[cifs-protocol] Help regarding the security descriptor creation algorithms

Nadezhda Ivanova nadezhda.ivanova at postpath.com
Mon Jul 27 05:44:57 MDT 2009


Hi Obaid,
I was wandering if there is any progress on this issue? 

Regards,
Nadezhda Ivanova
 
 
From: Obaid Farooqi [mailto:obaidf at microsoft.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 7:55 PM

 To: Nadezhda Ivanova

 Cc: pfif at tridgell.net; cifs-protocol at samba.org

 Subject: RE: Help regarding the security descriptor creation algorithms

 
Hi Nadezhda:
Just an update. I am still working on your issue. I’ll update you as soon as I have something concrete.
 
Regards,
Obaid Farooqi
Sr. Support Escalation Engineer | Microsoft
 
From: Obaid Farooqi 

Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 10:47 AM

 To: 'Nadezhda Ivanova'

 Cc: pfif at tridgell.net; cifs-protocol at samba.org

 Subject: RE: Help regarding the security descriptor creation algorithms


 
Hi Nadezhda:
My name is Obaid Farooqi and I am a member of protocol documentation team. I’ll be helping you with your question regarding security descriptor creation algorithms.
I’ll keep you updated as appropriate with my investigation.
Feel free to contact me if you have any further question or clarification about this issue.
 
Regards,
Obaid Farooqi
Sr. SEE | Microsoft
 
 
From: Nadezhda Ivanova [mailto:nadezhda.ivanova at postpath.com] 

Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 6:09 AM

 To: Interoperability Documentation Help

 Cc: pfif at tridgell.net; cifs-protocol at samba.org

 Subject: Help regarding the security descriptor creation algorithms


 
Hi,
I have been working on implementing correct nTSecurityDeascriptor creation in the directory service of Samba 4, and have come upon a problem in the ComputeInheritedACLfromParent subroutine described in MS-DTYP 2.5.2.6. The way the algorithm is described, the purpose of this algorithm is to determine which ACE’s from an object’s parent are to be inherited by the new object actively, and which are to be inherited only. The ComputeInheritedACLfromParent as described, walks the parent ACL twice. The first time it determines the active inherited ACE’s, the second time the ones that are inherited but inactive. 
I have been testing our implementation with the CN=Schema partition, as the attributes and objects by default are not given a security descriptor during creation, and the defaultSecurityDescriptor of attribute-Schema is empty DACL and SACL.
So, they inherit all their DACL ACE’s from their parent, CN=Schema. 

In a Win2008R2, CN=Schema has three inheritable DACL ACE’s: 

(A;CI;RPLCLORC;;;AU)
(A;CI;RPWPCRCCLCLORCWOWDSW;;;SA)
(A;CI;RPWPCRCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;SY)
 
ComputeInheritedACLfromParent has the following arguments:
                         ACL: ACL that contains the parent's ACEs from which to compute the inherited ACL. 
                        IsContainerObject: TRUE if the object is a container, FALSE otherwise. 
                        ObjectTypes: Array of GUIDs for the object type being created. 

So if we invoke the ComputeInheritedACLfromParent with the above DACL,and isConatinerObject = true (According to MS-ADTS 7.1.3, true is always the value), the first walk of the input 

Initialize ExplicitACL to Empty ACL 
FOR each ACE in ACL DO 
IF ACE.Flags contains INHERIT_ONLY 
THEN 
                                            CONTINUE 
ENDIF 
           
IF(((ACE.Flags contains CONTAINER_INHERIT) AND 
                                            (IsContainerObject = TRUE))OR 
                                           ((ACE.Flags contains OBJECT_INHERIT) AND (IsContainerObject = FALSE))) 
THEN 
            CASE ACE.Type OF 
                        ALLOW: 
                        DENY: 
                                    Set NewACE to ACE 
                                    Set NewACE.Flags to INHERITED 
                                    Append NewACE to ExplicitACL 
                        OBJECT_ALLOW: 
                        OBJECT_DENY: 
                                    IF (ObjectTypes contains ACE.ObjectGUID) THEN 
                                                Set NewACE to ACE 
                                                Set NewACE.Flags to INHERITED 
                                                Append NewACE to ExplicitACL 
                                    ENDIF 
            ENDCASE 
ENDIF 
END FOR
 
Will give:
 
D:AI(A;CIID;RPLCLORC;;;AU)(A;CIID;RPWPCRCCLCLORCWOWDSW;;;SA)(A;CIID;RPWPCRCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;SY)
 
Which is as expected, as this is the DACL of all attributes and classes in Win 2008.
However, the algorithm then walks the input a second time:
 
Initialize InheritableACL to Empty ACL 
IF (IsContainerObject = TRUE) THEN //In our case this is always true
FOR each ACE in ACL DO 
            IF ACE.Flags contains NO_PROPAGATE THEN //This flag is not set
                        CONTINUE 
            ENDIF 
           
            IF((ACE.Flags contains CONTAINER_INHERIT) OR 
                        (ACE.Flags contains OBJECT_INHERIT)) 
            THEN 
                        Set NewACE to ACE 
                        Add INHERITED to NewACE.Flags 
                        Add INHERIT_ONLY to NewACE.Flags 
                        Append NewACE to InheritableACL 
            ENDIF 
                       END FOR 
ENDIF 

This second loop yields:
 
(A;CIIOID;RPLCLORC;;;AU)(A;CIIOID;RPWPCRCCLCLORCWOWDSW;;;SA)(A;CIIOID;RPWPCRCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;SY)
 
Which after:
RETURN concatenation of ExplicitACL and InheritableACL 

Makes the final DACL look like: 

D:AI(A;CIID;RPLCLORC;;;AU)(A;CIID;RPWPCRCCLCLORCWOWDSW;;;SA)(A;CIID;RPWPCRCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;SY)(A;CIIOID;RPLCLORC;;;AU)(A;CIIOID;RPWPCRCCLCLORCWOWDSW;;;SA)(A;CIIOID;RPWPCRCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;SY)
 
So ACE’s are duplicated.
 
However, an attribute’s DACL in Win2008 does not have these last three ACE’s, so I am obviously missing something. How should the flow actually go with this same example in order to avoid this duplication? Or am I providing the wrong argument?
 
Best Regards,
Nadezhda Ivanova
	
Nadezhda Ivanova

 Software EngineerSoftware Development

 nadezhda.ivanova at postpath.com	CISCO SYSTEMS BULGARIA EOOD

 18 Macedonia Blvd. Sofia 1606

 Bulgaria

 	 	
Think before you print.	 	
 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/cifs-protocol/attachments/20090727/e9811ff2/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 837 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/cifs-protocol/attachments/20090727/e9811ff2/attachment-0002.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 87 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/cifs-protocol/attachments/20090727/e9811ff2/attachment-0003.gif>


More information about the cifs-protocol mailing list