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
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
16 hours, 18 minutes
Re: 2FA is being enforced after upgrading 2.9.1->2.9.4
by Sumit Bose
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/464a7ec2793a82c83330cb3a10b114d...
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....<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.f...<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....<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.fe...<https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/>
> > List Guidelines: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffedorap...<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines>
> > List Archives: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.f...<https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/sssd-users@lists.fedorahoste...>
> > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpagure....<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.fe...<https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/>
> List Guidelines: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffedorap...<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines>
> List Archives: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.f...<https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/sssd-users@lists.fedorahoste...>
> Do not reply to spam, report it: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpagure....<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.fedorahoste...
> Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
1 day, 9 hours
sssd have problem GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information (Server not found in Kerberos database)
by Omnis ludis - games
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, sssd have one
trust relationship or no this time?
1 day, 10 hours
GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS failure. Minor code may provide more information (Server not found in Kerberos database)
by Omnis ludis - games
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 day, 14 hours
Re: 2FA is being enforced after upgrading 2.9.1->2.9.4
by Sumit Bose
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.fedorahoste...
> Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
1 day, 15 hours
Re: 2FA is being enforced after upgrading 2.9.1->2.9.4
by Sumit Bose
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.fedorahoste...
> Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
4 days, 12 hours
how to apply custom password prompt?
by seojeong kim
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 ??
6 days, 16 hours
2FA is being enforced after upgrading 2.9.1->2.9.4
by 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.
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/>
1 week
looks like bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1984591 is back...
by Spike White
sssd personnel,
In RHEL7, sssd was auto-discovering AD domains that trusted this domain,
but that this domain did not trust. i.e., it was over-discovering AD
domains.
For a large company, you'll have one or more prod AD domain. That all
trust each other.
Then you'll likely have an engineering and possibly a test AD domain.
These engineering and test domains would trust the prod domain(s), but the
prod domain(s) wouldn't trust these engineering/test domains (nor should
they).
So if sssd were AD-integrated to one of the prod domains, it should
auto-discover the prod domains only. It's true that buried deep in AD's
data structures, there is a trust relationship with the test domain and the
engineering domain. But it's a trust going the wrong way.
Sumit fixed this for RHEL7, it seems the fix was first pushed out in
sssd-1.16.5-10.el7_9.11.
RHEL7 seems to still be fixed as of today.
At least on RHEL8 and RHEL9, it seems to have reverted.
There is a work-around. in /etc/sssd/sssd.conf file, you can add:
[domain/prod1.company.com]
....
ad_enabled_domains = prod1.company.com, prod2.company.com, prod3.company.com
So while all these extraneous auto-discovered AD domains still show in
'sssctl domain-list', they no longer cause problems.
Spike
1 week, 4 days
[SSSD] Announcing SSSD 2.10.0-beta1
by Pavel Březina
# SSSD 2.10.0-beta1
The SSSD team is announcing the release of version 2.10.0-beta1 of the
System Security Services Daemon. The tarball can be downloaded from:
https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/releases/tag/2.10.0-beta1
See the full release notes at:
https://sssd.io/release-notes/sssd-2.10.0-beta1.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-beta1 Release Notes
## Highlights
### General information
* **IMPORTANT note for downstream maintainers!**
This release features significant improvements of "running with less
privileges (under unprivileged service user)" feature. There is still
a `./configure` option `--with-sssd-user=` available that allows
downstream package maintainers to choose if support of non-root service
user should be built. In case such support is built, a preferred way to
configure service user is simply by starting SSSD under this user; for
example, using `User=/Group=` options of systemd sssd.service file.
Upstream defaults are to build `--with-sssd-user=sssd` and to install
systemd service with `User=/Group=sssd`. In this case, only several
helper processes - `ldap_child`, `krb5_child` and `selinux_child` - are
executed with elevated capabilities (that are now granted using fine
grained file capabilities instead of SUID bit). All other SSSD
components run without any capabilities. In this scenario it's still
possible to re-configure SSSD to run under `root` (if needed for some
reason): besides changing `User/Group=` options, some other tweaks of
systemd service files are required.
A legacy method to configure a service user - sssd.conf `user` option
- is now deprecated and its support isn’t built by default. It can be
enabled using `--with-conf-service-user-support` `./configure` option if
needed (for example, due to backward compatibility requirements of
stable releases).
Further, no matter if SSSD is built `--with-sssd-user=sssd` or
`--with-sssd-user=root`, when it's configured to run under `root` (in
both cases) it still runs without capabilities, the same way as when
it's configured to run under `sssd` user. The only difference is from
the DAC perspective.
Important note: owner of `/etc/sssd/sssd.conf` file (and snippets)
should match the user configured to start SSSD service. Upstream spec
file changes ownership of existing `sssd.conf` to `sssd` during package
installation for seamless upgrades.
Additionally, this release fixes a large number of issues with
"socket activation of responders" feature, making it operable
out-of-the-box when the package is built `--with-sssd-user=sssd`. Please
take a note, that user configured to run main sssd.service and socket
activated responders (if used) should match (i.e. if sssd.service is
re-configured from upstream defaults to `root` then responders services
also should be re-configured).
Downstream package maintainers are advised to carefully inspect
changes in `contrib/sssd.spec.in`, `src/sysv/systemd/*` and
`./configure` options that this release brings!
* sssctl `cache-upgrade` command was removed. SSSD performs automatic
upgrades at startup when needed.
* Support of `enumeration` feature (i.e. ability to list all
users/groups using `getent passwd/group` without argument) for AD/IPA
providers is deprecated and might be removed in further releases. Those
who are interested to keep using it awhile should configure its build
explicitly using `--with-extended-enumeration-support` ./configure option.
### New features
* The new tool `sss_ssh_knownhosts` can be used with ssh's
KnownHostsCommand configuration option to retrieve the host's public
keys from a remote server (FreeIPA, LDAP, etc.). This new tool, which is
more reliable, replaces `sss_ssh_knownhostsproxy`. Please consider
switching to using the new tool as the old one will be removed.
### Packaging changes
* Building SSSD now unconditionally requires availability of `ucred`/
`SO_PEERCRED` to enforce certain security checks at runtime (see `man 7
unix` for details).
* SSSD now requires `libini` not older than v1.3
* Explicit `--with-semanage` ./configure switch was removed, going
forward `--with-selinux` includes this.
### Configuration changes
* Default `ldap_id_use_start_tls` value changed from `false` to `true`
for improved security.
* Added a `ldap_use_ppolicy` option for backends with broken ppolicy
extension handling.
* Obsolete `config_file_version` option was removed.
2 weeks, 4 days
