ctdb in autobuild broken -- ctdb depends on winbind now????

[Andreas Schneider]

On Monday, 9 January 2017 17:30:52 CET Michael Adam wrote:
> On 2017-01-09 at 14:08 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> > On Friday, 6 January 2017 11:53:16 CET Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > > Quick update: If I run
> > > 
> > > make test TESTS=samba.blackbox.wbinfo
> > > 
> > > locally, I get two unexpected successes.
> > > 
> > > Some tests are designed to fail and now succeed when running isolated.
> > > Some tests are designed to succeed and now fail when running in the full
> > > run.
> > > 
> > > If I look at selftest/knownfail, I see
> > > 
> > > # These do not work against winbindd in member mode for unknown reasons
> > 
> > Yes, that the test running against the s4member target. I don't really
> > know
> > what a s4member is or means. However it seems to be broken!
> > 
> > $ bin/wbinfo --user-groups "SAMBADOMAIN/administrator"
> > 3000000
> > 3000001
> > $ bin/wbinfo --gid-to-sid 3000000
> > S-1-5-21-2767970802-1178991037-3063653489-500

Here is the gid to sid

> > $ bin/wbinfo --sid-to-name S-1-5-21-2767970802-1178991037-3063653489-500
> > SAMBADOMAIN/administrator 1
> > $ bin/wbinfo -g
> > SAMBADOMAIN/allowed rodc password replication group
> > SAMBADOMAIN/enterprise read-only domain controllers
> > SAMBADOMAIN/denied rodc password replication group
> > SAMBADOMAIN/read-only domain controllers
> > SAMBADOMAIN/group policy creator owners
> > SAMBADOMAIN/ras and ias servers
> > SAMBADOMAIN/domain controllers
> > SAMBADOMAIN/enterprise admins
> > SAMBADOMAIN/domain computers
> > SAMBADOMAIN/cert publishers
> > SAMBADOMAIN/dnsupdateproxy
> > SAMBADOMAIN/domain admins
> > SAMBADOMAIN/domain guests
> > SAMBADOMAIN/schema admins
> > SAMBADOMAIN/domain users
> > SAMBADOMAIN/dnsadmins
> > $ bin/wbinfo --name-to-sid "SAMBADOMAIN/administrator"
> > S-1-5-21-2767970802-1178991037-3063653489-500 SID_USER (1)


This sid is a user sid ...

> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > $ bin/wbinfo --user-groups "SAMBADOMAIN/administrator"
> > 
> > lists 300000, which is the uid from Administrtor, as a gid!
> 
> Yes? I don't thing this per se is a problem...
> 
> The same numerical value can be used both for a UID
> and a GID in a unix system. (On most Linux distros
> you get a Group of the same nam and ID value as the
> default group for a newly created user...)
> 
> Above you showed that the admin user (ID 300000) has a
> group of GID 300000 in its unix group list. But this could
> even resolve to one of the domain groups (like domain admins).
> (WHat does "wbinfo --gid-to-sid 300000" give?

A USER_SID, see above ...

> 
> This could also be sambadomain/administrator, viewed as
> a group in the unix world. Wih the ID_TYPE_BOTH mapping
> this can even be achieved in Samba. And i think this
> may be quite normal in the AD/DC setup (with passdb_dsdb
> and most id mapping going though passdb..).


> Let me ask again: Is this a problem?

I dunno, the test tells us that before this test was expected to fail. Now the 
test returns the uid of Administrator and the GID of Domain Users. We do not 
have a Group name Administrator. At least I don't see one in 'wbinfo -g'

> You pasted some output of wbinfo --user-groups that came
> unexpected to you, but is it really breaking anything?
> I think this is expected in the AD environment.

I do not expect a uid to be returned if I ask for gids ...


	Andreas

-- 
Andreas Schneider                   GPG-ID: CC014E3D
Samba Team                             asn at samba.org
www.samba.org