Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[v8] AP_REQ verification failed for aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96 #494

Open
karandp opened this issue Nov 7, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

[v8] AP_REQ verification failed for aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96 #494

karandp opened this issue Nov 7, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@karandp
Copy link

karandp commented Nov 7, 2022

AP_REQ verification failed for aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96

Error:- [Root cause: Decryption_Error] Decryption_Error: error decrypting encpart of service ticket provided: error decrypting Ticket EncPart: error decrypting: integrity verification failed.

The use's ticket decryption failed for encType aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96 VerifyIntegrity, The HMAC values does nit match. The error occurred when service's encType in AD is changed from rc4 to aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96.

While debugging, we found that VerifyIntegrity of aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96 uses rfc3961 and as per IETF that has beed superceded by rfc8429. Is there a plan to update to rfc8429 in near future?

rfc3961.VerifyIntegrity(protocolkey, ct, pt, usage, e)

I'm new to kerberos functionality, and looking for some help on this issue.

@jcmturner
Copy link
Owner

The aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96 enctype implements encryption type ID 18 and checksum type ID 16. From reading RFC 8429 these are not deprecated. I would also be a little surprised if RFC 8429 required a change to an existing enctype as this would be a breaking change for backwards compatibility. Are other users experiencing this issue?

@glacuesta-sa
Copy link

@jcmturner this is also happening to me and these issues as well
#416
#484

@jcmturner
Copy link
Owner

Thanks I'll take a look into these other issues to see what's going on.

@keith6014
Copy link

@jcmturner Same issue as #508

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants