[CI] ActiveDirectoryRunAsIT class failing

[elasticsearchmachine]

Build Scans:

• elasticsearch-periodic #8216 / single-processor-node-tests
• elasticsearch-periodic #8198 / encryption-at-rest
• elasticsearch-periodic #8198 / concurrent-search-tests
• elasticsearch-periodic-platform-support #8202 / oraclelinux-9_platform-support-unix

Reproduction Line:

undefined

Applicable branches:
main

Reproduces locally?:
N/A

Failure History:
See dashboard

Failure Message:

undefined

Issue Reasons:

• [main] 4 failures in class org.elasticsearch.xpack.security.authc.ldap.ActiveDirectoryRunAsIT (2.3% fail rate in 172 executions)
• [main] 2 failures in pipeline elasticsearch-periodic (28.6% fail rate in 7 executions)

Note:
This issue was created using new test triage automation. Please report issues or feedback to es-delivery.

[elasticsearchmachine]

Pinging @elastic/es-security (Team:Security)

[slobodanadamovic]

java.lang.Exception: Suite timeout exceeded (>= 1200000 msec).

org.testcontainers.containers.ContainerLaunchException: Container startup failed for image es-smb-fixture:latest	
at __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([279354606BF92A34]:0)	
•••
Caused by: org.testcontainers.containers.ContainerFetchException: Can't get Docker image: RemoteDockerImage(imageName=<resolving>, imagePullPolicy=DefaultPullPolicy(), imageNameSubstitutor=org.testcontainers.utility.ImageNameSubstitutor$LogWrappedImageNameSubstitutor@105cd8f7)	
at org.testcontainers.containers.GenericContainer.getDockerImageName(GenericContainer.java:1367)	
•••
Caused by: com.github.dockerjava.api.exception.DockerClientException: Could not build image: failed to get digest sha256:c394f1624522be4d12bd7e689371c444ca73d4e0a7b7c4026298feed68e81b4c: open /var/lib/docker/image/overlay2/imagedb/content/sha256/c394f1624522be4d12bd7e689371c444ca73d4e0a7b7c4026298feed68e81b4c: no such file or directory	
at com.github.dockerjava.api.command.BuildImageResultCallback.getImageId(BuildImageResultCallback.java:78)	
•••

It failed with two different causes. Both of them seem to be test setup related, hence marking it as low risk.