Re: [cifs-protocol] [REG:110092263101306] RE: backup protocol

2010-09-25 Thread Matthieu Patou
On 24/09/2010 02:18, Matthieu Patou wrote: On 23/09/2010 22:41, Hongwei Sun wrote: Matthieu, What I meant is that the guidGUID field in client-side-wrapped-secret structure is only dependent on the SubjectUniqueID field in the public key certificate received from server. Actually the

Re: [cifs-protocol] [REG:110092263101306] RE: backup protocol

2010-09-23 Thread Hongwei Sun
Matthieu, What I meant is that the guidGUID field in client-side-wrapped-secret structure is only dependent on the SubjectUniqueID field in the public key certificate received from server. Actually the document states that all other fields (and extensions, if any) of the certificate are

Re: [cifs-protocol] [REG:110092263101306] RE: backup protocol

2010-09-23 Thread Matthieu Patou
On 23/09/2010 22:41, Hongwei Sun wrote: Matthieu, What I meant is that the guidGUID field in client-side-wrapped-secret structure is only dependent on the SubjectUniqueID field in the public key certificate received from server. Actually the document states that all other fields (and

[cifs-protocol] [REG:110092263101306] RE: backup protocol

2010-09-22 Thread Hongwei Sun
Matthieu, After checking the logic in the code, I found that Windows clients will reverse the EncryptedSecret part in the Client-Side-Wrapped_Secret structure (2.2.2 MS-BKRP). This matches what you have found. I will file a request to have it confirmed and updated into the document.

Re: [cifs-protocol] [REG:110092263101306] RE: backup protocol

2010-09-22 Thread Matthieu Patou
On 23/09/2010 03:27, Hongwei Sun wrote: Matthieu, After checking the logic in the code, I found that Windows clients will reverse the EncryptedSecret part in the Client-Side-Wrapped_Secret structure (2.2.2 MS-BKRP). This matches what you have found. I will file a request to have it