Jakub,

> This is confusing because the enumerate word is overloaded :-)

Ha!  Agreed.

> What is not supported and I guess won't be is "getent passwd" or "getent
> group" to get all objects from AD.

I definitely agree with not being able to get all objects from AD via
`getent passwd` or `getent group`.

> get AD members of an IPA group added through an external group, e.g.
> "getent group ipagroup" should show both its IPA and AD group members.

This is exactly what I'm referring to.  On the IPA masters (which have
their AD Trusts established), I can query an IPA group which has IPA
and external members via `getent group blah` and see both IPA and AD
users, as long as the following option is set within sssd.conf:

ignore_group_members = FALSE

But, on the IPA client nodes the only time that all group members will
be shown is if:

1.)  The users have previously logged into the node in question;
2.)  The users have been queried via `id user` or `getent passwd user`

Is the functionality in question only available for IPA masters?

Thanks!
John DeSantis

Il giorno gio 14 nov 2019 alle ore 04:22 Jakub Hrozek
<[email protected]> ha scritto:
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 10:35:46AM -0500, John Desantis wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Apologies for the necromancy here, but there seems to be conflicting
> > information regarding group enumeration within an IPA AD Trust,
> > specifically, these tidbits:
> >
> > > > >>>>>>> ad_users is an IPA group that contains an IPA external group 
> > > > >>>>>>> that
> > > > >>>>>>> contains the users, right?
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Correct.
> >
> > > > >>>> To confirm: Is the idea behind your patches that it will enumerate 
> > > > >>>> users in groups that have not logged before? Ie. I have no means 
> > > > >>>> to determine which users are in a group on the sssd/ipa side.
> >
> > According to this thread and its linked bug reports, this was
> > addressed in SSSD versions >= 1.14.0-43.  But, per the URL
> > https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3597701 the following is stated:
> >
> > "Enumeration is not supported in IPA-AD trust environments."
> > "This is an expected behaviour if SSSD is not enumerating all AD
> > users/groups on IPA server or client after setting enumerate = True
> > and subdomain_enumerate = True in sssd.conf."
> >
> > &
> >
> > "Enumeration' is not supported in IPA-AD trust environments. As per
> > confirmation from IPA/SSSD engineering team, there is no plan on
> > supporting enumeration with IPA-AD trusts as it just wouldn't scale
> > with large AD domains."
> >
> > Our AD domain does permit enumeration as the sssd_nss.log on the IPA
> > master didn't manifest a message stating that the domain does not
> > support enumeration.
> >
> > Given the aforementioned information, is it correct to assume that
> > current versions of SSSD and IPA do not support enumerating a group
> > which contains trusted AD users who haven't logged in before/been
> > queried via `groups`, `id`, or `getent passwd`?
>
> This is confusing because the enumerate word is overloaded :-)
>
> What is not supported and I guess won't be is "getent passwd" or "getent
> group" to get all objects from AD. What is supported since 1.14 was to
> get AD members of an IPA group added through an external group, e.g.
> "getent group ipagroup" should show both its IPA and AD group members.
> _______________________________________________
> sssd-users mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/[email protected]
_______________________________________________
sssd-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/[email protected]

Reply via email to