search for: ntlmauthenticate

Hi Guys, I have been running squid with AD authentication and security group authentication for the last 6 months, and suddenly squid failed with the following error message (squid): Too many queued ntlmauthenticator requests. (I tried to start squid in a off peak time there were only 35 users, still it says Too many queued ntlmauthenticator requests. What can cause this issue ? Iam using

Hi, I recently upgraded samba from 3.0.11 3.0.20. It's integrated with squid 2.5 STABLE 7 with patches for NTLM bugs. I am facing problem with NTLM authentication. The browser hangs and I get following error in log.winbindd [2005/09/02 13:53:10, 0] nsswitch/winbindd.c:process_loop(803) winbindd: Exceeding 200 client connections, no idle connection found [2005/09/02 13:53:10, 0]

Hi!! We have two squid proxies running at our site, both of them with the same versions and configurations (Fedora Core 5, Samba 3.0.22-1.fc5, installed through rpm, and Squid 2.5.STABLE13. Both are running on Dell servers with the same configuration. Samba on both machines is configured with "security = ads", and the testes "wbinfo -t", "wbinfo -u" and

...: 000000 NTLMRevisionCurrent : NTLMSSP_REVISION_W2K3 (0xF) Got challenge flags: NTLMSSP: Set final flags: Got NTLMSSP neg_flags=0x60088215 authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE Signature : 'NTLMSSP' MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponse : * LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE(case 24) v1: struct LM_RESPONSE Response : 1845a8c3bc8a...

...: 0x00 (0) secure_channel_type : SEC_CHAN_WKSTA (2) ... negotiate: struct NEGOTIATE_MESSAGE ... challenge: struct CHALLENGE_MESSAGE ... authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE Signature : 'NTLMSSP' MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponse : * LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE(case 24) v1: struct LM_RESPONSE Response : fb3bc06d202c...

...) > [2019/10/15 07:06:26.589905, 1, pid=12457, effective(0, 0), real(0, 0), class=rpc_parse] ../../librpc/ndr/ndr.c:422(ndr_print_debug) > authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE > Signature : 'NTLMSSP' > MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) > LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0000 (0) > LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0000 (0) > LmChallengeResponse : * > LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE_with_len(case 0) > NtChallengeResponseLen : 0x0000 (0...

...TLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_SIGN NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_NTLM NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_ALWAYS_SIGN NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_NTLM2 NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_128 NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_KEY_EXCH &authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE Signature : 'NTLMSSP' MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponse : * LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE(case 24) v1: struct LM_RESPONSE Response : 078e8...

...MSSP_REVISION_W2K3 (0xF) [2019/10/15 07:06:26.589905, 1, pid=12457, effective(0, 0), real(0, 0), class=rpc_parse] ../../librpc/ndr/ndr.c:422(ndr_print_debug) authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE Signature : 'NTLMSSP' MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0000 (0) LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0000 (0) LmChallengeResponse : * LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE_with_len(case 0) NtChallengeResponseLen : 0x0000 (0) NtChallengeRespons...

...#39;0x559ba5a8'. 2003/09/03 08:15:40| authenticateValidateUser: Validating Auth_user request '0x559ba5a8'. 2003/09/03 08:15:40| authenticateValidateUser: Validated Auth_user request '0x559ba5a8'. 2003/09/03 08:15:40| User not fully authenticated. 2003/09/03 08:15:40| authenticateNTLMAuthenticateUser: auth state ntlm none. NTLM TlRMTVNTUAABAAAAB7IAoAwADAAoAAAACAAIACAAAABCQzAwNjc4NFRDU19NQUlOX0RPTX== 2003/09/03 08:15:40| authenticateNTLMAuthenticateUser: Locking auth_user from the connection. 2003/09/03 08:15:40| authenticateAuthUserRequestLock auth_user request '0x559ba5a8'. 2003/09...

...GET NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_SIGN NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_NTLM NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_ALWAYS_SIGN NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_NTLM2 NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_128 NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_KEY_EXCH authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE Signature : 'NTLMSSP' MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponse : * LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE(case 24) v1: struct LM_RESPONSE Response : de06e6edc827...

...OTIATE_NTLM > NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_ALWAYS_SIGN > NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_NTLM2 > NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_128 > NTLMSSP_NEGOTIATE_KEY_EXCH > authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE > Signature : 'NTLMSSP' > MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) > LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0018 (24) > LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0018 (24) > LmChallengeResponse : * > LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE(case 24) > v1: struct LM_RESPONSE > Res...

..._len = 8 req->out.vector[4].iov_len = 0 [2020/08/26 09:53:02.427493, 1, pid=2553, effective(0, 0), real(0, 0)] ../librpc/ndr/ndr.c:419(ndr_print_debug) authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE Signature : 'NTLMSSP' MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponse : * LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE(case 24) v1: struct LM_RESPONSE Response :...

Mandi! Rowland penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > Even though your users may have the same username in AD as in the NT4-style > domain, they are different users, so a few thoughts. You have 'map to guest > = bad user', so I take it you must have 'guest ok = yes' set in the shares > (you haven't shown us the shares), so try changing 'bad user' to

...78(_dump_data) [0000] AB 80 24 ED 76 F6 D3 DD ..$.v... [2011/01/21 09:50:41.281560, 1] ../librpc/ndr/ndr.c:214(ndr_print_debug) &authenticate: struct AUTHENTICATE_MESSAGE Signatu : 'NTLMSSP' MessageType : NtLmAuthenticate (3) LmChallengeResponseLen : 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponseMaxLen: 0x0018 (24) LmChallengeResponse : * LmChallengeResponse : union ntlmssp_LM_RESPONSE(case 24) v1: struct LM_RESPONSE Response :...

Hello, I have a question because POSIX ACL with SMB2 max protocol does not work properly.Did you test VFS xattr acls with SMB2 max protocol? Is it working corectly? Best regards/Adrian Berlin --