On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 18:50 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > On (29/04/15 08:00), Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > I'm not aware of any situation where this would be a sensible > > reply, > > so this should be fine (and at worst, safe). > > > > I suspect (but since Yassir isn't here any more cannot confirm) > > that > > the original intent here was to skip this GPO, but that wasn't > > correctly implemented. Good thing too, as it would have been a > > security bug as previously noted. > > > > Given that this is fairly likely to be hit, I suggest that we need > > to > > open an RFE bug upstream and then change the message to refer to > > it. I > > suggest the following: > > > > "BUG: No attrs found for GPO [%s]. This was likely caused by the > > GPO > > entry being a referred to another domain controller. SSSD does not > > yet > > support this configuration. See [insert SSSD bug number] for more > > information." > > Updated patch attached. > > LS
Ack. Tested with my reproduction environment and the user was denied login and the logs showed the message as expected.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
