[Samba] Re: major cifs bug in 2.6.19+?

[Jason Haar]

Akemi Yagi wrote:
> I have been using CentOS 4, CentOS 5 (with bug-fixed cifs.ko) as well as
> FC4, 5, and 6 to mount Windows shares, but have never seen the behavior
> you are experiencing.  I do use rsync to backup Windows files and it's
> been working.  What do you see with:
>
> cat /proc/fs/cifs/DebugData
>
> Or, enable cifs debugging by:
>
> echo 1 > /proc/fs/cifs/cifsFYI
>
> and see if you can collect more info in the log.
>
>   
I did as you said, and no errors showed up. I also got wireshark up -
which makes it look like a Windows problem...

I can see Linux asking for "ASG_SUPP\*" when I did an "ls -l ASG_SUPP" -
and I can see the Windows file server returning the contents of the
directory above it!!!

However - this problem isn't seen under 2.6.18 nor Windows - so even if
Windows is wrong - they're right :-/


Observe ngrep output...

##
T 10.3.0.198:55584 -> 10.3.0.134:445 [AP]
 
...f.SMB2............................$...... at ..........$.B.........%.......
 
.......\.A.S.G._.S.U.P.P.\.*...                                           
#
T 10.3.0.134:445 -> 10.3.0.198:55584 [A]
 
.....SMB2..............................`.....8...`.D.....m....I.........H..
 
......'..~[..!..N....................................0...............H.....
 
...'..~[..!..N....................................0...............P.......4
 
....Q...g.O....u...a...........................0.......A.d.m.i.n.......H...
 
......i.-......:.....B8.&"...B8.&"..................0.......A.G.....P......
 
.H....=...........2.}i...,.i.5...................1.......A.G.3.0.0.......P.
 
......p....V...........P...[.... at .....................0.......A.p.p.l.e.t.s
 
...P..........M.=............PI........5...................0.......A.p.r.i.
 
c.o.t...P.......8Zku.[...'}. at ...8Zku.[..:3.\.X..................0.......A.r
 
.c.h.i.v.e...X...............G}......o.`..v..o.`..v..................0.....
 
..A.r.c.h.i.v.e.H.o.l.d...P........#.P.=...:kw......k..l....k..l...........
 
.......1.......A.S.G._.S.U.P.P.P.........>(.=..I........B..z_...B..z_......
  ............1.......A.s.p.e.n.......P........


One new piece of information: the share that contains affected
directories also contains a directory that is mapped via DFS to another
server. I have just checked, and actually ALL subdirs are affected by
this bug.

i.e.


//server/share contains 74 subdirectories: attempts to do listings on
any of those directories results in the same list of 74 top-level
subdirs again.

So maybe this problem only hits servers with DFS enabled? But it works
under 2.6.18...?

Help?

-- 
Cheers

Jason Haar
Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd.
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1