Jakub Hrozek <jhro...@redhat.com> írta:
>On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 07:25:17AM +0200, Molnár Domokos wrote:
>> On 09/14/2015 03:08 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
>> >On 09/11/2015 02:40 PM, Molnár Domokos wrote:
>>
>> >>Full log attached.
>> >>"Molnár Domokos" <kret...@freemail.hu> írta:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Pavel Březina" <pbrez...@redhat.com> írta:
>> >>
>> >> On 09/09/2015 09:31 PM, Molnár Domokos wrote:
>> >> > I have a working IPA server and a working client config on an
>> >> OpenSuse
>> >> > 13.2 with the following versions:
>> >> > nappali:~ # rpm -qa |grep sssd
>> >> > sssd-tools-1.12.2-3.4.1.i586
>> >> > sssd-krb5-1.12.2-3.4.1.i586
>> >> > python-sssd-config-1.12.2-3.4.1.i586
>> >> > sssd-ipa-1.12.2-3.4.1.i586
>> >> > sssd-1.12.2-3.4.1.i586
>> >> > sssd-dbus-1.12.2-3.4.1.i586
>> >> > sssd-krb5-common-1.12.2-3.4.1.i586
>> >> > sssd-ldap-1.12.2-3.4.1.i586
>> >> > sssd is confihured for nss, pam, sudo
>> >> > There is a test sudo rule defined in the ipa server, which
>> >> applies to
>> >> > user "doma". However when the user tries to use sudo the rule
>> >> does not
>> >> > work.
>> >> > doma@nappali:/home/doma> sudo ls
>> >> > doma's password:
>> >> > doma is not allowed to run sudo on nappali. This incident will
>> >> be reported.
>> >> > The corresponding log in the sssd_sudo.log is this:
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]] [sss_cmd_get_version]
>> >> (0x0200):
>> >> > Received client version [1].
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]] [sss_cmd_get_version]
>> >> (0x0200):
>> >> > Offered version [1].
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> [sss_parse_name_for_domains]
>> >> > (0x0200): name 'doma' matched without domain, user is
>> >> doma
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> [sss_parse_name_for_domains]
>> >> > (0x0200): name 'doma' matched without domain, user is
>> >> doma
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> [sudosrv_cmd_parse_query_done]
>> >> > (0x0200): Requesting default options for [doma] from [<ALL>]
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]] [sudosrv_get_user]
>> >> (0x0200):
>> >> > Requesting info about [doma@szilva]
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> > [sudosrv_get_sudorules_query_cache] (0x0200): Searching sysdb
>> >> with
>> >> >
>> >> [(&(objectClass=sudoRule)(|(sudoUser=ALL)(name=defaults)(sudoUser=doma)(sudoUser=#1816400003)(sudoUser=%ipausers)(sudoUser=%picture_access)(sudoUser=%doma)(sudoUser=+*))(&(dataExpireTimestamp<=1441826725)))]
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> > [sudosrv_get_sudorules_query_cache] (0x0200): Searching sysdb
>> >> with
>> >> > [(&(objectClass=sudoRule)(|(name=defaults)))]
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> [sss_parse_name_for_domains]
>> >> > (0x0200): name 'doma' matched without domain, user is
>> >> doma
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> [sss_parse_name_for_domains]
>> >> > (0x0200): name 'doma' matched without domain, user is
>> >> doma
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> [sudosrv_cmd_parse_query_done]
>> >> > (0x0200): Requesting rules for [doma] from [<ALL>]
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]] [sudosrv_get_user]
>> >> (0x0200):
>> >> > Requesting info about [doma@szilva]
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> > [sudosrv_get_sudorules_query_cache] (0x0200): Searching sysdb
>> >> with
>> >> >
>> >> [(&(objectClass=sudoRule)(|(sudoUser=ALL)(name=defaults)(sudoUser=doma)(sudoUser=#1816400003)(sudoUser=%ipausers)(sudoUser=%picture_access)(sudoUser=%doma)(sudoUser=+*))(&(dataExpireTimestamp<=1441826725)))]
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:25 2015) [sssd[sudo]]
>> >> > [sudosrv_get_sudorules_query_cache] (0x0200): Searching sysdb
>> >> with
>> >> >
>> >> [(&(objectClass=sudoRule)(|(sudoUser=ALL)(sudoUser=doma)(sudoUser=#1816400003)(sudoUser=%ipausers)(sudoUser=%picture_access)(sudoUser=%doma)(sudoUser=+*)))]
>> >> > (Wed Sep 9 21:25:30 2015) [sssd[sudo]] [client_recv] (0x0200):
>> >> Client
>> >> > disconnected!
>> >> > This seems perfectly OK with one exception. The query against
>> >> the sysdb
>> >> > does not find the entry. This is strange because the entry is
>> >> there.
>> >> > Log in sssd.log:
>> >> > (Wed Sep 2 08:52:13 2015) [sssd] [sysdb_domain_init_internal]
>> >> (0x0200):
>> >> > DB File for szilva: /var/lib/sss/db/cache_szilva.ldb
>> >> > So we know that the sysdb is /var/lib/sss/db/cache_szilva.ldb
>> >> > Running the exact same query seen above in the sssd_sudo.log
>> >> against the
>> >> > db returns:
>> >> > ldbsearch -H /var/lib/sss/db/cache_szilva.ldb
>> >> >
>> >> "(&(objectClass=sudoRule)(|(sudoUser=ALL)(sudoUser=doma)(sudoUser=#1816400003)(sudoUser=%ipausers)(sudoUser=%picture_access)(sudoUser=%doma)(sudoUser=+*)))"
>> >> > asq: Unable to register control with rootdse!
>> >> > # record 1
>> >> > dn: name=Doma_ls,cn=sudorules,cn=custom,cn=szilva,cn=sysdb
>> >> > cn: Doma_ls
>> >> > dataExpireTimestamp: 1441830262
>> >> > entryUSN: 20521
>> >> > name: Doma_ls
>> >> > objectClass: sudoRule
>> >> > originalDN: cn=Doma_ls,ou=sudoers,dc=szilva
>> >> > sudoCommand: ls
>> >> > sudoHost: nappali.szilva
>> >> > sudoRunAsGroup: ALL
>> >> > sudoRunAsUser: ALL
>> >> > sudoUser: doma
>> >> > distinguishedName:
>> >> name=Doma_ls,cn=sudorules,cn=custom,cn=szilva,cn=sysdb
>> >> > # returned 1 records
>> >> > # 1 entries
>> >> > # 0 referrals
>> >> > This confirms that the entry is indeed there in the db. Why is
>> >> it found
>> >> > with ldbsearch and why does sssd_sudo not find it?
>> >> > I am pretty much stuck with this one. Anyone has an idea?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >> this is strange. Can you provide the logs with debug level set to
>> >> 0x3ff0
>> >>
>> >> please? Can you also send it as an attachment? Thanks!
>> >>
>> >> Sure. Here it is. Now I can see that the rule is returned. The
>> >> question is why the rule does not match. Anyway much better :)
>>
>> >
>> >Hi, thanks for the logs. Since the rule is returned, we will get more
>> >information from sudo logs. Can you please enable sudo logging by putting
>> >the following line into /etc/sudo.conf?
>> >
>> >Debug sudo /var/log/sudo_debug all@trace
>> >
>> >Run sudo and send us /var/log/sudo_debug? Thanks
>>
>> Thanks for the tip with the proper debug syntax - I was unable to get a
>> single log item out of sudo before.
>>
>> I think I have found something. This is the relevant part of the output of
>> all@debug (you need this not trace I think):
>>
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] username=doma
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] domainname=NULL
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] state |= USERMATCH
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] Received 1 rule(s)
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] -> sudo_sss_filter_result @ ./sssd.c:175
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] in_res=0xb7c9c1b8, count=1, act=INCLUDE
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] emalloc: cnt=1
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] -> sudo_sss_result_filterp @ ./sssd.c:648
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] -> sudo_sss_check_host @ ./sssd.c:556
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] val[0]=nappali.szilva
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] -> addr_matches @ ./match_addr.c:206
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] -> addr_matches_if @ ./match_addr.c:61
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] <- addr_matches_if @ ./match_addr.c:71 := false
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] IP address nappali.szilva matches local host:
>> false @ addr_matches() ./match_addr.c:217
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] <- addr_matches @ ./match_addr.c:218 := false
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] -> netgr_matches @ ./match.c:941
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] netgroup appali.szilva has no leading '+'
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] <- netgr_matches @ ./match.c:953 := false
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] -> hostname_matches @ ./match.c:776
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] host nappali matches sudoers pattern
>> nappali.szilva: false @ hostname_matches() ./match.c:788
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] <- hostname_matches @ ./match.c:789 := false
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] sssd/ldap sudoHost 'nappali.szilva' ...
>> not
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] <- sudo_sss_check_host @ ./sssd.c:591 := false
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] <- sudo_sss_result_filterp @ ./sssd.c:654 := 0
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] reallocating result: 0xb7cb1900 (count: 1 -> 0)
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] <- sudo_sss_filter_result @ ./sssd.c:221 :=
>> 0xb7c9e410
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] u_sss_result=(0xb7c9c1b8, 1) =>
>> f_sss_result=(0xb7c9e410, 0)
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] <- sudo_sss_result_get @ ./sssd.c:728 :=
>> 0xb7c9e410
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] searching SSSD/LDAP for sudoers entries
>> Sep 14 22:13:39 sudo[2314] Done with LDAP searches
>>
>>
>> And here is the code from match.c.
>>
>> bool
>> hostname_matches(const char *shost, const char *lhost, const char *pattern)
>> {
>> debug_decl(hostname_matches, SUDO_DEBUG_MATCH)
>> const char *host;
>> bool rc;
>>
>> host = strchr(pattern, '.') != NULL ? lhost : shost;
>> if (has_meta(pattern)) {
>> rc = !fnmatch(pattern, host, FNM_CASEFOLD);
>> } else {
>> rc = !strcasecmp(host, pattern);
>> }
>> sudo_debug_printf(SUDO_DEBUG_DEBUG|SUDO_DEBUG_LINENO,
>> "host %s matches sudoers pattern %s: %s",
>> host, pattern, rc ? "true" : "false");
>> debug_return_bool(rc);
>> }
>>
>> By the look of it it should match. I tried to find out how shost and lhost
>> get their values - these are macros to a member of the sudo_user struct but
>> that part is not debugged. Only thing I can confirm is that I do not get the
>>
>> log_warning(MSG_ONLY, N_("unable to resolve host %s"), user_host);
>>
>> from line 816 of sudoers.c.
>>
>> I also checked the hosts file and there I do have the
>>
>> 192.168.110.3 nappali nappali.szilva
>>
>> entry.
>>
>> Still stuck whit this.
>
>What is the output of 'hostname' ?
>
>I don't think sudo canonicalizes it..
>
>--
doma@nappali:/home/doma> hostname
nappali
doma@nappali:/home/doma> hostname --fqdn
nappali.szilva --
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-users mailing list:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-users
Go to http://freeipa.org for more info on the project
