Bug 12236 - samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck: DB ACL on GPO directory does not match expected value from GPO object
Summary: samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck: DB ACL on GPO directory does not match expected...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 14927
Alias: None
Product: Samba 4.1 and newer
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Tools (show other bugs)
Version: 4.5.0rc3
Hardware: All All
: P5 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Andrew Bartlett
QA Contact: Samba QA Contact
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 11924
  Show dependency tree / graph
 
Reported: 2016-09-03 22:53 UTC by Marc Muehlfeld
Modified: 2021-12-07 16:18 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Marc Muehlfeld 2016-09-03 22:53:18 UTC 
I found an uncaught exception:


# samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck
ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): uncaught exception - ProvisioningError: DB ACL on GPO directory /usr/local/samba/var/locks/sysvol/samdom.example.com/Policies/{31B2F340-016D-11D2-945F-00C04FB984F9}/MACHINE/Scripts/Startup O:BAG:DUD:(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;;0x001f01ff;;;BA)(A;OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED) does not match expected value O:DAG:DAD:P(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED) from GPO object
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/__init__.py", line 176, in _run
    return self.run(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/ntacl.py", line 270, in run
    lp)
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py", line 1723, in checksysvolacl
    direct_db_access)
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py", line 1674, in check_gpos_acl
    domainsid, direct_db_access)
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py", line 1640, in check_dir_acl
    raise ProvisioningError('%s ACL on GPO directory %s %s does not match expected value %s from GPO object' % (acl_type(direct_db_access), os.path.join(root, name), fsacl_sddl, acl))
Comment 1 Kinglok, Fong 2017-05-18 13:08:04 UTC 
I have the same error in samba 4.6.3 even after I execute command
samba-tool ntacl sysvolreset
and then
samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck
ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): uncaught exception - ProvisioningError: DB ACL on GPO directory /usr/local/samba/var/locks/sysvol/samdom.example.com/Policies/{8EDB68C4-BB42-437A-BF68-28AA6D7EF93C} O:LAG:DAD:PAR(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;DC)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;DU) does not match expected value O:DAG:DAD:PAR(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;EA)(A;OICIIO;0x001f01ff;;;CO)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;DA)(A;OICI;0x001f01ff;;;SY)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;AU)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;ED)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;DC)(A;OICI;0x001200a9;;;DU) from GPO object
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/__init__.py", line 176, in _run
    return self.run(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/netcmd/ntacl.py", line 270, in run
    lp)
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py", line 1723, in checksysvolacl
    direct_db_access)
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py", line 1674, in check_gpos_acl
    domainsid, direct_db_access)
  File "/usr/local/samba/lib/python2.7/site-packages/samba/provision/__init__.py", line 1621, in check_dir_acl
    raise ProvisioningError('%s ACL on GPO directory %s %s does not match expected value %s from GPO object' % (acl_type(direct_db_access), path, fsacl_sddl, acl))
Comment 2 Björn Jacke 2021-12-07 16:18:59 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 14927 ***