[cifs-protocol] Help regarding the security descriptor creation algorithms
Obaid Farooqi
obaidf at microsoft.com
Mon Jul 27 09:22:20 MDT 2009
Hi Nadezhda:
We have identified the flaw in the algorithm and as soon as I have the final version of the algorithm, I’ll be in touch. Your finding is correct and algorithm needs modification.
Regards,
Obaid Farooqi
Sr. Support Escalation Engineer | Microsoft
From: Nadezhda Ivanova [mailto:nadezhda.ivanova at postpath.com]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 6:45 AM
To: Obaid Farooqi
Cc: pfif at tridgell.net; cifs-protocol at samba.org
Subject: RE: Help regarding the security descriptor creation algorithms
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
[cid:image001.gif at 01CA0EA4.0C8998D0]
Nadezhda Ivanova
Software Engineer
Software Development
nadezhda.ivanova at postpath.com<mailto:nadezhda.ivanova at postpath.com>
CISCO SYSTEMS BULGARIA EOOD
18 Macedonia Blvd. Sofia 1606
Bulgaria
Cisco home page<http://www.cisco.com/global/BG/>
[Think before you print.]Think before you print.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/cifs-protocol/attachments/20090727/fb2d5c79/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 837 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/cifs-protocol/attachments/20090727/fb2d5c79/attachment-0002.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 87 bytes
Desc: image002.gif
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/cifs-protocol/attachments/20090727/fb2d5c79/attachment-0003.gif>
More information about the cifs-protocol
mailing list