[cifs-protocol] RE: MS-SAMR missing SID name use type ?

Neil B Martin neilm at thetestplace.com
Wed Dec 3 09:37:42 GMT 2008


I would argue that the docs for MS-LSAT are clear on that point, what I
believe would have helped was that the MS-SAMR
Document had a short note and reference to the fact there MS-LSAT and
MS-SAMR  share similar but maybe not identical IDL.
The fact that we even had this discussion shows that it is easy to overlook
that important fact.



From: Obaid Farooqi [mailto:obaidf at microsoft.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:32 PM
To: 'ronnie sahlberg'; Neil B Martin
Cc: pfif at tridgell.net; cifs-protocol at samba.org
Subject: RE: MS-SAMR missing SID name use type ?

Hi Ronnie, Neil:
Please let me know if the following response does not answer your question.

Obaid Farooqi
Sr. SEE | Microsoft

From: Obaid Farooqi 
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 10:34 AM
To: 'ronnie sahlberg'; 'Neil B Martin'
Cc: 'pfif at tridgell.net'; 'cifs-protocol at samba.org'
Subject: MS-SAMR missing SID name use type ?

Hi Ronnie, Neil:
We have finished investigation on this case. MS-SAMR does not document
SidTypeComputer in enum SID_NAME_USE  because the enum value SidTypeComputer
=9  is not part of the SAMR protocol. The SAM object model does not
distinguish between computer objects and user objects, that is, computers
are users.

In case of [MS-LSAT], while enum SidTypeComputer is mentioned in the
document, it clearly states that:

The SidTypeInvalid and SidTypeComputer enumeration values are not used in
this protocol. Usage information on the remaining enumeration values is
specified in section 3.1..1.

Our investigation also concluded that enum SidTypeComputer does not appear
on wire for any Windows scenario. 

If you see this enum on wire, please feel free to bring it to our attention.


Obaid Farooqi
Sr. SEE | Microsoft

More information about the cifs-protocol mailing list