There's enough info in the capture data provided to tell me the answer to the jcifs lmCompatibility question, I think. I'd still like to know the answer to question (2) though.
Thanks! Karl On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Karl Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes - and more information too: > > (1) I need to know some details about how jcifs is being used when it > is successful. Specifically, the question is whether you supply any > -D jcifs configuration switches. If *no* switches or system property > overrides are being supplied, that is also useful. Specifically, I'm > looking for this one: > > LM_COMPATIBILITY = Config.getInt("jcifs.smb.lmCompatibility", 3); > > (2) I have tested the HttpClient NTLM code with all the local and > domain security policies available on an Windows 2008 R2 setup, and > found that it works on all. I will need to know what domain > controller authentication policies have been selected to produce a > failure. > > Karl > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> wrote: >> Karl >> >> Do you think these captures could be useful? It appears we have another >> case where JCIFS works while our internal NTLM engine does not. >> >> Oleg >> >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> From: Jason Millard <[email protected]> >> Reply-to: "HttpClient User Discussion" <[email protected]> >> To: HttpClient User Discussion <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: NTLM issues with 4.2.3 >> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 11:44:44 -0500 >> >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Wed, 2013-02-13 at 16:15 -0500, Jason Millard wrote: >>>> Hello. >>>> >>>> I've been using previous versions of HttpClient forever using the >>>> JCIFSEngine. I wanted to give 4.2.3 a try to see if it solved my >>>> issues, but unfortunately I'm having the same problems. >>>> >>>> I was able to turn on debug logging and compare outputs. It's almost >>>> identical except for my final 200 vs 401 status code. Of course the >>>> type 1, 2, 3 messages have different signatures. >>>> >>>> Since the messages have addresses that I don't really want public, I >>>> was wondering the best way to get help debugging. >>>> >>>> 2013/02/13 16:09:22:817 EST [DEBUG] headers - >> User-Agent: >>>> Apache-HttpClient/4.2.3 (java 1.5) >>>> 2013/02/13 16:09:22:817 EST [DEBUG] headers - >> Authorization: NTLM xxxxxx >>>> 2013/02/13 16:09:22:928 EST [DEBUG] wire - << "HTTP/1.1 401 >>>> Unauthorized[\r][\n]" >>>> 2013/02/13 16:09:22:929 EST [DEBUG] wire - << "Content-Length: >>>> 1539[\r][\n]" >>>> 2013/02/13 16:09:22:929 EST [DEBUG] wire - << "Content-Type: >>>> text/html[\r][\n]" >>>> 2013/02/13 16:09:22:929 EST [DEBUG] wire - << "Server: >>>> Microsoft-IIS/6.0[\r][\n]" >>>> 2013/02/13 16:09:22:929 EST [DEBUG] wire - << "WWW-Authenticate: NTLM >>>> xxxxxx" >>>> 2013/02/13 16:09:22:929 EST [DEBUG] wire - << >>>> "MicrosoftSharePointTeamServices: 12.0.0.6520[\r][\n]" >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -- Jason >>>> >>> >>> Hi Jason >>> >>> Only Wireshark packet captures would be meaningful given Wireshark's >>> ability to decompose NTLM messages into more readable data structures. >>> If you are not willing or able to publish those there is not really much >>> we can do just having wire logs with all NTLM blobs stripped away. >>> >>> Oleg >>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> >> >> Hello. >> >> Thanks for the response. I understand. I'm not "not willing", just unable. >> >> Attached are edited Wireshark packet dissections (one with and one >> without JCIFS) with the NTLM information. I'm guessing this might not >> be enough information. >> >> -- Jason >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
