GSSAPI and krb5 as implemented in system krb5 libraries exists from
longer than Samba has implemented those capabilities, I do not think it
make sense to reason along those lines.
GSS-Proxy has been built with a protocol to talk from the kernel that
resolved a number of issues for knfsd (eg big packet sizes when a MS-
PAC is present).
And Samba uses internally exactly the same krb5 mechanism as it defers
to the kerberos libraries as well.
Additionally GSS-Proxy can be very easily extended to also do NTLMSSP
using the same interface as I have built the gssntlmssp long ago from
the MS spec, and is probably the most correct NTLMSSP implementation
you can find around.
Gssntlmssp also has a Winbind backend so you get automaticaly access to
whatever cached credentials Winbindd has for users as a bonus (although
the integration can be improved there), yet you *can* use it w/o
Winbindd just fine providing a credential file (smbpasswd format
GSS-Proxy is already integrated in distributions because it is used by
knfsd, and can be as easily used by cifsd, and you *should* really use
it there, so we can have a single, consistent, maintained, mechanism
for server side GSS authentication, and not have to repeat and reinvent
kernel to userspace mechanisms.
And if you add it for cifsd you have yet another reason to do it for
cifs.ko as well.
Finally the GSS-Proxy mechanism is namespace compatible, so you also
get the ability to define different auth daemons per different
containers, no need to invent new mechanisms for that or change yet
again protocols/userspace to obtain container capabilities.
For the client we'll need to add some XDR parsing functions in kernel,
they were omitted from my original patches because there was no client
side kernel consumer back then, but it i an easy, mechanical change.
On Wed, 2020-12-16 at 16:43 -0600, Steve French wrote:
generally I would feel more comfortable using something (library or
utility) in Samba (if needed) for additional SPNEGO support if
something is missing (in what the kernel drivers are doing to
encapsulate Active Directory or Samba AD krb5 tickets in SPNEGO) as
Samba is better maintained/tested etc. than most components. Is there
something in Samba that could be used here instead of having a
dependency on another project - Samba has been doing Kerberos/SPNEGO
longer than most ...? There are probably others (jra, Metze etc.)
that have would know more about gssproxy vs. Samba equivalents though
and would defer to them ...
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 8:33 AM Simo Sorce <simo(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> as you say the best course of action would be for cifs.ko to move to
> use the RPC interface we defined for knfsd (with any extensions that
> may be needed), and we had discussions in the past with cifs upstream
> developers about it. But nothing really materialized.
> If something is needed in the short term, I thjink the quickest course
> of action is indeed to change the userspace helper to use gssapi
> function calls, so that they can be intercepted like we do for rpc.gssd
> (nfs client's userspace helper).
> Unfortunately I do not have the cycles to work on that myself at this
> time :-(
> On Wed, 2020-12-16 at 10:01 +0000, Weiser, Michael wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I have a use-case for authentication of Linux cifs client mounts without the
user being present (e.g. from batch jobs) using gssproxy's impersonation feature with
Kerberos Constrained Delegation similar to how it can be done for NFS.
> > My understanding is that currently neither the Linux cifs kernel client nor
cifs-utils userland tools support acquiring credentials using gssproxy. The former uses a
custom upcall interface to talk to cifs.spnego from cifs-utils. The latter then goes
looking for Kerberos ticket caches using libkrb5 functions, not GSSAPI, which prevents
gssproxy from interacting with it.
> > From what I understand, the preferred method would be to switch the Linux
kernel client upcall to the RPC protocol defined by gssproxy (as has been done for the
Linux kernel NFS server already replacing rpc.svcgssd). The kernel could then, at least
optionally, talk to gssproxy directly to try and obtain credentials.
> > Failing that, cifs-utils' cifs.spnego could be switched to GSSAPI so that
gssproxy's interposer plugin could intercept GSSAPI calls and provide them with the
required credentials (similar to the NFS client rpc.gssd).
> > Assuming my understanding is correct so far:
> > Is anyone doing any work on this and could use some help (testing, coding)?
> > What would be expected complexity and possible roadblocks when trying to make a
start at implementing this?
> > Or is the idea moot due to some constraint or recent development I'm not
> > I have found a recent discussion of the topic on linux-cifs which provided
no definite answer though.
> > As a crude attempt at an explicit userspace workaround I tried but failed to
trick smbclient into initialising a ticket cache using gssproxy for cifs.spnego to find
> > Is this something that could be implemented without too much redundant effort
(or should already work, perhaps using a different tool)?
> > 
> >  https://pagure.io/gssproxy/issue/56
> >  https://github.com/gssapi/gssproxy/blob/main/docs/ProtocolDocumentation.md
> >  https://github.com/gssapi/gssproxy/blob/main/docs/NFS.md#nfs-server
> >  https://github.com/gssapi/gssproxy/blob/main/docs/NFS.md#nfs-client
> >  https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-cifs/msg20182.html
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Michael
> > _______________________________________________
> > gss-proxy mailing list -- gss-proxy(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to gss-proxy-leave(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
> > Fedora Code of Conduct:
> > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives:
> Simo Sorce
> RHEL Crypto Team
> Red Hat, Inc
RHEL Crypto Team
Red Hat, Inc