[Bug 1722936] Re: sssd hbac rule applicaton for AD users is inconsistent
Andreas Hasenack
andreas at canonical.com
Thu Feb 7 20:08:34 UTC 2019
** Description changed:
[Impact]
+ From the upstream bug at https://pagure.io/SSSD/sssd/issue/3382:
+ """
+ In IPA-AD trust environment, sssd is intermittently failing to map AD user
+ group with IPA POSIX group hence getting access denied due to HBAC rules. The issue gets resolved automatically after certain time, without restarting the sssd service. i.e:
- * An explanation of the effects of the bug on users and
+ The IPA HBAC code used to read the group members from the the
+ originalMemberOf attribute value for performance reasons. However,
+ especially on IPA clients trusting an AD domain, the originalMemberOf
+ attribute value is often not synchronized correctly.
+ """
- * justification for backporting the fix to the stable release.
-
- * In addition, it is helpful, but not required, to include an
- explanation of how the upload fixes this bug.
[Test Case]
+ Coming up with a simple test case is not feasable. Even upstream wasn't able to reliably reproduce the issue in a controlled manner. My best suggestion is for affected users to try the updated package and observe if the incorrect access denied error stops happening.
- * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug
-
- * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected
- package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes
- the problem.
+ This involves setting up an AD server, a FreeIPA one, creating trust
+ between them, and nested groups and HBAC rules. Upstream's description
+ of such a scenario is at
+ https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/309#issuecomment-318037063
[Regression Potential]
-
- * discussion of how regressions are most likely to manifest as a result
- of this change.
-
- * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before
- upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important
- to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the
- event of a regression.
-
- * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered,
- and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU.
+ The patch changes how group membership in this scenario is computed. It's a complex setup, and we are relying on a) patch has been applied upstream and backported to 1.13; b) user who reported this bug confirmed it fixed the issue with a custom build he did; c) upstream test suite passed; d) dep8 tests (new with this SRU) also pass.
[Other Info]
-
- * Anything else you think is useful to include
- * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board
- * and address these questions in advance
-
+ The scenario where the bug happens is too complex to reproduce in a test case, but does happen out in the wild according to this report and also in upstream's bug tracker. I decided to add the DEP8 tests to this update as well to give extra confidence in this and future updates, even though it doesn't exercise this bug in particular.
[Original Description]
NAME="Ubuntu"
VERSION="16.04.3 LTS (Xenial Xerus)"
sssd Version: 1.13.4-1ubuntu1.8
I'm sometimes seeing AD users denied access to a machine due to HBAC
access rules:
(Tue Oct 3 04:11:09 2017) [sssd[be[nwra.com]]]
[ipa_hbac_evaluate_rules] (0x0080): Access denied by HBAC rules
Upstream suggest applying this commit:
https://pagure.io/SSSD/sssd/c/88f6d8ad4eef4b4fa032fd451ad732cf8201b0bf
That was made on the 1.13 branch but not yet released. More here:
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/sssd-
users at lists.fedorahosted.org/message/YIHC2C6JDNQLYMW7K7IXQKKIIRMO3QER/
I'm currently testing out a local package with this patch.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1722936
Title:
sssd hbac rule applicaton for AD users is inconsistent
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sssd/+bug/1722936/+subscriptions
More information about the Ubuntu-server-bugs
mailing list