[Samba] Rights issue on GPO
mathias dufresne
infractory at gmail.com
Sun Jun 26 11:50:25 UTC 2016
Le 25 juin 2016 10:30, "Rowland penny" <rpenny at samba.org> a écrit :
>
> On 24/06/16 22:08, Achim Gottinger wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 24.06.2016 um 22:35 schrieb Achim Gottinger:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 24.06.2016 um 21:24 schrieb Rowland penny:
>>>>
>>>> On 24/06/16 19:47, lingpanda101 at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/24/2016 11:40 AM, mathias dufresne wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2016-06-24 15:24 GMT+02:00 lingpanda101 at gmail.com <mailto:
lingpanda101 at gmail.com> <lingpanda101 at gmail.com <mailto:
lingpanda101 at gmail.com>>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/22/2016 12:21 PM, mathias dufresne wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2016-06-22 16:37 GMT+02:00 L.P.H. van Belle <belle at bazuin.nl
>>>>>> <mailto:belle at bazuin.nl>>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Mathias,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pretty strange then, running some years like this without
>>>>>> any problem.
>>>>>> Yes we had few problems with "rights" in sysvol, but i
>>>>>> fixed this all
>>>>>> outside linux, and with that i mean. Changed rights from
>>>>>> within windows or
>>>>>> added registry changes or patches, or a local clean up of
>>>>>> the policies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the install of my DC2 i also synced the idmap.ldb, and
>>>>>> then a
>>>>>> net idmap flush on both servers to make my both dc's in
sync.
>>>>>> And i keep it in sync with my rsync/unison setup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All new added, but i'll keep an eye also in this and i'll
>>>>>> recheck my logs.
>>>>>> But i dont think i'll find anything here.
>>>>>> I'll keep notice on your "workaround".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which backend are you using matias?
>>>>>> Mine : (idmap config NTDOMAIN : backend = ad)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gr.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Louis
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK you keep idmap.ldb synched, that's what I missed until few
>>>>>> days and was
>>>>>> the reason that is was not working.
>>>>>> Our choice to give each and users and groups into AD some xID
>>>>>> is only to
>>>>>> avoid usage of mapping. I expect the synchronization of
>>>>>> idmap.ldb (if done
>>>>>> often enough) would be sufficient. But I don't always like
>>>>>> magic : )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you for precisions !
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers all
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>>>>>> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org
>>>>>> <mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org>] Namens mathias
>>>>>>
>>>>>> dufresne
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Verzonden: woensdag 22 juni 2016 15:31
>>>>>> Aan: lingpanda101 at gmail.com
>>>>>> <mailto:lingpanda101 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> CC: samba
>>>>>> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Rights issue on GPO
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @LPH van Belle
>>>>>> I did tried (and still use) "acl_xattr:ignore system
>>>>>> acls = yes" as shown
>>>>>> on the first mail of that thread. And even using that
>>>>>> rights errors on
>>>>>>
>>>>>> GPO
>>>>>>
>>>>>> files _are_ an issue. Otherwise that thread won't
have
>>>>>> been opened of
>>>>>> course : )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding how we decided to workaround almost
>>>>>> definitively with that was
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> give every users and groups in AD some xID, also
those
>>>>>> in CN=Builtin and
>>>>>> CN=Users. We also cleaned our idmap.ldb to keep
inside
>>>>>> only special users
>>>>>> /
>>>>>> groups (as "local system" / S-1-5-18, "guests" /
>>>>>> S-1-5-32-546...).
>>>>>> We also add some rsync to keep idmap.ldb synchronized
>>>>>> on all our DC, for
>>>>>> these special items have same mapped xID in case they
>>>>>> are used (and so
>>>>>> mapped).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doing that id mapper has no reason to define by
itself
>>>>>> some xID to users
>>>>>> and groups contained into AD as they already have
some
>>>>>> xID.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Until now it seems to work fine...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2016-06-22 15:09 GMT+02:00 lingpanda101 at gmail.com
>>>>>> <mailto:lingpanda101 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> <lingpanda101 at gmail.com <mailto:
lingpanda101 at gmail.com>>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/22/2016 8:53 AM, mj wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 06/22/2016 02:44 PM,
lingpanda101 at gmail.com
>>>>>> <mailto:lingpanda101 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is is when I do a getfacl I do not
see
>>>>>> the mapping of BUILTIN
>>>>>>
>>>>>> like
>>>>>>
>>>>>> others?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> do you have winbind in /etc/nsswitch.conf?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mj
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also thought winbind was only necessary on
>>>>>> member servers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> -James
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following
>>>>>> URL and read the
>>>>>> instructions:
>>>>>> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL
>>>>>> and read the
>>>>>> instructions:
>>>>>> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and
>>>>>> read the
>>>>>> instructions:
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I assign every user a UID and select groups a GID by utilizing
>>>>>> rfc2307 on my DC's. Would I still benefit from keeping idmap.ldb
>>>>>> synchronized? I'm thinking XID's are obsolete at that point?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only users and groups in AD will avoid id mapper by that workaround.
But there are others accounts ("local system", "guest", "local
administrator"...) all these accounts exist on MS Windows clients, and so
they can all do stuff on Sysvol and so they can all go through id mapper.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So no. There no way (for me at least :) to totally avoid id mapper
and so you should keep idmap.ldb synched.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- -James
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and
read the
>>>>>> instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in the process now of creating a script to sync idmap.ldb. Does
anyone have one at the moment? Is it best practice to stop samba before
replacing idmap.ldb on the additional DC's? My script will currently watch
for any idmap.ldb changes and create a hot backup if a change is detected.
It will then send to the other DC's via rsync. I'm thinking starting and
stopping samba isn't ideal during production hours.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you are running Samba >= 4.2.0 with the separate 'winbindd' binary,
there is no reason to sync idmap.ldb. Syncing idmap was/is only required if
you use 'winbind' that is built into the 'samba' binary.
>>>>
>>>> Rowland
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hello Rowland,
>>>
>>> If you take an look on your sysvol rights there are two still unresoved
groups SECURITY\Local System and SECURITY\Autheticated Users. These show up
with gid's from idmap.ldb in the acl list and therefore can not be mapped
during rsync. So at least these two groups need idntical mapping on all
dc's. It is however not neccessary to keep idmap in sync as long as no ther
security groups are used.
>>>
>>> achim~
>>>
>> To be more specific the groups belongig to "WellKnown Security
Principals" are not mapped. I called them security groups above.
>> See here for an list:
>>
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn617202(v=ws.11).aspx#BKMK_AuthenticatedUser
>>
>
> I know all of the above, and you seem to be using fixes that had to be
used with a Samba 4 AD DC that used the 'winbind' part of the 'samba'
binary.
>
> When Samba 4.2.0 came out, 'winbind' was replaced with the separate
'winbindd' binary (the same one used on a domain member). This means that,
even though an AD object may be mapped to a number, the DC knows what AD
object that is.
>
> This means you do not need to sync idmap.ldb between DCs if you use Samba
>= 4.2.0 with the separate 'winbindd' binary.
What you wrote sounds very strange to me as we use 4.4.4, we do not specify
explicitly Samba to use winbind in place of winbindd, and we had to keep
idmap.ldb synced. Or at least we had issues until we synced it.
>
> Rowland
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
> instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
More information about the samba
mailing list