GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 693222
NTLM authentication doesn't reask password
Last modified: 2013-07-13 14:25:16 UTC
Created attachment 235249 [details] test2.c When playing with EWS I realized I'm not reasked for a password when the first is wrong, thus users cannot re-enter it (in evolution-ews they can reenter it, but the "authenticate" callback is not called on a session which failed before). My test program is close it, though I cannot mimic exactly that behaviour. Nonetheless, the attached test2.c shows that, with NTLM, the POST is done with only one "authenticate" emission. Only change the "exchange.example.com" with your EWS enabled exchange server host name. Mine current output of the test is: -------------------------------------------------------- queue_message_idle_cb: [0]: to be send (process:27884): libsoup-WARNING **: NTLM single-sign-on by using /usr/bin/ntlm_auth failed authenticate_cb: retrying:0 > queue_cb: [0]: result:401 queue_message_idle_cb: [1]: to be send (process:27884): libsoup-WARNING **: NTLM single-sign-on by using /usr/bin/ntlm_auth failed authenticate_cb: retrying:0 > queue_cb: [1]: result:401 queue_message_idle_cb: [2]: to be send (process:27884): libsoup-WARNING **: NTLM single-sign-on by using /usr/bin/ntlm_auth failed authenticate_cb: retrying:0 > queue_cb: [2]: result:401 -------------------------------------------------------- while I expect to see there: authenticate_cb: retrying:1 too. Testing with evolution-source-registry with configured evolution-ews account may help too, as it does call the authenticate_cb only once, on the first message, and the other messages are processed without that signal being emitted.
fixed in master The NTLM code has been heavily reorganized in unstable, so it would probably take a bit of work to backport the fix. (I haven't actually looked. And of course, we're already one past the number of 2.40 releases there were supposed to be anyway...) So, unless you say otherwise, the plan is to not backport this.
I'm fine, it was just that I faced it "accidentally".
*** Bug 646060 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***