On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 09:40:25PM +0100, Mark Phalan wrote:
>
> On 3 Mar 2008, at 21:04, Will Fiveash wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 08:39:51PM +0100, Mark Phalan wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3 Mar 2008, at 20:21, Will Fiveash wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 01:43:40PM +0100, Mark Phalan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 15:25 -0600, Will Fiveash wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark, I know this is a late response so you don't have to deal with it
>>>>>> in this putback but don't you think,
>>>>>> *Change Request ID*: 6245750
>>>>>> *Synopsis*: kadmin "Bad encryption type" error should state the 
>>>>>> enctype
>>>>>> should also be a part of it?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it could be, I took a look at this last night and came up with
>>>>> the following:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Old behaviour:
>>>>>
>>>>> Mar 02 20:12:17 zup kadmind[2324](Notice): Request:
>>>>> kadm5_randkey_principal, t at ACME.COM, Bad encryption type,
>>>>> client=mark/admin at ACME.COM, service=kadmin at zup.czech.sun.com, addr=
>>>>> (10.4.193.194)
>>>>>
>>>>> soe-280r-4# kadmin -p mark/admin -q "ktadd -k /tmp/t t"
>>>>> Authenticating as principal mark/admin with password.
>>>>> Password for mark/admin at ACME.COM:
>>>>> kadmin: Bad encryption type while changing t's key
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> New behaviour:
>>>>>
>>>>> Mar 02 21:00:38 zup kadmind[11939](Notice): Request:
>>>>> kadm5_randkey_principal, t at ACME.COM, Unknown encryption type: 18,
>>>>> client=mark/admin at ACME.COM, service=kadmin at zup.czech.sun.com, addr=
>>>>> (10.4.193.194)
>>>>>
>>>>> zup#  ./kadmin -p mark/admin -q "ktadd -k /tmp/t p"
>>>>> Authenticating as principal mark/admin with password.
>>>>> Password for mark/admin at ACME.COM:
>>>>> kadmin: Bad encryption type while changing p's key
>>>>> kadmin: Encryption types requested: 18, 17, 16, 23, 3, 1
>>
>> Can the client print the enctype names that it requested?  I understand
>> your point below that the server isn't sending the enctype(s) that it
>> had problems with but the client should be able to map the enctypes it
>> requested to names.

What do you think about my point above?

>>>>> Unfortunately I don't think it would be trivial to have the client
>>>>> print out the encryption type that caused the server to reject the
>>>>> request.  It would require that the server provide more
>>>>> information than the error code when failing. This sort of change
>>>>> would require a protocol change (I think).

-- 
Will Fiveash
Sun Microsystems Inc.
Austin, TX, USA (TZ=CST6CDT)

Reply via email to