(ITS#7350) aclparse.c acl_unparse() attrval empty DN
by daniel＠pluta.biz
Full_Name: Daniel Pluta
Version: MASTER
OS: Linux
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (2001:470:9feb:ff03:4dbf:1141:9dad:2f88)
It seems to me, that the following acl statement isn't correctly unparsed within
aclparse.c:
to dn.base="ou=persons,o=test" attrs=seeAlso val/distinguishedNameMatch="" by
users read
Starting slapd using loglevel 128 reports:
Backend ACL: access to dn.base="ou=persons,o=test"
attrs=seeAlso
by users read
I would have expected:
Backend ACL: access to dn.base="ou=persons,o=test"
attrs=seeAlso
val/distinguishedNameMatch=""
by users read
As the empty DN is empty, the problem seems to be located in aclparse.c's
acl_unparse()'s statement
if ( !BER_BVISEMPTY( &a->acl_attrval ) )
or even in the parse_acl() flagless spliting into left and right.
11 years, 4 months
Re: (ITS#7349) openldap not supporting CAMELLIA ciphers
by hyc＠symas.com
goodgoingswati(a)gmail.com wrote:
> Full_Name: Swati
> Version: 2.4.32
> OS: RHEL5
> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
> Submission from: (NULL) (115.113.153.34)
>
>
> openldap is not supporting CAMELLIA based ciphers(both RSA and DSA based)
> I have configured SSL LDAP(LDAPS) and on checking SSL connection with LDAPS
> server with CAMELLIA based cipher leads to failure in handshake:
OpenLDAP doesn't implement any ciphers at all; the ciphers are provided by
whichever TLS implementation you're using. Closing this ITS.
>
> openssl s_client -connect localhost:636 -showcerts -cipher
> DHE-DSS-CAMELLIA256-SHA -state -CAfile /path_to_cert -cert /path_to_client_cert
> -key /path_to_client_key
> CONNECTED(00000003)
> SSL_connect:before/connect initialization
> SSL_connect:SSLv2/v3 write client hello A
> SSL3 alert read:fatal:handshake failure
> SSL_connect:error in SSLv2/v3 read server hello A
> 47726707455072:error:14077410:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:sslv3 alert
> handshake failure:s23_clnt.c:741:
> ---
> no peer certificate available
> ---
> No client certificate CA names sent
> ---
> SSL handshake has read 7 bytes and written 102 bytes
> ---
> New, (NONE), Cipher is (NONE)
> Secure Renegotiation IS NOT supported
> Compression: NONE
> Expansion: NONE
>
> Handshake is failing with all camellia ciphers.
>
>
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
11 years, 4 months
(ITS#7349) openldap not supporting CAMELLIA ciphers
by goodgoingswati＠gmail.com
Full_Name: Swati
Version: 2.4.32
OS: RHEL5
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (115.113.153.34)
openldap is not supporting CAMELLIA based ciphers(both RSA and DSA based)
I have configured SSL LDAP(LDAPS) and on checking SSL connection with LDAPS
server with CAMELLIA based cipher leads to failure in handshake:
openssl s_client -connect localhost:636 -showcerts -cipher
DHE-DSS-CAMELLIA256-SHA -state -CAfile /path_to_cert -cert /path_to_client_cert
-key /path_to_client_key
CONNECTED(00000003)
SSL_connect:before/connect initialization
SSL_connect:SSLv2/v3 write client hello A
SSL3 alert read:fatal:handshake failure
SSL_connect:error in SSLv2/v3 read server hello A
47726707455072:error:14077410:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:sslv3 alert
handshake failure:s23_clnt.c:741:
---
no peer certificate available
---
No client certificate CA names sent
---
SSL handshake has read 7 bytes and written 102 bytes
---
New, (NONE), Cipher is (NONE)
Secure Renegotiation IS NOT supported
Compression: NONE
Expansion: NONE
Handshake is failing with all camellia ciphers.
11 years, 4 months
Re: (ITS#7347) Exclusive bit masks for: ACL_WADD, ACL_WDEL, and ACL_WRITE
by daniel＠pluta.biz
Applying the patch accessible here:
ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/Daniel-Pluta-120808.patch together with
the acl set below obsoletes ITS#6900.
In combination they enable the mode of operation we described in section
VI, subsection G. of the previously linked paper.
to dn.base="ou=groups,o=test" attrs=children by users write by * none
to dn.one="ou=groups,o=test" attrs=owner by dnattr=owner write continue
by dnattr=owner self-z by * none break
to dn.one="ou=groups,o=test" attrs=entry,@groupOfNames by dnattr=owner
write by * none
The patch enables support to independently substract the privileges 'z'
or 'a' from 'w', while 'a' or 'z' remain in the resulting bit mask. The
other way around, adding 'a' or 'z' privs is also supported.
Nevertheless, in the sense of the subject of this ITS the patch
represents only a workaround. A clean solution (separating the 'a', 'z'
and 'w' bitmasks) is of course preferable.
LDIF test cases using ldapmodify command:
ldapmodify -x -D "cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test" ...
#create group entry (should fail)
dn: cn=its7347-fail,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: add
cn: its7347
objectClass: top
objectClass: groupOfNames
member: cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test
owner: cn=000002,ou=persons,o=test
#create group entry (should succeed)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: add
cn: its7347
objectClass: top
objectClass: groupOfNames
member: cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test
owner: cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test
#add another owner (should succeed)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: modify
add: owner
owner: cn=000002,ou=persons,o=test
#delete the other owner (should succeed)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: modify
delete: owner
owner: cn=000002,ou=persons,o=test
#delete the entry (should succeed)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: delete
#restore the group (should succeed)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: add
cn: its7347
objectClass: top
objectClass: groupOfNames
member: cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test
owner: cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test
owner: cn=000002,ou=persons,o=test
#delete the entry (should succeed)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: delete
#again restore the entry (should succeed)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: add
cn: its7347
objectClass: top
objectClass: groupOfNames
member: cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test
owner: cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test
owner: cn=000002,ou=persons,o=test
#try to delete the owner (should fail)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: modify
delete: owner
owner: cn=000001,ou=persons,o=test
#delete the entry (should succeed)
dn: cn=its7347-success,ou=groups,o=test
changetype: delete
11 years, 4 months
Re: (ITS#7348) enhancement: check_password contrib module
by Guillaume.Rousse＠inria.fr
Ceci est un message signC) cryptographiquement au format MIME.
--------------ms000000000208070102090606
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="------------050908090805020607010105"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050908090805020607010105
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Here is the patch.
--=20
Guillaume Rousse
INRIA, Direction des syst=E8mes d'information
Domaine de Voluceau
Rocquencourt - BP 105
78153 Le Chesnay
Tel: 01 39 63 58 31
--------------050908090805020607010105
Content-Type: text/x-patch;
name="0001-ITS-7348-new-check_password-contrib-module.patch"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename*0="0001-ITS-7348-new-check_password-contrib-module.patch"
=46rom fa2f6730171ab5755f56ca66715b723df726026d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Guillaume Rousse <guillomovitch(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 17:39:21 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] ITS #7348: new check_password contrib module
Signed-off-by: Guillaume Rousse <Guillame.Rousse(a)inria.fr>
---
contrib/slapd-modules/README | 3 +
contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/Makefile | 52 +++
contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/README | 146 +++++++++
.../slapd-modules/check-password/check_password.c | 356 +++++++++++++++=
++++++
4 files changed, 557 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/Makefile
create mode 100644 contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/README
create mode 100644 contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/check_password.c=
diff --git a/contrib/slapd-modules/README b/contrib/slapd-modules/README
index db74379..d8005ff 100644
--- a/contrib/slapd-modules/README
+++ b/contrib/slapd-modules/README
@@ -20,6 +20,9 @@ allop (overlay)
autogroup (overlay)
Automated updates of group memberships.
=20
+check_password (plugin)
+ External password quality check module for ppolicy
+
cloak (overlay)
Hide specific attributes unless explicitely requested
=20
diff --git a/contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/Makefile b/contrib/slap=
d-modules/check-password/Makefile
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..42dd18f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/Makefile
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+
+LDAP_SRC =3D ../../..
+LDAP_BUILD =3D ../../..
+LDAP_INC =3D -I$(LDAP_BUILD)/include -I$(LDAP_SRC)/include -I$(LDAP_SRC)=
/servers/slapd
+LDAP_LIB =3D $(LDAP_BUILD)/libraries/libldap_r/libldap_r.la \
+ $(LDAP_BUILD)/libraries/liblber/liblber.la
+
+CRACKLIB_PATH =3D /usr/share/cracklib/pw_dict
+CRACKLIB_INC =3D=20
+CRACKLIB_LIB =3D -lcrack
+
+CONFIG_PATH =3D /etc/openldap/check_password.conf
+
+LIBTOOL =3D $(LDAP_BUILD)/libtool
+CC =3D gcc
+OPT =3D -g -O2 -Wall
+DEFS =3D -DHAVE_CRACKLIB -DCRACKLIB_DICTPATH=3D"\"$(CRACKLIB_PATH)\"" \
+ -DCONFIG_FILE=3D"\"$(CONFIG_PATH)\"" -DDEBUG
+INCS =3D $(LDAP_INC) $(CRACKLIB_INC)
+LIBS =3D $(LDAP_LIB) $(CRACKLIB_LIB)
+
+PROGRAMS =3D check_password.la
+LTVER =3D 0:0:0
+
+prefix=3D/usr/local
+exec_prefix=3D$(prefix)
+ldap_subdir=3D/openldap
+
+libdir=3D$(exec_prefix)/lib
+libexecdir=3D$(exec_prefix)/libexec
+moduledir =3D $(libexecdir)$(ldap_subdir)
+
+.SUFFIXES: .c .o .lo
+
+.c.lo:
+ $(LIBTOOL) --mode=3Dcompile $(CC) $(OPT) $(DEFS) $(INCS) -c $<
+
+all: $(PROGRAMS)
+
+check_password.la: check_password.lo
+ $(LIBTOOL) --mode=3Dlink $(CC) $(OPT) -version-info $(LTVER) \
+ -rpath $(moduledir) -module -o $@ $? $(LIBS)
+
+clean:
+ rm -rf *.o *.lo *.la .libs
+
+install: $(PROGRAMS)
+ mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(moduledir)
+ for p in $(PROGRAMS) ; do \
+ $(LIBTOOL) --mode=3Dinstall cp $$p $(DESTDIR)$(moduledir) ; \
+ done
+
diff --git a/contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/README b/contrib/slapd-=
modules/check-password/README
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..10191c2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/README
@@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
+
+check_password.c - OpenLDAP pwdChecker library
+
+2007-06-06 Michael Steinmann <msl(a)calivia.com>
+2008-01-30 Pierre-Yves Bonnetain <py.bonnetain(a)ba-cst.com>
+2009 Clement Oudot <clem.oudot(a)gmail.com> - LTB-project
+2009 Jerome HUET - LTB-project
+
+check_password.c is an OpenLDAP pwdPolicyChecker module used to check th=
e
+strength and quality of user-provided passwords.
+
+This module is used as an extension of the OpenLDAP password policy cont=
rols,
+see slapo-ppolicy(5) section pwdCheckModule.
+
+check_password.c will run a number of checks on the passwords to ensure =
minimum
+strength and quality requirements are met. Passwords that do not meet th=
ese
+requirements are rejected.
+
+
+Password checks
+---------------
+ - passwords shorter than 6 characters are rejected if cracklib is used =
(because
+ cracklib WILL reject them).
+
+ - syntactic checks controls how many different character classes are us=
ed
+ (lower, upper, digit and punctuation characters). The minimum number =
of
+ classes is defined in a configuration file. You can set the minimum f=
or each
+ class.
+
+ - passwords are checked against cracklib if cracklib is enabled at comp=
ile
+ time. It can be disabled in configuration file.
+
+INSTALLATION
+------------
+Use the provided Makefile to build the module.
+
+Compilation constants :
+
+CONFIG_FILE : Path to the configuration file.=20
+ Defaults to /etc/openldap/check_password.conf
+
+DEBUG : If defined, check_password will syslog() its actions.
+
+Build dependencies
+cracklib header files (link with -lcrack). The Makefile does not look fo=
r
+cracklib; you may need to provide the paths manually.
+
+Install into the slapd server module path. Change the installation
+path to match with the OpenLDAP module path in the Makefile.
+
+The module may be defined with slapd.conf parameter "modulepath".
+
+USAGE
+-----
+To use this module you need to add objectClass pwdPolicyChecker with an =
+attribute 'pwdCheckModule: check_password.so' to a password policy entry=
=2E
+
+The module depends on a working cracklib installation including wordlist=
files.
+If the wordlist files are not readable, the cracklib check will be skipp=
ed
+silently.
+
+Note: pwdPolicyChecker modules are loaded on *every* password change ope=
ration.
+
+Configuration
+-------------
+The configuration file (/etc/openldap/check_password.conf by default) co=
ntains
+parameters for the module. If the file is not found, parameters are give=
n their
+default value.
+
+The syntax of the file is :
+
+parameter value
+
+with spaces being delimiters. Parameter names ARE case sensitive (this m=
ay
+change in the future).
+
+Current parameters :
+
+- useCracklib: integer. Default value: 1. Set it to 0 to disable crackl=
ib verification.
+ It has no effect if cracklib is not included at compile time.
+
+- minPoints: integer. Default value: 3. Minimum number of quality point=
s a new
+ password must have to be accepted. One quality point is awarded for e=
ach character
+ class used in the password.
+
+- minUpper: integer. Defaut value: 0. Minimum upper characters expected.=
+
+- minLower: integer. Defaut value: 0. Minimum lower characters expected.=
+
+- minDigit: integer. Defaut value: 0. Minimum digit characters expected.=
+
+- minPunct: integer. Defaut value: 0. Minimum punctuation characters exp=
ected.
+
+Logs
+----
+If a user password is rejected by an OpenLDAP pwdChecker module, the use=
r will
+*not* get a detailed error message, this is by design.
+
+Typical user message from ldappasswd(5):
+ Result: Constraint violation (19)
+ Additional info: Password fails quality checking policy
+
+A more detailed message is written to the server log.
+
+Server log:
+ check_password_quality: module error: (check_password.so)
+ Password for dn=3D".." does not pass required number of strength check=
s (2 of 3)
+
+
+Caveats
+-------
+Runtime errors with this module (such as cracklib configuration problems=
) may
+bring down the slapd process.
+
+Use at your own risk.
+
+
+TODO
+----
+* use proper malloc function, see ITS#4998
+
+
+HISTORY
+-------
+* 2009-10-30 Clement OUDOT - LTB-project
+ Version 1.1
+ - Apply patch from Jerome HUET for minUpper/minLower/minDigit/minPunc=
t
+
+* 2009-02-05 Clement Oudot <clem.oudot(a)gmail.com> - LINAGORA Group
+ Version 1.0.3
+ - Add useCracklib parameter in config file (with help of Pascal Pejac)=
+ - Prefix log messages with "check_password: "
+ - Log what character type is found for quality checking
+
+* 2008-01-31 Pierre-Yves Bonnetain <py.bonnetain(a)ba-cst.com>
+ Version 1.0.2
+ - Several bug fixes.
+ - Add external config file
+
+* 2007-06-06 Michael Steinmann <msl(a)calivia.com>
+ Version 1.0.1
+ - add dn to error messages
+
+* 2007-06-02 Michael Steinmann <msl(a)calivia.com>
+ Version 1.0
+
diff --git a/contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/check_password.c b/cont=
rib/slapd-modules/check-password/check_password.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..da427e7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/contrib/slapd-modules/check-password/check_password.c
@@ -0,0 +1,356 @@
+/*
+ * check_password.c for OpenLDAP
+ *
+ * See LICENSE, README and INSTALL files
+ */
+
+#include <string.h>
+#include <ctype.h>
+#include <portable.h>
+#include <slap.h>
+
+#ifdef HAVE_CRACKLIB
+#include "crack.h"
+#endif
+
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+#include <syslog.h>
+#endif
+
+#ifndef CRACKLIB_DICTPATH
+#define CRACKLIB_DICTPATH "/usr/share/cracklib/pw_dict"
+#endif
+
+#ifndef CONFIG_FILE
+#define CONFIG_FILE "/etc/openldap/check_password.conf"
+#endif
+
+#define DEFAULT_QUALITY 3
+#define DEFAULT_CRACKLIB 1
+#define MEMORY_MARGIN 50
+#define MEM_INIT_SZ 64
+#define FILENAME_MAXLEN 512
+
+#define PASSWORD_TOO_SHORT_SZ \
+ "Password for dn=3D\"%s\" is too short (%d/6)"
+#define PASSWORD_QUALITY_SZ \
+ "Password for dn=3D\"%s\" does not pass required number of strength che=
cks (%d of %d)"
+#define BAD_PASSWORD_SZ \
+ "Bad password for dn=3D\"%s\" because %s"
+
+typedef int (*validator) (char*);
+static int read_config_file (char *);
+static validator valid_word (char *);
+static int set_quality (char *);
+static int set_cracklib (char *);
+
+int check_password (char *pPasswd, char **ppErrStr, Entry *pEntry);
+
+static int set_quality (char *value)
+{
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Setting quality to [%s]", value);
+#endif
+
+ /* No need to require more quality than we can check for. */
+ if (!isdigit(*value) || (int) (value[0] - '0') > 4) return DEFAULT_QUAL=
ITY;
+ return (int) (value[0] - '0');
+
+}
+
+static int set_cracklib (char *value)
+{
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Setting cracklib usage to [%s]", va=
lue);
+#endif
+
+
+ return (int) (value[0] - '0');
+
+}
+
+static int set_digit (char *value)
+{
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Setting parameter to [%s]", value);=
+#endif
+ if (!isdigit(*value) || (int) (value[0] - '0') > 9) return 0;
+ return (int) (value[0] - '0');
+}
+
+static validator valid_word (char *word)
+{
+ struct {
+ char * parameter;
+ validator dealer;
+ } list[] =3D { { "minPoints", set_quality },
+ { "useCracklib", set_cracklib },
+ { "minUpper", set_digit },
+ { "minLower", set_digit },
+ { "minDigit", set_digit },
+ { "minPunct", set_digit },
+ { NULL, NULL } };
+ int index =3D 0;
+
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Validating parameter [%s]", word);
+#endif
+
+ while (list[index].parameter !=3D NULL) {
+ if (strlen(word) =3D=3D strlen(list[index].parameter) &&
+ strcmp(list[index].parameter, word) =3D=3D 0) {
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Parameter accepted.");
+#endif
+ return list[index].dealer;
+ }
+ index++;
+ }
+
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Parameter rejected.");
+#endif
+
+ return NULL;
+}
+
+static int read_config_file (char *keyWord)
+{
+ FILE * config;
+ char * line;
+ int returnValue =3D -1;
+
+ if ((line =3D ber_memcalloc(260, sizeof(char))) =3D=3D NULL) {
+ return returnValue;
+ }
+
+ if ( (config =3D fopen(CONFIG_FILE, "r")) =3D=3D NULL) {
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_ERR, "check_password: Opening file %s failed", CONFIG_FILE)=
;
+#endif
+
+ ber_memfree(line);
+ return returnValue;
+ }
+
+ while (fgets(line, 256, config) !=3D NULL) {
+ char *start =3D line;
+ char *word, *value;
+ validator dealer;
+
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ /* Debug traces to syslog. */
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Got line |%s|", line);
+#endif
+
+ while (isspace(*start) && isascii(*start)) start++;
+
+ if (! isascii(*start))
+ continue;
+
+ if ((word =3D strtok(start, " \t")) && (dealer =3D valid_word(word)) &=
& (strcmp(keyWord,word)=3D=3D0)) {
+ if ((value =3D strtok(NULL, " \t")) =3D=3D NULL)
+ continue;
+
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Word =3D %s, value =3D %s", word,=
value);
+#endif
+
+ returnValue =3D (*dealer)(value);
+ }
+ }
+
+ fclose(config);
+ ber_memfree(line);
+ return returnValue;
+}
+
+static int realloc_error_message (char ** target, int curlen, int nextle=
n)
+{
+ if (curlen < nextlen + MEMORY_MARGIN) {
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_WARNING, "check_password: Reallocating szErrStr from %d to =
%d",
+ curlen, nextlen + MEMORY_MARGIN);
+#endif
+ ber_memfree(*target);
+ curlen =3D nextlen + MEMORY_MARGIN;
+ *target =3D (char *) ber_memalloc(curlen);
+ }
+
+ return curlen;
+}
+
+ int
+check_password (char *pPasswd, char **ppErrStr, Entry *pEntry)
+{
+
+ char *szErrStr =3D (char *) ber_memalloc(MEM_INIT_SZ);
+ int mem_len =3D MEM_INIT_SZ;
+
+ int nLen;
+ int nLower =3D 0;
+ int nUpper =3D 0;
+ int nDigit =3D 0;
+ int nPunct =3D 0;
+ int minLower =3D 0;
+ int minUpper =3D 0;
+ int minDigit =3D 0;
+ int minPunct =3D 0;
+ int nQuality =3D 0;
+ int i;
+
+ /* Set a sensible default to keep original behaviour. */
+ int minQuality =3D DEFAULT_QUALITY;
+ int useCracklib =3D DEFAULT_CRACKLIB;
+
+ /** bail out early as cracklib will reject passwords shorter
+ * than 6 characters
+ */
+
+ nLen =3D strlen (pPasswd);
+ if ( nLen < 6) {
+ mem_len =3D realloc_error_message(&szErrStr, mem_len,
+ strlen(PASSWORD_TOO_SHORT_SZ) +
+ strlen(pEntry->e_name.bv_val) + 1);
+ sprintf (szErrStr, PASSWORD_TOO_SHORT_SZ, pEntry->e_name.bv_val, nLen)=
;
+ goto fail;
+ }
+
+ /* Read config file */
+ minQuality =3D read_config_file("minPoints");
+
+ useCracklib =3D read_config_file("useCracklib");
+ minUpper =3D read_config_file("minUpper");
+ minLower =3D read_config_file("minLower");
+ minDigit =3D read_config_file("minDigit");
+ minPunct =3D read_config_file("minPunct");
+
+ /** The password must have at least minQuality strength points with one=
+ * point for the first occurrance of a lower, upper, digit and
+ * punctuation character
+ */
+
+ for ( i =3D 0; i < nLen; i++ ) {
+
+ if ( nQuality >=3D minQuality ) break;
+
+ if ( islower (pPasswd[i]) ) {
+ minLower--;
+ if ( !nLower && (minLower < 1)) {
+ nLower =3D 1; nQuality++;
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Found lower character - quality =
raise %d", nQuality);
+#endif
+ }
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if ( isupper (pPasswd[i]) ) {
+ minUpper--;
+ if ( !nUpper && (minUpper < 1)) {
+ nUpper =3D 1; nQuality++;
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Found upper character - quality =
raise %d", nQuality);
+#endif
+ }
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if ( isdigit (pPasswd[i]) ) {
+ minDigit--;
+ if ( !nDigit && (minDigit < 1)) {
+ nDigit =3D 1; nQuality++;
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Found digit character - quality =
raise %d", nQuality);
+#endif
+ }
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if ( ispunct (pPasswd[i]) ) {
+ minPunct--;
+ if ( !nPunct && (minPunct < 1)) {
+ nPunct =3D 1; nQuality++;
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Found punctuation character - qu=
ality raise %d", nQuality);
+#endif
+ }
+ continue;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if ( nQuality < minQuality ) {
+ mem_len =3D realloc_error_message(&szErrStr, mem_len,
+ strlen(PASSWORD_QUALITY_SZ) +
+ strlen(pEntry->e_name.bv_val) + 2);
+ sprintf (szErrStr, PASSWORD_QUALITY_SZ, pEntry->e_name.bv_val,
+ nQuality, minQuality);
+ goto fail;
+ }
+
+#ifdef HAVE_CRACKLIB
+
+ /** Check password with cracklib */
+
+ if ( useCracklib > 0 ) {
+ int j =3D 0;
+ FILE* fp;
+ char filename[FILENAME_MAXLEN];
+ char const* ext[] =3D { "hwm", "pwd", "pwi" };
+ int nErr =3D 0;
+
+ /**
+ * Silently fail when cracklib wordlist is not found
+ */
+
+ for ( j =3D 0; j < 3; j++ ) {
+
+ snprintf (filename, FILENAME_MAXLEN - 1, "%s.%s", \
+ CRACKLIB_DICTPATH, ext[j]);
+
+ if (( fp =3D fopen ( filename, "r")) =3D=3D NULL ) {
+
+ nErr =3D 1;
+ break;
+
+ } else {
+
+ fclose (fp);
+
+ }
+ }
+
+ char *r;
+ if ( nErr =3D=3D 0) {
+
+ r =3D (char *) FascistCheck (pPasswd, CRACKLIB_DICTPATH);
+ if ( r !=3D NULL ) {
+ mem_len =3D realloc_error_message(&szErrStr, mem_len,
+ strlen(BAD_PASSWORD_SZ) +
+ strlen(pEntry->e_name.bv_val) +
+ strlen(r));
+ sprintf (szErrStr, BAD_PASSWORD_SZ, pEntry->e_name.bv_val, r);
+ goto fail;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+ else {
+#if defined(DEBUG)
+ syslog(LOG_NOTICE, "check_password: Cracklib verification disabled by =
configuration");
+#endif
+ }
+
+#endif
+
+ *ppErrStr =3D strdup ("");
+ ber_memfree(szErrStr);
+ return (LDAP_SUCCESS);
+
+fail:
+ *ppErrStr =3D strdup (szErrStr);
+ ber_memfree(szErrStr);
+ return (EXIT_FAILURE);
+
+}
+
--=20
1.7.11.4
--------------050908090805020607010105--
--------------ms000000000208070102090606
Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
Content-Description: Signature cryptographique S/MIME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--------------ms000000000208070102090606--
11 years, 4 months
(ITS#7348) enhancement: check_password contrib module
by Guillaume.Rousse＠inria.fr
Full_Name: Guillaume Rousse
Version: current git HEAD
OS:
URL:
Submission from: (NULL) (128.93.30.10)
The attached patch provides an external password checker module for ppolicy.
It was originally created by Michael Steinmann <msl(a)calivia.com>, then
maintained by Clement Oudot <clem.oudot(a)gmail.com> as part of the LTP project
(http://ltb-project.org/wiki/documentation/openldap-ppolicy-check-password).
Integrating it directly as an openldap official contrib module would help its
usage, as it relies on private OpenLDAP APIs. See README file for detailed
history and copyrights.
11 years, 4 months
Re: (ITS#7347) Exclusive bit masks for: ACL_WADD, ACL_WDEL, and ACL_WRITE
by Kurt＠OpenLDAP.org
On Aug 6, 2012, at 1:55 PM, daniel(a)pluta.biz wrote:
> Full_Name: Daniel Pluta
> Version: MASTER
> OS: Linux
> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
> Submission from: (NULL) (2001:470:9feb:ff03:e455:e36f:5b06:b2f1)
>
>
> The "Enhancement for dnattr=... ACL" we've described within the LDAPcon2011
> paper (http://www.daasi.de/ldapcon2011/downloads/plutahommelweinert-paper.pdf,
> Chapter VI, Section G., pdf page 7, left column bottom) seems to be still very
> useful in our opinion.
>
> We (Peter an me) have discussed the idea behind this enhancement together with
> Howard during dinner the day before the LDAPCon2011 officially started. We
> described the enhancement as some kind of
> "dnattr-based-administrator-less-2-way-handshake-entry-responsibility(-owner)-transition".
>
> Until today ITS#6900 contains a prototypical patch (very dirty hack), to
> demonstrate the described enhancement's mode of operation.
>
> The good news:
> Probably this hack isn't needed anymore in the future and thus ITS#6900 could be
> closed, but just in case ...
>
> The bad news:
> ... another (hopefully) less intrusive and generally useful patch, that seems to
> be implementable without introducing new keywords can be realized instead:
>
> In http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201208/msg00040.html Kurt
> explained that the acl privilege levels "a" and "z" share one bit with the "w"
> privilege's bit set. Thus currently neither "a" nor "z" can be independently
> substracted from "w" in the way either "z" or "a" remains in the privilege set.
> Subtracting "a" or "z" results in removing the complete "w" privilege (including
> "a" and "z").
Looking back at the devel discussion about the introduction of a/z privs (April 2005), there seems to have been no consideration of subtractive access controls. That is, I think the we all just missed the a/z feature was not implemented in a manner which supported subtractive access controls. Or, more simply put, whoops.
Using qualifiers was the mistake. Just should of replaced one bit with 2 bits, with some operations requesting one or the other or both bits.
> In case the bit masks of the privileges "a", "z", and "w" can be separated
> (introducing exclusive masks for ACL_WADD, ACL_WDEL and ACL_WRITE), the
> following acl set offers the above described mode of operation (out-of-the-box
> without the need to apply the hack submitted with ITS#6900):
>
> {0}to dn.base="ou=groups,o=iacm" attrs=children by users write by * none
> {1}to dn.one="ou=groups,o=iacm" attrs=owner by dnattr=owner =dxcsraz continue
> by dnattr=modifiersName -z by * none
> {2}to dn.one="ou=groups,o=iacm" attrs=entry,@groupOfNames by dnattr=owner write
> by * none
>
> I've not been able to test this acls yet (due to no available hack/patch). At
> least in theory it should represent the mentioned enhancement's mode of
> operation:
> The owner attribute can be modified (add and delete) by any owner, but no owner
> can remove himself from the owner attribute to either repudiate his personal
> responsibility for an entry or to produce a dangling entry (an administrator
> needs to clean up), in case it's the last owner.
I'd have to think a bit harder whether the access controls above implement this properly, but I am sure {1} can be written using non-substractive ACLs. Off hand, probably requiring two to do it.
> Herewith, the request for a more detailed description of a usecase where
> substractive privileges are of general use should be answered.
The general use case of additive and subtractive ACL is that it sometimes makes ACLs shorter.
> Additionally I
> also thought about the statement, that "good ACLs" are either static or
> additive:
I think I used the word "should", as in subtractive ACLs should be avoided. There are likely cases where their use can be well justified, just like default grant rules can sometimes be well justified. However, many security experts advise use of explicit grants (=) or additive (+) grants. I generally concur with this advice.
> I have not been able to find a static or additive ACL solution to
> implement the above described functionality in a similar elegant way (e.g.
> without administratively maintained group patterns)
>
> Alternative 1: (elegant static/additive ACL)
> There possibly exists a solution to express the above described mode of
> operation already nowadays by using static and additive acls only, if so, I
> appreciate any advice.
>
> Alternative 2: (coding the bitmask-separation)
> I have no clue how(h)ard ;-) it is to implement (especially test) a successfull
> separation of these bit masks. It was mentioned that the incremental processing
> of privileges has been added later and the underlying design could be
> suboptimal. Currently I don't know which pitfalls to be aware of (especially in
> and around acl.c). Nevertheless and depending on the answer to alternative 1,
> I'm interessted to give it a try, thus any thoughts and hints are very welcome,
> too.
The latter should be the preferred approach, IMO. The question I would have is wether an implementation of such would have any negative impact upon deployments. That's a real hard one to access, as deployments do some pretty crazy things. In short, it comes does to whether anyone does =w continue followed by -a or -z and expecting the outcome not to z or a respectively.
-- Kurt
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
11 years, 4 months
(ITS#7347) Exclusive bit masks for: ACL_WADD, ACL_WDEL, and ACL_WRITE
by daniel＠pluta.biz
Full_Name: Daniel Pluta
Version: MASTER
OS: Linux
URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
Submission from: (NULL) (2001:470:9feb:ff03:e455:e36f:5b06:b2f1)
The "Enhancement for dnattr=... ACL" we've described within the LDAPcon2011
paper (http://www.daasi.de/ldapcon2011/downloads/plutahommelweinert-paper.pdf,
Chapter VI, Section G., pdf page 7, left column bottom) seems to be still very
useful in our opinion.
We (Peter an me) have discussed the idea behind this enhancement together with
Howard during dinner the day before the LDAPCon2011 officially started. We
described the enhancement as some kind of
"dnattr-based-administrator-less-2-way-handshake-entry-responsibility(-owner)-transition".
Until today ITS#6900 contains a prototypical patch (very dirty hack), to
demonstrate the described enhancement's mode of operation.
The good news:
Probably this hack isn't needed anymore in the future and thus ITS#6900 could be
closed, but just in case ...
The bad news:
... another (hopefully) less intrusive and generally useful patch, that seems to
be implementable without introducing new keywords can be realized instead:
In http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201208/msg00040.html Kurt
explained that the acl privilege levels "a" and "z" share one bit with the "w"
privilege's bit set. Thus currently neither "a" nor "z" can be independently
substracted from "w" in the way either "z" or "a" remains in the privilege set.
Subtracting "a" or "z" results in removing the complete "w" privilege (including
"a" and "z").
In case the bit masks of the privileges "a", "z", and "w" can be separated
(introducing exclusive masks for ACL_WADD, ACL_WDEL and ACL_WRITE), the
following acl set offers the above described mode of operation (out-of-the-box
without the need to apply the hack submitted with ITS#6900):
{0}to dn.base="ou=groups,o=iacm" attrs=children by users write by * none
{1}to dn.one="ou=groups,o=iacm" attrs=owner by dnattr=owner =dxcsraz continue
by dnattr=modifiersName -z by * none
{2}to dn.one="ou=groups,o=iacm" attrs=entry,@groupOfNames by dnattr=owner write
by * none
I've not been able to test this acls yet (due to no available hack/patch). At
least in theory it should represent the mentioned enhancement's mode of
operation:
The owner attribute can be modified (add and delete) by any owner, but no owner
can remove himself from the owner attribute to either repudiate his personal
responsibility for an entry or to produce a dangling entry (an administrator
needs to clean up), in case it's the last owner.
Herewith, the request for a more detailed description of a usecase where
substractive privileges are of general use should be answered. Additionally I
also thought about the statement, that "good ACLs" are either static or
additive: I have not been able to find a static or additive ACL solution to
implement the above described functionality in a similar elegant way (e.g.
without administratively maintained group patterns).
Alternative 1: (elegant static/additive ACL)
There possibly exists a solution to express the above described mode of
operation already nowadays by using static and additive acls only, if so, I
appreciate any advice.
Alternative 2: (coding the bitmask-separation)
I have no clue how(h)ard ;-) it is to implement (especially test) a successfull
separation of these bit masks. It was mentioned that the incremental processing
of privileges has been added later and the underlying design could be
suboptimal. Currently I don't know which pitfalls to be aware of (especially in
and around acl.c). Nevertheless and depending on the answer to alternative 1,
I'm interessted to give it a try, thus any thoughts and hints are very welcome,
too.
Thanks a lot!
11 years, 4 months