search for: sids

Hi all, i read the logfiles again and again and stumbled over some lines: [2020/10/07 11:25:45.191784,? 5] ../../libcli/security/security_token.c:63(security_token_debug) ? Security token SIDs (38): ??? SID[? 0]: S-1-5-21-3542048200-3079820972-537594794-55128 ??? SID[? 1]: S-1-5-21-3542048200-3079820972-537594794-513 ??? SID[? 2]: S-1-5-21-3542048200-3079820972-537594794-211797 ??? SID[? 3]: S-1-5-21-3542048200-3079820972-537594794-92780 ??? SID[? 4]: S-1-5-21-3542048200-3079820972-...

...rce of authority') as well as a 32-bit RID (relative ID, similar to UID/GID in POSIX except it is a single 32-bit space for any and all security principals in a domain/machine) itself as its components. AFAIK the only exceptions to the rule of SID including RID as its necessary part are Service SIDs and Machine SIDs. The Service SIDs are used to manage permissions for individual services (longer than typical SID and is based on SHA1 hash of the service name) and Machine SIDs are effectively just a special case of the SID prefix without RID. That said the machine accounts in AD will have full S...

...:45.581992, 0] ../source4/auth/unix_token.c:79(security_token_to_unix_token) Unable to convert first SID (S-1-5-7) in user token to a UID. Conversion was returned as type 0, full token: [2017/01/10 13:00:45.659202, 0] ../libcli/security/security_token.c:63(security_token_debug) Security token SIDs (3): SID[ 0]: S-1-5-7 SID[ 1]: S-1-1-0 SID[ 2]: S-1-5-2 Privileges (0x 0): Rights (0x 0): [2017/01/10 13:00:46.378251, 0] ../source4/auth/unix_token.c:79(security_token_to_unix_token) Unable to convert first SID (S-1-5-21-2812428577-3463248684-241...

...spent many days working on this but no luck . please help me :( following is the log . when i try to access samba share from windows 7. [2010/07/07 12:53:44.907353, 5] auth/token_util.c:531(debug_nt_user_token) NT user token of user S-1-5-21-103778645-3415079703-3562334698-8645 contains 58 SIDs SID[ 0]: S-1-5-21-103778645-3415079703-3562334698-8645 SID[ 1]: S-1-5-21-103778645-3415079703-3562334698-513 SID[ 2]: S-1-1-0 SID[ 3]: S-1-5-2 SID[ 4]: S-1-5-11 SID[ 5]: S-1-5-21-103778645-3415079703-3562334698-1629 SID[ 6]: S-1-5-21-103778645-3415079703-3562334698-1363 SID[...

Hello guys, as subject says, i've got problem with it. And because i'm in preparation of migration of users form Samba PDC with passdb.tdb backend ot LDAP backend, i need to be 100% clear on it. I can't find the reference to it anywhere, so if anyone can point me in the right way ..? What is confusing for me? I'll explain on example: 1. Scenario: Existing Samba PDC server

Hello I have a client who historical had a machinename with an underscore in it : samba_machine I had to get rid of the underscore names and changed the name to samba-machine. At the same time I upgraded to samba-3.0.11 to get a printer queue problem resolved. Now it seems the Domain SID has changed, so I changed the new SID back to the old one with net setlocalsid, because on all machines I had

Hi all, How does this look as a general approach to a SID.create method: # Creates and initializes def self.create(authority, *sub_authorities) if sub_authorities.length > 8 raise ArgumentError, ''maximum of 8 subauthorities allowed'' end authorities = Array.new(8, 0) authorities.replace(sub_authorities) count = authorities.select{ |e| e > 0 }.size

...rce of authority') as well as a 32-bit RID (relative ID, similar to UID/GID in POSIX except it is a single 32-bit space for any and all security principals in a domain/machine) itself as its components. AFAIK the only exceptions to the rule of SID including RID as its necessary part are Service SIDs and Machine SIDs. The Service SIDs are used to manage permissions for individual services (longer than typical SID and is based on SHA1 hash of the service name) and Machine SIDs are effectively just a special case of the SID prefix without RID. That said the machine accounts in AD will have full S...

Hi all. I'm doing an upgrade from samba 3.4.8 domain to samba 4.1 I followed this guide: http://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba4/samba-tool/domain/classicupgrade/HOWTO I'm upgrading on a new virtual server (for testing purposes). Executing the command /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool domain classicupgrade --dbdir=/root/samba3/ --use-xattrs=yes /root/smb.conf (where /root/samba3/ contains

...eturn: # net getdomainsid SID for local machine MY_PDC_HOST is: S-1-5-21-4174501313-1202754954-1084205825 SID for domain MY_DOMAIN is: S-1-5-21-4174501313-1202754954-1084205825 # net getlocalsid SID for domain MY_PDC_HOST is: S-1-5-21-4174501313-1202754954-1084205825 (So, all SIDs are the same. And there is no error) The other server runs Samba 3.6.6 on Debian stable ("Wheezy"). At first, it wouldn't let me access it's shares, and SID queries returned: # net getdomainsid SID for local machine OTHER is: S-1-5-21-2241737573-1899521008-914752976...

...g_sign_pdu) > signed SMB2 message > [2017/01/31 10:08:43.323568, 4] ../source3/smbd/sec_ctx.c:316(set_sec_ctx) > setting sec ctx (5227, 513) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0 > [2017/01/31 10:08:43.323612, 5] ../libcli/security/security_token.c:63(security_token_debug) > Security token SIDs (45): > SID[ 0]: S-1-22-1-5227 > SID[ 1]: S-1-22-2-513 > SID[ 2]: S-1-5-21-12345678-123456789-868425949-35723 > SID[ 3]: S-1-5-32-551 > SID[ 4]: S-1-5-21-12345678-123456789-868425949-54195 > SID[ 5]: S-1-22-2-5923 > SID[ 6]: S-1-22-2-512 >...

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > tag 564974 + sid wheezy Bug #564974 [cyphesis-cpp] cyphesis-cpp: ftbfs with gcc-4.5 Added tag(s) wheezy. > tag 565026 + sid wheezy Bug #565026 [libfreebob] libfreebob: ftbfs with gcc-4.5 Added tag(s) wheezy. > tag 565051 + sid wheezy Bug #565051 [synopsis] synopsis: ftbfs with gcc-4.5 Added tag(s) wheezy. > tag 565068 + sid wheezy

...1-5-21-383998039-2845272951-4289691644-2061 Perms: 000F003F, SID: Perms: 10000000, SID: S-1-5-18 Perms: 000F003F, SID: S-1-5-32-544 Perms: 10000000, SID: S-1-5-32-544 Owner SID: S-1-5-32-544 Not only are the groups all wrong, but I don't even know where most of the SIDs in there came from. The S-1-5-21-383998039-2845272951-4289691644-2061 is from the old domain. The others I haven't a clue. Anyway, if I use the following syntax: profiles -c S-1-5-21-383998039-2845272951-4289691644-2061 -n S-1-5-21-725326080-1709766072-2910717368-513 /path/to/NTUSER.DAT...

After some more screwing around with leaving and rejoining the ADS domain I was finally able to access a share with "valid users =" set to a domain group I was a member of. The _only_ change I made after this was to add yet another group to the valid users on the share and restart samba...after that I could no longer access the share. I removed the additional group, restarted samba and

...ced the machine and domain sid from the new server with the old ones. But how can reuse the profiles from the old machine at the new one? If i make a simple remote copy, the settings of the users are lost, i miss my german keyboard layout and so on. I think that this is a problem regarding the sids of the users. How can i find out the sids from the old machine and how can i replace the new ones with the old ones on the new server? I tried to do it with " pdbedit -u username -G oldSID" (i retrieved the old SID from the logs, but i don't know how to generally get it), but it obvio...

IF a samba server is setup to be a domain controller, should it's local SID = the domain SID? Also, what are the requirements of a SID? I usually see S-1-5-21-x-y-z, where x,y,z = 10 digits, but could x,y,z be 1,2,3 (for example)? I.e. do they have to be 10 digit numbers or can they be shorter? If I have a simple setup, and want a sid I can remember can I just make it 'short'?

...to a network timeout, it's possible that the AD server sometimes isn't responding quickly enough. Or, the AD server could simply be returning incomplete information. Does anyone have a suggestion for how to track things down further? I really don't know much about winbind or AD or even SIDs in general. Is there much chance that this is a winbind problem, or is it more likely an AD problem? Given that I'm not going to be able to replace the AD server, might sssd work better for querying the AD server? More details: Note the different number of SIDs in this successful attempt (...

..., 4, pid=2781, effective(0, 0), real(0, 0)] ../../source3/smbd/sec_ctx.c:320(set_sec_ctx_internal) setting sec ctx (1003, 101) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0 [2020/06/05 16:40:40.672941, 5, pid=2781, effective(0, 0), real(0, 0)] ../../libcli/security/security_token.c:63(security_token Security token SIDs (15): SID[ 0]: S-1-5-21-1151667668-222068009-1375177606-1010 SID[ 1]: S-1-5-21-1151667668-222068009-1375177606-513 SID[ 2]: S-1-5-21-1151667668-222068009-1375177606-1003 SID[ 3]: S-1-5-21-1151667668-222068009-1375177606-1006 SID[ 4]: S-1-5-21-1151667668-222068009-1375177606...

...hostnew. Also there is no SID at all for the new NETBIOS name infrahost. This causes for example net getlocalsid to fail. My research suggests that the NETBIOS name SID of the PDC infrahost should be the same as the domain SID, is that correct? Also, I found an article that dealt with inconsistent SIDs; it suggested to set the NETBIOS SID to be the same as the domain SID. But this article dealt with the case that there actually _is_ a NETBIOS SID in secrets.tdb but it's not the same as the domain SID. This is not our case however since there is no SID at all for the NETBIOS name. We haven...

...rce of authority') as well as a 32-bit RID (relative ID, similar to UID/GID in POSIX except it is a single 32-bit space for any and all security principals in a domain/machine) itself as its components. AFAIK the only exceptions to the rule of SID including RID as its necessary part are Service SIDs and Machine SIDs. The Service SIDs are used to manage permissions for individual services (longer than typical SID and is based on SHA1 hash of the service name) and Machine SIDs are effectively just a special case of the SID prefix without RID. That said the machine accounts in AD will have full S...