X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,TW_MK X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4E28FEDC.5080306@tlinx.org> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 21:38:52 -0700 From: Linda Walsh Reply-To: Linda Walsh User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100228 Thunderbird/2.0.0.24 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "cygwin AT cygwin DOT com" Subject: I'm confused, ... domain vs. local account mappings (why diffs, how to control mappings?) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com For various reasons (config changes, upgrading to newer version of samba, phase of the moon, dumb-luck/random chance, after a latest round of samba-setup config auditing (amongst other things), I'm no longer getting "device attached to sys not functioning" (originally reported http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2010-07/msg00289.html) Now I get output that I'm not exactly sure how to interpret. --- first local, which by itself seems almost normal): (I split long lines and indented the continuations, also sub'ed the long sys-uniq# with 11111-22222-11111 for my local sys. I use a different ## for my domain further on, down, below. (I also sorted them by UID) # mkpasswd -l: SYSTEM:*:18:544:,S-1-5-18:: LocalService:*:19:544:U-NT AUTHORITY\LocalService,S-1-5-19:: NetworkService:*:20:544:U-NT AUTHORITY\NetworkService,S-1-5-20:: Guest:unused:501:513:U-athenae\Guest,\ S-1-5-21-11111-22222-11111-501:/home/Guest:/bin/bash root:unused:500:513:Athenae Admin,U-athenae\root,\ S-1-5-21-11111-22222-11111-500:/home/root:/bin/bash Administrators:*:544:544:,S-1-5-32-544:: law:unused:1001:513:L A Walsh,U-athenae\law,\ S-1-5-21-11111-22222-11111-1001:/home/law:/bin/bash # mkgroup -l SYSTEM:S-1-5-18:18: None:S-1-5-21-11111-22222-11111-513:513: Administrators:S-1-5-32-544:544: Users:S-1-5-32-545:545: Guests:S-1-5-32-546:546: Power Users:S-1-5-32-547:547: Backup Operators:S-1-5-32-551:551: Replicator:S-1-5-32-552:552: Remote Desktop Users:S-1-5-32-555:555: Network Configuration Operators:S-1-5-32-556:556: Performance Monitor Users:S-1-5-32-558:558: Performance Log Users:S-1-5-32-559:559: Distributed COM Users:S-1-5-32-562:562: IIS_IUSRS:S-1-5-32-568:568: Cryptographic Operators:S-1-5-32-569:569: Event Log Readers:S-1-5-32-573:573: lawgroup:S-1-5-21-11111-22222-11111-1005:1005: --- so above looks ok, -- several builtin entries, and some added local entries. Now the Domain entries: # mkpasswd -D: BLISS\root:unused:10500:10513:root,U-BLISS\root, S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-500://BLISS/root:/bin/bash BLISS\law:unused:90026:71008:L A Walsh,U-BLISS\law,\ S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-80026://BLISS/law:/bin/bash #mkgroup -D: SYSTEM:S-1-5-18:18: Print Operators:S-1-5-32-550:550: Replicator:S-1-5-32-552:552: Administrators:S-1-5-32-544:544: Users:S-1-5-32-545:545: Guests:S-1-5-32-546:546: Power Users:S-1-5-32-547:547: Account Operators:S-1-5-32-548:548: Server Operators:S-1-5-32-549:549: Backup Operators:S-1-5-32-551:551: RAS Servers:S-1-5-32-553:553: BLISS\Domain Admins:S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-512:10512: BLISS\Domain Controllers:S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-516:10516: BLISS\Juno:S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-1462:11005: BLISS\media:S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-1017:11017: BUILTIN\Backup Operators:S-1-5-32-551:11018: BLISS\man:S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-1028:11028: BLISS\Trusted Local Net Users:S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-50002:60002: BLISS\lawgroup:S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-61008:71008: BLISS\scan:S-1-5-21-33333-77777-33333-70464:80464: Comments: 1) local user 'law', 'root' and 'guest' are all in '513' Sid "S-1-5-21----513" is a "well known sid" for 'Domain Users' (why it shows up as a group labeled 'non' with my local computers id in the computer part, is confusing. 2) 'law' is in 'lawgroup' (one good thing!) But Domain user 'root' is in group 10513, which is sorta 'broken' like the local users mapping to 513. It probably should have mapped to '10512'? 3) Why 2 Backup Operators? -- Backup Operators mapping correctly from Sid S---551->551. but 'builtin\backup operators, (also 512, mapping to a different domain-mapped UID on the local machine). I do have Domain Admins, -512, but they aren't being mapped to the correct local GID of '512'... Same goes for 'Domain Controllers' (516->10516) ---- Conflicts? Or design (I hope?, but how to fix the broken parts?) Note there is a larger overlap of unprefixed groups from the local and domain listing. None conflict if they were merged with dups removed, but some are in the Domain listing, while others are only in the local listing. So -- I take it the low-numbered groups are not prefixed because the somehow have a "WELL KNOWN SID" property attached to them? Hoping/presuming that's the case, how can I map the 3 domain groups: 'Domains Admins' (i.e. 10512 -> 512) 'Domain Controllers' (10516 -> 516) builtin/backup operators -> backup operators (i.e. did I miss setting some 'built-in' flag somewhere?) or, how do I prevent cygwin from adding anything to the UID's, that way, I can have the same mapping from the DC? (as the DC, running samba, has already done a block-jump mapping of UID's into a higher level).... --- Guess that's the main Q how to have cygwin not add to the UID's -- that way Domain Administrator would map to Administrator, which is also 'correct' for Admins on Domain joined machines (IF memory serves me correctly, I could see that making sense as well -- as in a domain, as domain policy can lockdown/control member machines, it could also disable local admin accounts if that was wanted...)... In my situation would there be any great risk in removing that offset, since it seems to be preventing some logins/groups from properly mapping, within cygwin they way they should.... Certainly, would like to get my 'Bliss\law acct to have the same UID as what is seen on my network shares...would make life so much more integrous**.... ** -- a word in need or more usage! (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/integrous) -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple