RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 748756 - mount.cifs does not use KRB5_CONFIG
Summary: mount.cifs does not use KRB5_CONFIG
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: cifs-utils
Version: 6.2
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
low
low
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Jeff Layton
QA Contact: Jian Li
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-10-25 09:46 UTC by Marko Myllynen
Modified: 2014-06-18 07:42 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
The cifs.upcall utility previously always used the "/etc/krb5.conf" file regardless of whether the user had specified a custom Kerberos configuration file. This update adds the "--krb5conf" option to cifs.upcall allowing thus the administrator to specify an alternate krb5.conf file. Details for option usage can be seen in the cifs.upcall(8) manual page.
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-06-20 07:27:43 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
patch -- allow admins to specify an alternate krb5.conf location (1.69 KB, patch)
2012-01-04 19:03 UTC, Jeff Layton 		no flags Details | Diff
View All


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2012:0902 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Low: cifs-utils security, bug fix, and enhancement update 2012-06-19 19:28:35 UTC

Description Marko Myllynen 2011-10-25 09:46:22 UTC 
Description of problem:
Applications using krb5-libs can use a custom (user specific) krb5.conf by defining KRB5_CONFIG but mount.cifs always uses /etc/krb5.conf regardless of KRB5_CONFIG. It would make testing in some cases a bit easier if the system keytab does not need to be modified while testing CIFS mounts with Kerberos authentication.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHEL 6.2
Comment 2 RHEL Program Management 2011-10-29 05:47:11 UTC 
Since RHEL 6.2 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains
unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as
exception or blocker.

Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the
next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Comment 3 Jeff Layton 2011-11-08 15:42:43 UTC 
I don't think we'll be able to reasonably support this feature. While I'm sure it would be convenient, I don't see it as worth the effort.

When the kernel does an upcall it occurs in a different process context than the process that triggered the upcall. In order to do this, we'd need the upcall program to scrape /proc/<pid>/environ for that process and try to divine the various KRB5* functions out of it.

That's a lot of effort to handle this variable, and I think it would likely be problematic. Another possibility is to add a new command-line parm to cifs.upcall that would allow it to use an alternate krb5.conf. Would that be reasonable?
Comment 4 Marko Myllynen 2011-11-08 15:57:41 UTC 
Thanks for looking into this.

> I don't think we'll be able to reasonably support this feature. While I'm sure
> it would be convenient, I don't see it as worth the effort.

Yes, this is definitely in the nice-to-have category.

> That's a lot of effort to handle this variable, and I think it would likely be
> problematic. Another possibility is to add a new command-line parm to
> cifs.upcall that would allow it to use an alternate krb5.conf. Would that be
> reasonable?

Sure - it might even be better as it would make things perhaps a bit more explicit.

Thanks.
Comment 5 Jeff Layton 2012-01-04 19:03:34 UTC 
Created attachment 550749 [details]
patch -- allow admins to specify an alternate krb5.conf location

Something like this patch ought to do it. When you get a chance, could you test it and let me know if it works for you?
Comment 8 Jeff Layton 2012-03-02 13:05:42 UTC 
Fixed in cifs-utils-4.8.1-7.el6.
Comment 10 Jeff Layton 2012-05-01 10:23:46 UTC 
    Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field
    accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team.
    
    New Contents:
The cifs.upcall utility previously always used the "/etc/krb5.conf" file regardless of whether the user had specified a custom Kerberos configuration file. This update adds the "--krb5conf" option to cifs.upcall allowing thus the administrator to specify an alternate krb5.conf file. Details for option usage can be seen in the cifs.upcall(8) manual page.
Comment 11 Jian Li 2012-05-14 05:15:28 UTC 
This bug is tested on cifs-utils-4.8.1-10.el6, using test case /kernel/filesystems/cifs/multihost/bz805490-krb5-domain_realm, test steps follow comment 7.
Comment 12 errata-xmlrpc 2012-06-20 07:27:43 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2012-0902.html
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.