On 28/01/2010 19:54, Bill Wesse wrote:
Good day Matthieu. Please note that my colleague Sebastian is out of the office 
for the next few days. In the interim, I will be your contact. Thanks in 
advance for your patience!

I have reviewed the case, and want to make sure I address any open questions. 
My current read indicates we haven't answered the below question. Could you 
confirm this is the case, and advise me of any other open questions you have?

And last but not least question, it seems that GPMC wants to have OI and CI flags on every 
ACL entries; is it due to the presence of the "SDDL_AUTO_INHERITED">control in 
the SDDL?
Well I'm not sure of this because I remember an email from Hongwei that told me that they were set because it was coded like that ...

But in fact I would like to come back to you about NT ACLs (but maybe it might be filled in another case let me know if you want to do so).
Lately I discovered that subinacl is able du dump NT ACLs in SDDL format.
I checked and it seems that the dump is ok (at least the owner is ok, the different granted users/groups are ok also).
So for instance a w2k3 server acting as a DC I have :
 c:\WINDOWS\SYSVOL\sysvol\samba.net\Policies\{6AC1786C-016F-11D2-945F-0
0C04fB984F9}
/sddl=O:BAG:SYD:PARAI(A;;0x1200a9;;;AU)(A;OICIIO;GXGR;;;AU)(A;;0x1200a9;;;SO)(A;
OICIIO;GXGR;;;SO)(A;;FA;;;BA)(A;OICIIO;GA;;;BA)(A;;FA;;;SY)(A;OICIIO;GA;;;SY)(A;
;FA;;;BA)(A;OICIIO;GA;;;CO)

It was obtained from:
subinacl.exe /file c:\WINDOWS\SYSVOL\sysvol\samba.net\Policies\{6AC1786C-016F-11D2-945F-0
0C04fB984F9} /display=sddl

But if dump the ACL of the object

CN={6AC1786C-016F-11D2-945F-00C04fB984F9},CN=Policies,CN=System,DC=Samba,DC=net

O:DAG:DAD:PAI(A;CI;RPWPCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;DA)(A;CI;RPWPCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;EA)(A;;RPWPCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;DA)(A;CIIO;RPWPCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;CO)(A;CI;RPWPCCDCLCLORCWOWDSDDTSW;;;SY)(A;CI;RPLCLORC;;;AU)(OA;CI;CR;edacfd8f-ffb3-11d1-b41d-00a0c968f939;;AU)(A;CI;RPLCLORC;;;ED)S:AI(OU;CIIDSA;WPWD;;f30e3bc2-9ff0-11d1-b603-0000f80367c1;WD)(OU;CIIOIDSA;WP;f30e3bbe-9ff0-11d1-b603-0000f80367c1;bf967aa5-0de6-11d0-a285-00aa003049e2;WD)(OU;CIIOIDSA;WP;f30e3bbf-9ff0-11d1-b603-0000f80367c1;bf967aa5-0de6-11d0-a285-00aa003049e2;WD)


So even if we remove the SACL and apply the transformation rules proposed before there is a huge difference between the file DS ACL and the associated file ACL (owner/group is different, BA is used in file ACL when DA is used in DS ACL). So it is seems that the logic is not ok (although it makes gpmc happy).

Can you explain this ? Can you take from your side dump of a fresh w2k3r2 dc (or w2k8/w2k8r2) and look for the ACL on files/dir associated with GPO and with the GPO objects as well ?

Regards.
Matthieu.

Thanks in advance!

Regards,
Bill Wesse
MCSE, MCTS / Senior Escalation Engineer, US-CSS DSC PROTOCOL TEAM
8055 Microsoft Way
Charlotte, NC 28273
Email:  [email protected]
Tel:    +1(980) 776-8200
Cell:   +1(704) 661-5438
Fax:    +1(704) 665-9606

From: Matthieu Patou [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 3:56 PM
To: Hongwei Sun
Cc: Sebastian Canevari; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: FW: [cifs-protocol] Group Policy questions

On 23/12/2009 00:47, Hongwei Sun wrote:
Matthieu,

     Your summary is a good recap of what we have done on this topic.   I have 
one clarification for the point below.

          * All ACE for allowed object are wipped out when
"translating" AD ACL to File ACL

         When translating a ACL for DS object to a ACL for SYSVOL file object,  
the ACEs with types of  ACCESS_ALLOWED_OBJECT_ACE_TYPE, 
ACCESS_DENIED_OBJECT_ACE_TYPE and SYSTEM_AUDIT_OBJECT_ACE_TYPE are not really 
deleted from the ACL.  Instead, for such a ACE, access mask in AceHeader is 
assigned to zero.

Yeah I meant that when "translating" an AD ACL to a file ACL we do not care 
about it, for all those ACCESS_ALLOWED_OBJECT_ACE_TYPE in the AD no corresponding ACE in 
created.


     Sebastian will follow up with you on your question regarding documenting 
the logic for ACE OI and CI flags.

Thanks!

Hongwei


_______________________________________________
cifs-protocol mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/cifs-protocol

Reply via email to