Bug 658871
Summary: | krb5-lib wrongly considers KRB5KRB_AP_ERR_REPEAT error from MS AD as correct application reply leading to wrong error "Requested protocol version not supported" | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 | Reporter: | Martin Osvald 🛹 <mosvald> |
Component: | krb5 | Assignee: | Nalin Dahyabhai <nalin> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | high | ||
Version: | 5.5 | CC: | dpal, jplans |
Target Milestone: | rc | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | krb5-1.6.1-59.el5 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2011-07-21 08:20:13 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: |
Description
Martin Osvald 🛹
2010-12-01 14:48:35 UTC
I'm wondering if this is something that the patch for bug #427789 affected adversely. To check that, are you able to retry this with a krb5 package that's been rebuilt without patch #89 applied? Just reverting the patch would be a regression, so we couldn't do that, but at least we'd know whether or not it was a sequence number problem. Hello, I am sorry for the delay, I must have overlooked an email with needinfo flag. I have tried to build the krb5 packages without mentioned patch krb5-trunk-seqnum.patch (#89), but it ended with exactly the same error with exactly the same code path. No problems for me to do anything else for you, just tell me. Best regards, -Martin 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-2011-1031.html |