Bug 497551

Summary:	Inconsistent default anonuid/anongid values.
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	Reporter:	Sachin Prabhu <sprabhu>
Component:	nfs-utils	Assignee:	Steve Dickson <steved>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	BaseOS QE <qe-baseos-auto>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	5.3	CC:	jwest, mcermak, rlerch, rryder, syeghiay, tao, wezhang
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Clones:	566888 (view as bug list)		Environment:
Last Closed:	2010-03-30 08:52:07 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	499522, 541103, 566888

Description Sachin Prabhu 2009-04-24 16:34:01 UTC

Both RHEL4 and 5 set the uid/gid for nfsnobody to 4294967294 in /etc/passwd, but RHEL4 and 5 have different NFS defaults for anonuid/anaongid.  RHEL4 uses anonuid/anongid of 4294967294. RHEL5, by default, sets these to 65534 (which is the "traditional" uid for nfsnobody):


The change occurs due to the following comment in nfs-utils

http://git.linux-nfs.org/?p=steved/nfs-utils.git;a=commit;h=3419e37500dfd19cb2c246260dbd2bc0ee4704d4

--
Use 65534 for anon uid/gid rather than -2

This is more consistant across platforms.
--

The values for anonuid and anongid should be the same for RHEL 4 and RHEL 5.

Comment 1 Sachin Prabhu 2009-07-15 11:50:27 UTC

This also means that the values of nfsnobody(4294967294) on RHEL 5 64 bit machines do not match the anonuid/anongid values(65534) used by the exports on RHEL 5 machines.

Comment 14 errata-xmlrpc 2010-03-30 08:52:07 UTC

An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2010-0284.html