (0x0200): [RID#729] Prompter interface isn't used for password prompts by SSSD. > On 2.9.4: > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [sss_krb5_responder] (0x4000): [RID#38] Got question [otp]. > Although one is in loglines other in backtrace. > > Logs: > On 2.9.1: > > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [dp_pam_handler_send] (0x0100): Got request with the following data > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): command: SSS_PAM_AUTHENTICATE > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): domain: realm > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): user: gsobanski@realm > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): service: sudo > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): tty: /dev/pts/1 > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): ruser: gsobanski > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): rhost: > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): authtok type: 1 (Password) > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): newauthtok type: 0 (No authentication token available) > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): priv: 0 > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): cli_pid: 3400909 > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): child_pid: 0 > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): logon name: not set > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): flags: 0 > [...] > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#729] Will perform auth > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#729] Will perform online auth > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [get_and_save_tgt] (0x0400): [RID#729] Attempting kinit for realm [realm] > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [sss_krb5_prompter] (0x0200): [RID#729] Prompter interface isn't used for password prompts by SSSD. > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [validate_tgt] (0x0400): [RID#729] TGT verified using key for [host/hostname@realm]. > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [safe_remove_old_ccache_file] (0x0400): [RID#729] New and old ccache file are the same, none will be deleted. > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [k5c_send_data] (0x0200): [RID#729] Received error code 0 > (2024-06-17 12:07:45): [krb5_child[3400913]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#729] krb5_child completed successfully > > On 2.9.4: > > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [dp_pam_handler_send] (0x0100): Got request with the following data > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): command: SSS_PAM_AUTHENTICATE > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): domain: realm > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): user: gsobanski@realm > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): service: sudo > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): tty: /dev/pts/1 > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): ruser: gsobanski > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): rhost: > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): authtok type: 1 (Password) > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): newauthtok type: 0 (No authentication token available) > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): priv: 0 > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): cli_pid: 1757901 > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): child_pid: 0 > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): logon name: not set > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [be[realm]] [pam_print_data] (0x0100): flags: 0 > [...] > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#38] Will perform auth > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#38] Will perform online auth > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [get_and_save_tgt] (0x0400): [RID#38] Attempting kinit for realm [realm] > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [get_and_save_tgt] (0x0020): [RID#38] 2367: [-1765328360][Preauthentication failed] > ********************** PREVIOUS MESSAGE WAS TRIGGERED BY THE FOLLOWING BACKTRACE: > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#38] krb5_child started. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [unpack_buffer] (0x1000): [RID#38] total buffer size: [179] > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [unpack_buffer] (0x0100): [RID#38] cmd [241 (auth)] uid [123456] gid [1002] validate [true] enterprise principal [false] offline [false] UPN [gsobanski@realm] > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [unpack_buffer] (0x0100): [RID#38] ccname: [FILE:/tmp/krb5cc_123456_XXXXXX] old_ccname: [FILE:/tmp/krb5cc_123456_3UVHOp] keytab: [/etc/krb5.keytab] > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [switch_creds] (0x0200): [RID#38] Switch user to [123456][1002]. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [switch_creds] (0x0200): [RID#38] Switch user to [0][0]. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [k5c_check_old_ccache] (0x4000): [RID#38] Ccache_file is [FILE:/tmp/krb5cc_123456_3UVHOp] and is active and TGT is valid. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [k5c_setup_fast] (0x0100): [RID#38] Fast principal is set to [host/hostname@realm] > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [find_principal_in_keytab] (0x4000): [RID#38] Trying to find principal host/hostname@realm in keytab. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [match_principal] (0x1000): [RID#38] Principal matched to the sample (host/hostname@realm). > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [check_fast_ccache] (0x0200): [RID#38] FAST TGT is still valid. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [become_user] (0x0200): [RID#38] Trying to become user [123456][1002]. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [main] (0x2000): [RID#38] Running as [123456][1002]. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [set_lifetime_options] (0x0100): [RID#38] No specific renewable lifetime requested. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [set_lifetime_options] (0x0100): [RID#38] No specific lifetime requested. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [set_canonicalize_option] (0x0100): [RID#38] Canonicalization is set to [true] > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#38] Will perform auth > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#38] Will perform online auth > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [tgt_req_child] (0x1000): [RID#38] Attempting to get a TGT > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [get_and_save_tgt] (0x0400): [RID#38] Attempting kinit for realm [realm] > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [sss_krb5_responder] (0x4000): [RID#38] Got question [otp]. > * (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [get_and_save_tgt] (0x0020): [RID#38] 2367: [-1765328360][Preauthentication failed] > ********************** BACKTRACE DUMP ENDS HERE ********************************* > > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [map_krb5_error] (0x0040): [RID#38] 2496: [-1765328360][Preauthentication failed] > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [k5c_send_data] (0x0200): [RID#38] Received error code 1432158222 > (2024-06-17 12:12:23): [krb5_child[1757979]] [main] (0x0400): [RID#38] krb5_child completed successfully > > Grzegorz Sobański > www.payu.com<http://www.payu.com/> > > -- > _______________________________________________ > sssd-users mailing list -- sssd-users(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > To unsubscribe send an email to sssd-users-leave(a)lists.fedorahosted.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/sssd-users@lists.fedorahosted.… > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

sssd-users June 2024