On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 14:34 +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Rob Crittenden wrote:
> >Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> >>On Thu, 26 Jul 2012, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >>>When setting up AD trusts support, ipa-adtrust-install utility
> >>>needs to be run as:
> >>>  - root, for performing Samba configuration and using LDAPI/autobind
> >>>  - kinit-ed IPA admin user, to ensure proper ACIs are granted to
> >>>    fetch keytab
> >>>
> >>>As result, we can get rid of Directory Manager credentials in
> >>>ipa-adtrust-install
> >>>
> >>>https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/2815
> >>>
> >>>This ticket also simplifies a bit the way we handle admin connection in
> >>>Service class and particulary in Service._ldap_mod() by defaulting to
> >>>LDAPI/autobind in case of running as root and to GSSAPI otherwise.
> >>>Except few cases in remote replica management (not applicable in
> >>>_ldap_mod() case) we always run installation tools as root and can
> >>>benefit from using autobind feature. Unfortunately, it is not yet
> >>>possible to get away from using DM credentials for all cases as the same
> >>>class is used to perform initial directory server instance
> >>>configuration.
> >>>
> >>>One side effect is explicit disconnect and reconnect in
> >>>Service.add_cert_to_service() due to way how SimpleLDAPObject class
> >>>handles stale connections (no handling at all). I've put some comments
> >>>in place so that others would not try to err out optimizing it in
> >>>future.
> >>>
> >>>Finally, with next patch series which will introduce syncing ipaNTHash
> >>>attribute with RC4 key in existing kerberos credentials, we can remove
> >>>requirements to change passwords or re-kinit for majority of trust
> >>>cases. This should then conclude our trusts content for beta2 release.
> >>
> >>Patch updated, fixed small typo (auth_parms was initialized as
> >>auth_params which led to non-existing auth_parms in ipa-adtrust-install
> >>case).
> >
> >Nack, a couple of minor issues:
> >
> >The exception handling is rather unusual in 
> >ensure_kerberos_admin_rights(api). I'm not sure if this is any more 
> >efficient than a series of excepts...
> I've rewrote this code and put it directly in the main.
> 
> >You don't need to pass in api, it's a global.
> Fixed.
> 
> 
> >It may be safe to see if the user is in the group the way you are 
> >doing it, I wonder if it would be clearer to cast those into DN 
> >objects.
> Not sure if checking DNs would be sustaining in long run. Ideally we
> should check ACI here, not just hardcoded group name. I'd like to keep
> it explicit with memberof for now because it shows what exactly we want
> to check.
> 
> >In the Service class what is the point of ldapi if it is going to be 
> >ignored in the case we know the realm? What if I really, really just 
> >want to use a password?
> LDAPI bind in IPAAdmin.__local_init() requires that there is realm known.
> No realm -- no LDAPI use because we otherwise cannot construct the
> socket name. For 'just want to use a password' case you can simply set
> self.dm_password.
> 
> However, I've changed the code in Service.ldap_connect() to do
> following:
> 
> 1. if DM password is provided, we'll try to use it
> 2. Otherwise, if LDAPI is asked for and realm is set, we'll use LDAPI and 
> realm
> 3. Otherwise (ldapi was False or realm not provided), we'll try to
>     connect to fqdn:389 with GSSAPI
> 
> I think this covers all cases.
> 
> >And later where it forces ldapi, it seems better to either commit all 
> >the way and drop the ldapi argument or convert it to a better name 
> >(like autobind).
> ldapi requires realm but can be used with either GSSAPI or autobind.
> Calling it autobind isn't really correct as autobind only available on
> ldapi under root.

Alexander, the realm is always available ion api.* so it seem that the
case where the realm is missing can basically never happen, and it seem
like it make no sense to explicitly check that case.

This means you'll never fall back to GSSAPI unless you also check what
user are you running as. I think we should not try ldapi unless
explicitly requested if we are not root (uid 0).

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

_______________________________________________
Freeipa-devel mailing list
Freeipa-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel

Reply via email to