search for: smb2_signing_sign_pdu

...unix_mode) > unix_mode(digicam pictures/events/PHD Defences) returning 0770 > [2017/01/31 10:08:32.322337, 3] ../source3/smbd/dosmode.c:196(unix_mode) > unix_mode(digicam pictures/events/PHD Defences) returning 0760 > [2017/01/31 10:08:32.322387, 5] ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:92(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) > signed SMB2 message > [2017/01/31 10:08:32.322903, 4] ../source3/smbd/uid.c:384(change_to_user) > Skipping user change - already user > [2017/01/31 10:08:32.322941, 5] ../lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:178(dbwrap_check_lock_order) > check lock order 1 for /var/cache/samba/locking.tdb...

...16:42:23.869296, 3] ../../source3/smbd/smb2_server.c:3274(smbd_smb2_request_error_ex) smbd_smb2_request_error_ex: smbd_smb2_request_error_ex: idx[1] status[NT_STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER] || at ../../source3/smbd/smb2_ioctl.c:312 [2020/05/20 16:42:23.869317, 5] ../../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:174(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) signed SMB2 message [2020/05/20 16:42:23.869547, 5] ../../source3/smbd/uid.c:326(change_to_user_impersonate) change_to_user_impersonate: Skipping user change - already user [2020/05/20 16:42:23.869573, 5] ../../source3/smbd/uid.c:298(print_impersonation_info) print_impersonation_info: Impe...

Thanks for the suggestions! > The latter is easiest to deal with, replace it with a CNAME in the AD dns. I did the CNAME, but when I remove the netbios alias I can see the shares list when accessing \\aliasname, but then I'm not allowed into any of them. I tried rebooting the client but same result, and I also don't see anything in the logs :( > The first will require a bit more

...ck lock order 1 for /tmp/samba/smbXsrv_session_global.tdb [2019/09/25 15:01:46.695371, 5] ../lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:159(dbwrap_lock_order_unlock) dbwrap_lock_order_unlock: release lock order 1 for /tmp/samba/smbXsrv_session_global.tdb [2019/09/25 15:01:46.695622, 5] ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:93(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) signed SMB2 message [2019/09/25 15:01:47.845994, 0] ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:171(smb2_signing_check_pdu) Bad SMB2 signature for message [2019/09/25 15:01:47.846405, 0] ../lib/util/util.c:514(dump_data) [0000] 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........ ........ [2019/0...

...to do the access checks. Then it checks the open request using the current process token against the NT ACL to decide whether to allow access. > Also, the line: > > [2016/11/14 12:49:21.964411, 5, pid=28398, effective(2310, 2049), > real(2310, 0)] > ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:92(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) > > How is the real different from the effective on a simple unix file? These come from the current uid/gid of the process - constructed here: ", effective(%u, %u), real(%u, %u)", (unsigned int)geteuid(), (unsigned int)getegid(),...

Hi Andrew, If I give register user as vignesh/guest, its working fine. While selecting the Guest radio button, guest user is not working. Guest user is working fine without AD connection. Kindly do the needful. Thanks, Vignesh. On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 4:28 PM Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2019-09-25 at 16:24 +0530, VigneshDhanraj G via samba wrote: > >

...8912, 5] ../source3/libsmb/namequery.c:210(saf_fetch) saf_fetch: failed to find server for "B" domain [2017/05/04 13:09:54.029028, 5] ../source3/rpc_client/cli_pipe.c:826(rpc_api_pipe_send) rpc_api_pipe: host dc1.a.com [2017/05/04 13:09:54.029070, 5] ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:93(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) signed SMB2 message [2017/05/04 13:09:54.029782, 5] ../source3/rpc_client/cli_pipe.c:98(rpc_read_send) rpc_read_send: data_to_read: 456 [2017/05/04 13:09:54.029841, 6] ../librpc/rpc/dcerpc_util.c:173(dcerpc_pull_auth_trailer) ../librpc/rpc/dcerpc_util.c:173: auth_pad_length 0 [2017/05/04 1...

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:38:52AM -0500, Josh Malone via samba wrote: > All, > > Apologies for basically bumping my own thread, but I'm absolutely at > my wits' end trying to figure out this access problem. I've > replicated the issue with and without NFS being involved. On our old > 4.0.25 server, users can write to files that they have group-based > write

...ver.c:874(smb2_set_operation_credit) > smb2_set_operation_credit: requested 1, charge 1, granted 1, current possible/max 482/512, total granted/max/low/range 31/8192/4/31 > [2014/02/03 10:01:15.823393, 5, pid=13235, effective(3000029, 100), real(3000029, 0)] ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:92(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) > signed SMB2 message > *** glibc detected *** /usr/sbin/smbd: free(): invalid next size (fast): 0x00007ffd9b7f7160 *** > ======= Backtrace: ========= > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x76d76)[0x7ffd9707dd76] > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(cfree+0x6c)[0x7ffd97082aac] > /us...

...order) check lock order 1 for /var/samba/lock/smbXsrv_tcon_global.tdb [2018/01/04 11:42:32.080907, 5] ../lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:145(dbwrap_lock_order_state_destructor) release lock order 1 for /var/samba/lock/smbXsrv_tcon_global.tdb [2018/01/04 11:42:32.080960, 5] ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:93(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) signed SMB2 message [2018/01/04 11:42:39.182065, 4] ../source3/smbd/sec_ctx.c:320(set_sec_ctx_internal) <snip> >From log file for unsuccessful user: <snip> [2018/01/02 07:59:32.253188, 3] ../source3/smbd/service.c:536(make_connection_snum) Connect path is '/departments/-1...

...file permissions are though. Am I mis-reading this or is Samba getting permissions some other way. This is a purely Unix filesystem - there should be no NTFS ACLs. Also, the line: [2016/11/14 12:49:21.964411, 5, pid=28398, effective(2310, 2049), real(2310, 0)] ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:92(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) How is the real different from the effective on a simple unix file? Thanks again, -Josh -- -------------------------------------------------------- Joshua Malone Systems Administrator (jmalone at nrao.edu) NRAO Charlottesville 434-296-0263 www.nrao.e...

...checks the open request using the > current process token against the NT ACL to decide whether to > allow access. > >> Also, the line: >> >> [2016/11/14 12:49:21.964411, 5, pid=28398, effective(2310, 2049), >> real(2310, 0)] >> ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:92(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) >> >> How is the real different from the effective on a simple unix file? > > These come from the current uid/gid of the process - constructed > here: > > ", effective(%u, %u), real(%u, %u)", > (unsigned int)ge...

...ut AD connection. Andrew said: server signing as mandatory makes no sense with a guest connection, where there is no password with which to secure the session. Which is okay as far as it goes. Your client seems to be using SMBv2: [2019/09/25 15:01:46.695622, 5]../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:93(smb2_signing_sign_pdu)? signed SMB2 message And 'man smb.conf' has this to say about 'server signing': This controls whether the client is allowed or required to use SMB1 and SMB2 signing. Possible values are default, auto, mandatory and disabled. By default, and when smb signing is set to default,...

...rver signing as mandatory makes no sense with a guest connection, > where there is no password with which to secure the session. > > Which is okay as far as it goes. > > Your client seems to be using SMBv2: > > [2019/09/25 15:01:46.695622, > 5]../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:93(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) signed SMB2 > message > > And 'man smb.conf' has this to say about 'server signing': > > This controls whether the client is allowed or required to use SMB1 and > SMB2 signing. Possible values are default, auto, mandatory and disabled. > > By default, and w...

...k order 1 for /run/samba/smbXsrv_tcon_global.tdb [2024/01/30 23:48:22.301741,? 5] ../../lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:178(dbwrap_lock_order_unlock) ? dbwrap_lock_order_unlock: release lock order 1 for /run/samba/smbXsrv_tcon_global.tdb [2024/01/30 23:48:22.301762,? 5] ../../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:173(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) ? signed SMB2 message ......etc............ Here it denies permission (disregard the clock, collected it from different parts of the log file): [2024/01/30 23:41:10.198795,? 4] ../../source3/smbd/sec_ctx.c:319(set_sec_ctx_internal) ? setting sec ctx (1000, 1000) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0 [20...

...lock order 1 for /var/lib/samba/lock/smbXsrv_session_global.tdb [2018/02/21 14:26:38.854334, 5] ../lib/dbwrap/dbwrap.c:127(dbwrap_lock_order_state_destructor) release lock order 1 for /var/lib/samba/lock/smbXsrv_session_global.tdb [2018/02/21 14:26:38.854369, 5] ../libcli/smb/smb2_signing.c:93(smb2_signing_sign_pdu) signed SMB2 message [2018/02/21 14:26:38.855089, 4] ../source3/smbd/sec_ctx.c:321(set_sec_ctx_internal) setting sec ctx (0, 0) - sec_ctx_stack_ndx = 0 [2018/02/21 14:26:38.855165, 5] ../libcli/security/security_token.c:53(security_token_debug) Security token: (NULL) [2018/02/21 14:26:38.85...

Ok. I've done the following, any samba dev, please read below. Looks to me some bug in librpc/ndr/ndr.c But im not a coder.. so please have a look.     Environment. Debian Jessie, samba 4.2.10 (debian)   I remove my proxy2 server from the domain, cleared up the AD. Removed all content from /var/(lib/cache)/samba Removed all other unnneeded services for this test. Removed all

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 --