On Wed, 2016-08-24 at 15:19 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 01:33:33PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> > 
> > On (24/08/16 09:10), Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 2016-08-24 at 11:02 +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 09:52:17AM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 07:39:54AM +0000, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Wed, 2016-08-24 at 09:14 +0200, Petr Spacek wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On 24.8.2016 09:03, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Getting to the of our AD domain migration but there is one step 
> > > > > > > > I haven't solved.
> > > > > > > > Our users has UID/GID in the new domain while the already 
> > > > > > > > present users in the new domain
> > > > > > > > does not. Assigning UID/GID to all users does not sit well with 
> > > > > > > > upstream IT so I am 
> > > > > > > > looking at what to do with these when they visit/access our 
> > > > > > > > site.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > What comes to mind is partial id_mapping, if a user had UID/GID 
> > > > > > > > in the AD use that, otherwise
> > > > > > > > do id_mapping for that user(preferably the same way samba does 
> > > > > > > > it since we already have a
> > > > > > > > samba
> > > > > > > > based interim solution).
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I haven't found a way to do that in sssd, is there?
> > > > > > > > Maybe I am just full of it and this is really a bad idea?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Are you using FreeIPA? FreeIPA got support for "ID Views" which 
> > > > > > > can be used
> > > > > > > for this purpose. (I'm not very sure about pure-SSSD case.)
> > > > 
> > > > It is also possible in the pure-SSSD case, see man sss_override for
> > > > details.
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I wish, but this is a Windows AD :(
> > > > > 
> > > > > Petr had IPA-AD trusts in mind, I guess.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Partial ID mapping is not possible, sorry.
> > > > 
> > > > yes, SSSD cannot do this automatically because we can never be sure that
> > > > a UID/GID attribute will be added in future to a user who currently
> > > > does not have them set.
> > > 
> > > I see, but does not sssd refresh/check cached values against AD regularly?
> > > Or mark the non UID/GID user as do not cache? 
> > > 
> > I am not sure you understand it correctly.
> > 
> > sssd does not support partial ID mapping intentionally.
> > 
> > let's image. The partial ID mapping would be enabled but neither of
> > uses have posix attibutes. So sssd would generate UID/GID from SID.
> > 
> > Then later someone decide to add UID and GID into Active Directory.
> > But there is a chance that administrator would not be carefull
> > and assign IDs which are already generated from SID for another user.
> > If the another user had higer privileges then it would be a security 
> > problem.
> 
> ...also files would had to be chown-ed, so at the very least there is a
> huge annoyance to the admins and risk to locking out users away from
> their files because you forget to chown some files..
> 

OK, so no good way to fix this problem as it is now.
But, so I am sure, if we were get a subdomain to INFINERA.COM say 
SE.INFINERA.COM it would be
possible to have UID/GID in SE.INFINERA.COM and idmapping in INFINERA.COM?
What about group membership, can a SE.INFINERA.COM user be in a group in 
INFINERA.COM and vice versa?

But the we would have to deal with TRANSMODE.SE(old to be retired), 
SE.INFINERA.COM and INFINERA.COM in
sssd.conf et. all?

 Jocke
_______________________________________________
sssd-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/[email protected]

Reply via email to