[cifs-protocol] [EXTERNAL] [MS-GKDI] GetKey — Group Keys and Seed Keys - TrackingID#2311210040001551

Jeff McCashland (He/him) jeffm at microsoft.com
Tue Nov 21 05:06:46 UTC 2023

[DocHelp to BCC, support on CC, SR ID on Subject]

Hi Joseph,

Thank you for your question. We have created SR 2311210040001551 to track this issue. One of our engineers will respond soon. 

Best regards,
Jeff McCashland (He/him) | 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

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Sutton <jsutton at samba.org> 
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 7:50 PM
To: cifs-protocol at lists.samba.org; Interoperability Documentation Help <dochelp at microsoft.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [MS-GKDI] GetKey — Group Keys and Seed Keys

Hi dochelp,

The documentation for GetKey ([MS-GKDI] states that, in general, there are four types of GetKey request: two requesting the latest group key, and two requesting a specific seed key. If L0KeyID, L1KeyID, and L2KeyID are all equal to −1, the caller has requested a group key, and if they are all greater than −1, a seed key.

Further on, the documentation states:

“6. If the client is only authorized to access public keys […] compute the public key corresponding to the SK […] Return the result in the ppbOut parameter of the GetKey method […] and then exit.
“7. If the client is authorized to access seed keys […] then: 
[directions follow for returning a seed key].”

Steps 6 and 7, taken literally, seem to imply that whether to return a seed key depends only on the client’s access privileges. But that would be contrary to the earlier passage which leaves the choice up to the client — although still restricted by their privileges.

Which reading is the correct one?


More information about the cifs-protocol mailing list