On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 10:03 PM Julian Sikorski <belegdol@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Am 03.07.22 um 19:51 schrieb Stefan Metzmacher: > > Am 03.07.22 um 07:01 schrieb Steve French: > >> I lean toward thinking that this is a Samba bug (although I don't see > >> it on my local system - it works to samba for me, although I was > >> trying against a slightly different version, Samba 4.15.5-Ubuntu). > >> > >> Looking at the traces in more detail they look the same (failing vs. > >> working) other than the order of the negotiate context, which fails > >> with POSIX as the 3rd context, and netname as the 4th, but works with > >> the order reversed (although same contexts, and same overall length) > >> ie with POSIX context as the fourth one and netname context as the > >> third one. > >> > >> The failing server code in Samba is in > >> smbd_smb2_request_process_negprot but I don't see changes to it > >> recently around this error. > >> > >> Does this fail to anyone else's Samba version? > >> > >> This is probably a Samba server bug but ... seems odd since it doesn't > >> fail to Samba for me. > >> > >> Jeremy/Metze, > >> Does this look familiar? > > > > Maybe this one: > > > > https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=commitdiff;h=147dd9d58a429695a3b6c6e45c8b0eaafc67908a > > > > > > that went only into 4.15 and higher. > > > > metze > > Nice catch, I can confirm that adding this patch to debian samba > 2:4.13.13+dfsg-1~deb11u3 package makes the mounts work again. How do we > get this patch into debian? > > Best regards, > Julian Hi Metze, I went through the above patch, and it looks like an issue with parsing garbage at the end of the buffer, rather than negotiate count. I'm not sure how the netname negotiate context patches above are being affected by this samba server patch. The only difference from the client side for single channel is that the netname context appears as the 4th element in the list of 4, rather than the 3rd element in the list of 4. Do you have a possible explanation? Julian, Thanks for the repro attempt. So I assume that with the latest samba server, things work as expected without reverting any changes in 5.18.8 kernel, correct? -- Regards, Shyam
