RE: Are domain/machine names required when specifying roles

From: Mark Walker (markwalker42@hotmail.com)
Date: 03/30/03


From: "Mark Walker" <markwalker42@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 16:18:55 -0800


Dispite the documentation I still have this problem. I've
reproduced it following the steps below:

- create a group called testGroup (don't associate any
users yet).
- create a user called testUser.
- create a default webService project and uncomment
helloworld method in service1.asmx.
- build and test (works like a champ!)
- modify the web.config file to include the following just
under the authentication tag:
    <authorization>
    <allow users="?"/>
    <deny users="*"/>
    </authorization>
- test (access allowed)
- change IIS directory security to disable anonymous
access and allow windows integrated and basic
authentication.
- access web service. Now you are prompted to enter a name
(use testUser). Access will still be denied at this point.
- modify the web.config authorization section to the
following:
    <authorization>
    <allow users="testUser"/>
    <deny users="*"/>
    </authorization>

- now access is denied even though testUser is a valid
user on my machine. But wait there's more...
- prepend the machine name to the user (in my case my
machine name is GECKO) so the authorization section reads
as follows:
    <authorization>
        <allow users="GECKO\testUser"/>
        <deny users="*"/>
    </authorization>
- now I have access.
- just to make sure I remove GECKO from the configuration
and I'm denied again.

While my original problem centered around prepending
roles, this user example shows the same behavior.

If there is a way to remove the machine name dependancy,
I'm all ears.

Thanks,
Mark

>-----Original Message-----
>Hello Mark,
>For Windows Defined Roles you can use the
WindowsBuiltInRole Enumeration.
>These roles represent the local Windows groups common to
most installations
>of Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
>
>Members
>AccountOperator: Account operators manage the user
accounts on a computer
>or domain.
>Administrator: Administrators have complete and
unrestricted access to the
>computer or domain.
>BackupOperator: Backup operators can override security
restrictions for the
>sole purpose of backing up or restoring files.
>Guest: Guests are more restricted than users.
>PowerUser: Power users possess most administrative
permissions with some
>restrictions. Thus, power users can run legacy
applications, in addition to
>certified applications.
>PrintOperator: Print operators can take control of a
printer.
>Replicator: Replicators support file replication in a
domain.
>SystemOperator: System operators manage a particular
computer.
>
>When you are refering to domain roles
(contoso\PowerUser), you must include
>both the domain and user name combination.
>Otherwise as the documentation blow is referring you can
just use the role
>name:
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?
url=/library/en-us/cpguide/htm
>l/cpconaspnetauthorization.asp.
>
>Please let me know if you have further questions on this.
>
>
>Thanks,
>Bassel Tabbara
>Microsoft, ASP.NET
>
>This posting is provided "AS IS", with no warranties, and
confers no rights.
>
>
>--------------------
>| Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
>| From: "Mark Walker" <markwalker42@hotmail.com>
>| Sender: "Mark Walker" <markwalker42@hotmail.com>
>| Subject: Are domain/machine names required when
specifying roles
>| Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 12:21:26 -0800
>| Lines: 12
>| Message-ID: <008701c2f49e$719e6010$a601280a@phx.gbl>
>| MIME-Version: 1.0
>| Content-Type: text/plain;
>| charset="iso-8859-1"
>| Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>| X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
>| Thread-Index: AcL0nnGbaRHDaqisSF+53cCu4Hdt/g==
>| X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300
>| Newsgroups:
microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.security
>| Path: cpmsftngxa06
>| Xref: cpmsftngxa06
microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.security:4583
>| NNTP-Posting-Host: TK2MSFTNGXA14 10.40.1.166
>| X-Tomcat-NG:
microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.security
>|
>| Is the domain/machine name always required when
specifying
>| roles? I can't get it to work without the full
>| specification even though most references imply
otherwise.
>|
>| Which way is it supposed to work?
>|
>| How can this be resolved?
>|
>| I would really like to create a standard web.config
file
>| using a generic role (other than the builtin\roles) soI
>| don't have to edit to edit the specific machine or
domain
>| in the web.config file.
>|
>
>.
>



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Executable enty points incorrectly documented
    ... I was speaking about Windows SDK not MSDN Library entirely, but even if Windows SDK conatins C/C++ documentation I believe that main/WinMain belong to C/C++ documentation rather than Windows API documentation. ... It's correct about the default entry point names used by the linker and also correct about what those entry points call and because this is the ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel)
  • Re: ping Purl Gurl? Beginner Level Perl
    ... This is a good short one page article on perl core buffering, ... a lot of documentation amounted to nothing ... more than tirades about how bad Windows is as an operating system. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: installing freebsd on windows
    ... windows vista runs well too on overmuscled hardware. ... Why do I have to Google the info? ... So you're trying to say that all local documentation is useless ... recommending that I do business with them again? ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: solaris
    ... In FreeBSD I can't see a lack. ... the lact of documentation is one of the ... If the Windows documentation were fit for purpose, ... Installing an MS operating system on hardware for which the OS has inbuilt ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: What Was Your Experience When You First Started Using Linux?
    ... Considering the amount of flawless uptime I see with Windows ... wipe the disk and install Linux. ... > The documentation is not poor, or at least most of the documentation ... Poor was a 'poor' choice of words. ...
    (alt.os.linux)