Support for complex cross-realm scenarios #536
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Co-authored-by: Ivan <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Sarthak Gupta <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: xtian <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #130
Description
It slightly modifies the
messages.NewTGSReqsignature in order to use the client's realm as thepaRealmforTGS_REQmessages, as discussed in #130 and suggested by @momiji and @snqk (added them as co-authors for credit).Proof
I have also added a new Go test (which also relies on a few changes added on the testing environment here) that reproduces the issue. So, you can try to run it without and with the other changes present on this pull request in order to verify that they actually fix that issue (test-driven).
Considerations
First, in order to get this pull request (CI) fully working, it would require approving & merging the
gokrb5-test's pull request (here) first, and re-building and publishing the modified / added Docker images later.Second, as this slightly modifies part of the public API of the library (the
messagespackage), it would probably require bumping up its major version to v9 (unfortunately), but I think the fix does worth it.--
Pinging you @jcmturner for visibility, I'm definitely looking forward for some feedback and ideally getting this merged sooner rather than later, cause as the other users involved, we're experiencing the same issue, and we rather prefer to contribute back to this repository than having to maintain our own fork.
Thanks!