From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27220C4707F for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 20:31:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0127A61408 for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 20:31:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233284AbhEYUcr (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2021 16:32:47 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44754 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229643AbhEYUcq (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2021 16:32:46 -0400 Received: from hr2.samba.org (hr2.samba.org [IPv6:2a01:4f8:192:486::2:0]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4A00C061574 for ; Tue, 25 May 2021 13:31:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=samba.org; s=42; h=Message-ID:Date:To:From:CC; bh=Jhj6It2LlKe7YsbJNJLk5rnHr87AJm5pGJBU2zigyDE=; b=xiRuoMJsWR/gKzpKg2viHwVsyQ JUyv9qs09kOcYCFbNrYDqQa4/44r+M/XhPQAae9K5iIQ2GBP4U/fOTcKmgb7uXslt202JJfyTHr0T fCT0pVV/3enTulSdggfMlK5sDJ4UX/oBhpKpPPkujQYIVGSHtJMe9wB6SxTiN5CTP66P8ZoA4jz58 WaMs5gnjGzUQ1dXLzMM4Tirc61U2AN2NXbrbTYVesdfomGNqPOWDh/2Pi3M5Yi9MBBVv73uB7OE81 gQZ3cfxcFj030ZBgGonryx3zCaqdUD3pFTiUUy+RBplWhWJj5g8nhZ+fx6Gn60xrFj3Bg62i3Ki39 x4VN9bZoO6sxGFV0wSkCUoFs8a9L1BLYW57W0Nbo/75koUaXUk4yQjPVc2Ru1MIaIFwALvSfHtJUc l92EvCS5MvdAgzUK2TPmqsUxYyGs+73GEscbwpvi3p9f++5zZeLDZ7M40oyee7JpnX6p3B9JOwTyq NLC79B5xPpFClEItpO1NawmH; Received: from [2a01:4f8:192:486::6:0] (port=55990 helo=hr6.samba.org) by hr2.samba.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256) (Exim) id 1lldhn-0007Aj-Vp for cifs-qa@samba.org; Tue, 25 May 2021 20:31:12 +0000 Received: from [::1] (port=33874 helo=bugzilla.samba.org) by hr6.samba.org with esmtp (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1lldhn-008k07-7b for cifs-qa@samba.org; Tue, 25 May 2021 20:31:11 +0000 From: samba-bugs@samba.org To: cifs-qa@samba.org Subject: [Bug 14713] SMBv3 negotiation fails with a Solaris server Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 20:31:10 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: QAcontact X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: CifsVFS X-Bugzilla-Component: kernel fs X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.x X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: sfrench@samba.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P5 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: sfrench@samba.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugzilla.samba.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D14713 --- Comment #20 from Steve French --- Comparing with smbclient, there are a few interesting things which differ: a) smbclient sets a default domain name ("SAMBA"). To make this identical = for the kernel mount ("mount -t cifs ...") case you could try setting domain=3D parameter to the same. I doubt this will make a difference because in neit= her case does the server indicate in its SessionSetup response that authenticat= ion ended up as 'guest' so presumably Solaris server thinks the user authentica= ted properly in both cases (albeit it could be a very unlikely case where "SAMBA/username" is different than "username") b) there are some NegotiateFlags (NTLMSSP flags) set differently during negotiation: 1) smbclient sets "Negotiate Version" 2) cifs.ko sets "Negotiate Seal" and "Negotiate Target Info" and "Negotiate 56" but otherwise the flags look the same.=20=20 c) smbclient sends both an old Lanman (Lanmanv2) and NTLM (NTLMv2) response= in the NTLMSSP_AUTH SessionSetup request, but zeroes the Lanman field, while cifs.ko doesn't send Lanman. This is unlikely to be related --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.=