[cifs-protocol] [EXTERNAL] Update of MS-PAC spec regarding November 2021 security updates - TrackingID#2111240040005432
Alexander Bokovoy
ab at samba.org
Mon Nov 29 19:05:56 UTC 2021
On ma, 29 marras 2021, Jeff McCashland (HE/HIM/THEY/THEM) wrote:
> Hi Metze,
>
> How were you able to determine that the array size is '((int)(flags_length/32))+1'? Do you have a trace or document illustrating this?
>
> Also, it is expected that changes in the current Errata doc are not included in the published document, but normally the changes would be spelled out in the errata doc.
>
> Where did you find the Diff file with the changes? When I click the link, I get a PDF download, but I can't tell where it's coming from.
You can download it from the MS-WINERRATA:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-winerrata/314fe022-28ea-4bd9-93ac-7941ecf9ca10
For example, choose 'MS-PAC':
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-winerrata/54e7d766-95ed-4e47-bae3-0904176b5958
has a table with
------
The following sections were changed or added. Please see the [diff
document] for the details.
------
[diff document] is a link to https://winprotocoldoc.blob.core.windows.net/productionwindowsarchives/MS-PAC/%5bMS-PAC%5d-20211109-diff.pdf
Also, the same problem exists with [MS-KILE] spec, it also needs an
update.
Choose 'MS-KILE' in the list:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-winerrata/c982f6c4-2f70-4dc7-b252-09092e9f1eed
then you'd see in the table
------
The following sections were changed or
added. Please see the [diff document] for the details.
------
[diff document] is a link to https://winprotocoldoc.blob.core.windows.net/productionwindowsarchives/MS-KILE/%5bMS-KILE%5d-20211109-diff.pdf
>
> Best regards,
> Jeff McCashland | Senior Escalation Engineer | Microsoft Protocol Open Specifications Team
> Phone: +1 (425) 703-8300 x38300 | Hours: 9am-5pm | Time zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US and Canada)
> Local country phone number found here: http://support.microsoft.com/globalenglish | Extension 1138300
> We value your feedback. My manager is Natesha Morrison (namorri), +1 (704) 430-4292
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff McCashland
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2021 9:18 AM
> To: metze <metze at samba.org>; Alexander Bokovoy <ab at samba.org>
> Cc: cifs-protocol at lists.samba.org
> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [cifs-protocol] Update of MS-PAC spec regarding November 2021 security updates - TrackingID#2111240040005432
>
> [Kristian to BCC]
>
> Hi Alexander and Metze,
>
> I will look into this and get back to you.
>
> Best regards,
> Jeff McCashland | Senior Escalation Engineer | Microsoft Protocol Open Specifications Team
> Phone: +1 (425) 703-8300 x38300 | Hours: 9am-5pm | Time zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US and Canada) Local country phone number found here: http://support.microsoft.com/globalenglish | Extension 1138300 We value your feedback. My manager is Natesha Morrison (namorri), +1 (704) 430-4292
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kristian Smith <Kristian.Smith at microsoft.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2021 8:40 AM
> To: metze <metze at samba.org>; Alexander Bokovoy <ab at samba.org>
> Cc: cifs-protocol at lists.samba.org
> Subject: RE:[EXTERNAL] [cifs-protocol] Update of MS-PAC spec regarding November 2021 security updates - TrackingID#2111240040005432
>
> [DocHelp to Bcc]
>
> Hi Alexander and Metze,
>
> Thank you for your request. The case number 2111240040005432 has been created for this inquiry. One of our team members will follow-up with you soon.
>
> Regards,
> Kristian
>
> Kristian Smith
> Support Escalation Engineer
> Windows Open Spec Protocols
> Office: (425) 421-4442
> krsmith at microsoftsupport.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: metze <metze at samba.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2021 2:13 AM
> To: Alexander Bokovoy <ab at samba.org>; Interoperability Documentation Help <dochelp at microsoft.com>
> Cc: cifs-protocol at lists.samba.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cifs-protocol] Update of MS-PAC spec regarding November 2021 security updates
>
>
> Am 24.11.21 um 10:33 schrieb Alexander Bokovoy via cifs-protocol:
> > Hello dochelp,
> >
> > I can see inconsistency in what is published on
> > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs
> > .microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Fopenspecs%2Fwindows_protocols%2Fms-pac%2F&
> > ;data=04%7C01%7CKristian.Smith%40microsoft.com%7C976b8182b4b84582f4bd0
> > 8d9af334186%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C6377334569597
> > 45681%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB
> > TiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=7gzSojo9ov6Uwx80K%2FwOQGhB
> > drb8oxqR%2F7yid5vn8tQ%3D&reserved=0
> > with regards to the changes introduced as a part of the Microsoft
> > Windows security update of November 2021. Could this inconsistency be
> > clarified by publishing the new revision of the MS-PAC document?
> >
> > Errata document[1] talks about changes dated 2021/11/11 post V22.0 but
> > the rest of the linked documents are only V22.0.
> >
> > In particular, the errata document[1] is saying:
> >
> > -----
> > The following sections were changed or added. Please see the diff
> > document for the details.
> >
> > In section 2.10 UPN_DNS_INFO, added four new fields and a flag to the
> > UPN_DNS_INFO structure.
> >
> > In section 2.14 PAC_ATTRIBUTES_INFO, added section.
> >
> > In section 2.15 PAC_REQUESTOR, added section.
> > -----
> >
> > The document published, however, does not have these changes. The last
> > section in chapter 2 is '14', there is no section 2.15.
>
> I'm seeing it here:
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwinprotocoldoc.blob.core.windows.net%2Fproductionwindowsarchives%2FMS-PAC%2F%255bMS-PAC%255d-20211109-diff.pdf&data=04%7C01%7Cjeffm%40microsoft.com%7Cd3b94f30d63a4201ca5708d9af6911a4%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637733688085851057%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=afpiUM0iw8uPezHr32JH3UVlG3HQcUD%2BnGteWfO%2FyEY%3D&reserved=0
>
> But for me the PAC_ATTRIBUTES_INFO documentation is a bit unclear:
>
> We have this in Samba:
> typedef [bitmap32bit] bitmap {
> PAC_ATTRIBUTE_FLAG_PAC_WAS_REQUESTED = 0x00000001,
> PAC_ATTRIBUTE_FLAG_PAC_WAS_GIVEN_IMPLICITLY = 0x00000002
> } PAC_ATTRIBUTE_INFO_FLAGS;
>
> typedef struct {
> uint32 flags_length; /* length in bits */
> PAC_ATTRIBUTE_INFO_FLAGS flags;
> } PAC_ATTRIBUTES_INFO;
>
> And the documentation has:
>
> FlagsLength (4 bytes): An unsigned 32-bit integer in little-endian format that describes the length,
> in bits, of the Flags field.
>
> Flags (variable): an array of 32-bit unsigned integers in little-endian format that contains flag bits
> describing the PAC.
>
> It's not really clear that the array size is '((int)(flags_length/32))+1', for now it's seems to be just a single
> uint32 element with two defined flags. Unless bit 33 will be defined someday, it would be easier to have it as
>
> typedef struct {
> uint32 number_of_valid_flags;
> uint32 flags;
> } PAC_ATTRIBUTES_INFO;
>
> which is basically what we currently have in Samba, but in theory it would have to be
>
> typedef struct {
> uint32 number_of_valid_flags;
> uint32 flags[(number_of_valid_flags/32)+1];
> } PAC_ATTRIBUTES_INFO;
>
> metze
--
/ Alexander Bokovoy
More information about the cifs-protocol
mailing list