Hi Andrew:
Please let me know if the following document changes answer your question.

Regards,
Obaid Farooqi
Escalation Engineer | Microsoft

Exceeding your expectations is my highest priority.  If you would like to 
provide feedback on your case you may contact my manager at 
allis...@microsoft.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Obaid Farooqi 
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 4:06 PM
To: 'Andrew Bartlett'
Cc: cifs-proto...@samba.org; MSSolve Case Email
Subject: RE:[REG:111020250601482] RE: Please provide windows behaviour notes on 
MS-KILE's reference to Referrals-11

Hi Andrew:
The modifications to the document resulting from your request are now complete. 
In a future version of [MS-KILE], the following changes will be incorporated:

Section 3.2.1
------------------
The following explanation will be added at the beginning of the section:

“KILE client has the following configuration setting for non-KILE realms:
RealmCanonicalize SHOULD be initialized in an implementation specific way. 
Implementations that use the Windows registry to persistently store and 
retrieve the RealmCanonicalize variable SHOULD use the 
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa\Kerberos\Domains\<REALM>
 registry path where <REALM> is the name of the realm and RealmFlags key bit 
0x8 is set when the non-KILE realm supports canonicalization.”

Section 3.2.5.1
-------------------
The following sentence:

“Clients SHOULD set the canonicalize flag ([RFC4120] section 5.4.1).”

will be replaced by:

“Clients SHOULD set the canonicalize flag ([RFC4120] section 5.4.1 & 
[Referrals] Section 3). For non-KILE realms, if RealmCanonicalize is not set 
for the realm the client SHOULD NOT set the canonicalize flag ([RFC4120] 
section 5.4.1).“

Section 3.3.5.1
-------------------
The following sentence:

“KILE KDCs SHOULD<28> ignore the canonicalize flag except for referrals 
[Referrals-11].”

will be replaced by:

“If the canonicalize flag ([RFC4120] section 5.4.1) is set, KILE KDCs SHOULD 
return krbtgt/FQDN for the domain. KILE KDCs SHOULD canonicalize principals 
unless:
*             The canonicalize flag ([RFC4120] section 5.4.1) is not set.
*             The server principal is kadmin/changepw.
*             The account is marked as DES only.”


Section 6
-------------
The following behavior note will be removed:

“<28> Section 3.3.5.1: Windows 2000 KDCs will canonicalize the name in the 
resulting ticket, based on the name of the account that is ultimately used in 
AD.
Windows Server 2003, Windows Server 2008, and Windows Server 2008 R2 KDCs do 
not honor the canonicalize flag except for referrals [Referrals-11], and they 
do not perform any canonicalization.”


Regards,
Obaid Farooqi
Escalation Engineer | Microsoft

Exceeding your expectations is my highest priority.  If you would like to 
provide feedback on your case you may contact my manager at 
allis...@microsoft.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:abart...@samba.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 4:36 PM
To: Obaid Farooqi
Cc: cifs-proto...@samba.org; MSSolve Case Email
Subject: Re: RE:[REG:111020250601482] Please provide windows behaviour notes on 
MS-KILE's reference to Referrals-11

On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 22:20 +0000, Obaid Farooqi wrote:
> Hi Andrew:
> I am in the process of filing a document bug for this issue but in the 
> meantime here is the reason why Windows Server 2003 behaves this way and how 
> Windows KDC deals with it.
> 
> Windows Server 2003 has a test in the code that test if there is a referral 
> loop. Here is what happens:
> 
> My domain name is S4DOM.NET and the NETBIOS name is S4DOM. In this scenario, 
> due to referral, there are two TGT’s. One returned in AS Response will be 
> referred to as TGT1 and the one returned in the TGS response will be referred 
> to as TGT2. 
> For this discussion, I’ll use Sname as servicename/hostname where host name 
> is either <DNS domain name> or <NETBIOS domain name>.
> 
> Here is what happens:
> 1.    WS2k3 client sends AS Request with Realm = s4dom and Sname = 
> krbtgt/s4dom
> 2.    In AS Response, Samba KDC sends TGT1. TGT1 contains Realm = s4dom.net 
> and Sname = krbtgt/s4dom
> 3.    WS2k3 send a TGS request with Realm = s4dom and Sname = krbtgt/s4dom.net
> 4.    Samba KDC sends the TGS response that contains TGT2. In TGT2 , Realm is 
> s4dom.net and sname is krbtgt/s4dom.net
> 
> 
> Windows 2003 checks for referral loop as follows:
> 
> 
> (Realm in TGT1 == hostname in TGT2)  AND  !(hostname in TGT1 == 
> hostname in TGT2)

Just so I'm clear, hostname in your examples here is the realm component
of a krbtgt principal?   ie krbtgt/<hostname>@<REALM>?

> If the expression evaluates to TRUE, a loop is detected and the error you are 
> observing is shown to the user.
> 
> Clients of Windows Vista and onwards do not make this check.
> 
> Windows KDC deals with this situation by sending both Realm in TGT1 and 
> hostname in TGT1 the same (s4dom.net in this case). 
> This causes client to send TGS Request with Realm and hostname as s4dom.net. 
> KDC send TGS response with Realm in TGT2 being equal to hostname in TGT2 
> (s4dom.net in this case) and the expression mentioned above evaluates to 
> FALSE and no referral loop is detected.
> 
> You probably know it already, but I'll mention it just for completeness. I 
> can login by using administra...@s4dom.net on WS2k3 client when KDC is Samba.

Yep, and it gave me great relief that it wasn't something more fundamental, but 
we have some proprietary products running on Windows that seem to trigger the 
alternate login, which is what was getting us stuck. 

> I’ll update you as soon as I have the changes in the document. Please let me 
> know if it answers your question.

Thanks,

Andrew Bartlett
-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Cisco Inc.


Microsoft is committed to protecting your privacy.  Please read the Microsoft 
Privacy Statement for more information.The above is an email for a support case 
from Microsoft Corp.REPLY ALL TO THIS MESSAGE or INCLUDE casem...@microsoft.com 
IN YOUR REPLY if you want your response added to the case automatically. For 
technical assistance, please include the Support Engineer on the TO: line. 
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
cifs-protocol mailing list
cifs-protocol@cifs.org
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol

Reply via email to