openldap-bugs September 2019

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

24 participants
50 discussions

(ITS#9076) back-ldap tries to free the wrong controls
by ondra＠openldap.org 10 Sep '19

10 Sep '19

Full_Name: Ondrej Kuznik Version: re24/master OS: URL: Submission from: (NULL) (82.132.242.212) ldap_back_extended_one needs to play with op->o_ctrls since it doesn't just pass ctrls over like the other sites in back-ldap, but it never sets oldctrls as is should. If a control is ever added to the list, it will restore op->o_ctrls to the wrong value and crash. This happens e.g. in certain chaining scenarios with mode=legacy.

1 0

Re: (ITS#9055) contrib/slapd-modules/passwd/totp improvements
by ondra＠mistotebe.net 09 Sep '19

09 Sep '19

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 10:59:46AM -0400, Greg Veldman wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 11:52:45AM +0200, Ond??ej Kuzn??k wrote: >> - could you split it in two patches, one to check the previous time step >> (+doc) and one to support the new schemes (+doc)? > > Working on it, will have updated patches up shortly... Thanks for the updated patches. >> - I don't think you need to allocate a copy of the passwd just come in, >> you can just frame it into separate bervals reusing the provided >> buffer so long as you keep in mind they are not NUL-terminated >> properly. > > Are you referring to the chk_totp_and_pw() function? If so, > since the expected format is <password><totp> with no seperator, > if I terminated the password part that would overwrite the first > char of totp, yes? That's the reason I make a copy and allocate > an extra byte for the NUL. I mean the ber_str2bv(,,1,) in both new functions. Not sure which code you think would overwrite parts of the buffer? ber_str2bv(,,0,) never touches it, manually initialising the berval certainly wouldn't either. And then you have fewer memory regions to scrub. Since you already know the length, you can also pass it in so ber_str2bv can skip its strlen() check (and since anything can be in a {PLAINTEXT} password, you're now embedded NUL safe). >> Just a style note, if there's an else coming, could you make sure both >> the if and the else blocks are in {}? > > Implemented, it will be included in the updated patches. I think I mentioned this before as something worth changing: rather than call time(0L), you can use op->o_time which is stable and the closest you can get to the time the operation was received. BTW, scinet.supercomputing.org's HTTPS cert is signed by Let's Encrypt Authority X3 as an intermediate, but isn't sending it during the handshake, so wget/curl aren't happy trusting it (I think browsers cache it or already have a copy). Thanks, -- Ondřej Kuzník Senior Software Engineer Symas Corporation http://www.symas.com Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP

1 0

Re: (ITS#9055) contrib/slapd-modules/passwd/totp improvements
by gv＠members.scinet.supercomputing.org 06 Sep '19

06 Sep '19

1 0

Re: (ITS#9069) Stop setting custom GnuTLS mutex functions
by ryan＠nardis.ca 06 Sep '19

06 Sep '19

I know the locking gets exercised (both libldap and GnuTLS sides) during connection and TLS handshake, so I tested this by doing a bind/search/unbind loop on a bunch of parallel threads. I built master with this patch in all of the following environments: Debian 8 (jessie), GnuTLS 3.3.30 Debian 9 (stretch), GnuTLS 3.5.8 Debian 10 (buster), GnuTLS 3.6.7 Debian unstable (sid), GnuTLS 3.6.9 FreeBSD 12.0, GnuTLS 3.6.8 Solaris 11.4, GnuTLS 3.5.16, --with-threads=lwp Solaris 11.4, GnuTLS 3.5.16, --with-threads=posix Windows 10 (MinGW), GnuTLS 3.6.8, --with-threads=nt Windows 10 (MinGW), GnuTLS 3.6.8, --with-threads=posix and ran my test program successfully on all of them. On each of these I also stepped into the debugger and confirmed that the expected calls happened (gnutls_system_mutex_lock calling resp. pthread_mutex_lock or EnterCriticalSection, ldap_pvt_thread_mutex_lock calling the expected API, etc). Any further comments, or suggestions for additional tests I should run?

1 0

ITS#9075 published: SECURITY: Not able to view directory structure in 389 management Console
by openldap-its＠OpenLDAP.org 06 Sep '19

06 Sep '19

Private ITS#9075 is now publicly readable URL: http://www.OpenLDAP.org/its/?findid=9075

1 0

ITS#9074 published: SECURITY: Not able to view directory structure in 389 management Console
by openldap-its＠OpenLDAP.org 06 Sep '19

06 Sep '19

Private ITS#9074 is now publicly readable URL: http://www.OpenLDAP.org/its/?findid=9074

1 0

Re: (ITS#9055) contrib/slapd-modules/passwd/totp improvements
by gv＠members.scinet.supercomputing.org 05 Sep '19

05 Sep '19

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 11:52:45AM +0200, Ond??ej Kuzn??k wrote: > - could you split it in two patches, one to check the previous time step > (+doc) and one to support the new schemes (+doc)? Working on it, will have updated patches up shortly... > - I don't think you need to allocate a copy of the passwd just come in, > you can just frame it into separate bervals reusing the provided > buffer so long as you keep in mind they are not NUL-terminated > properly. Are you referring to the chk_totp_and_pw() function? If so, since the expected format is <password><totp> with no seperator, if I terminated the password part that would overwrite the first char of totp, yes? That's the reason I make a copy and allocate an extra byte for the NUL. > Just a style note, if there's an else coming, could you make sure both > the if and the else blocks are in {}? Implemented, it will be included in the updated patches. -- Greg Veldman

1 0

Re: (ITS#9055) contrib/slapd-modules/passwd/totp improvements
by ondra＠mistotebe.net 05 Sep '19

05 Sep '19

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 08:14:55PM +0000, gv(a)members.scinet.supercomputing.org wrote: > v3 of the patch is available, which includes hashing functions > and documents the expected input format when using those functions. > I don't have the updated module on any of my servers yet, but > running slappasswd from my build directory does seem to yield > the same results as the non-password versions: > > $ ../../../../servers/slapd/slappasswd -T passwd -o module-load=`pwd`/.libs/pw-totp.so -h "{TOTP1}" > New password: > Re-enter new password: > {TOTP1}GAYA==== > > $ ../../../../servers/slapd/slappasswd -T passwd -o module-load=`pwd`/.libs/pw-totp.so -h "{TOTP1ANDPW}" > New password: > Re-enter new password: > {TOTP1ANDPW}GAYA====|{SSHA}Qo6WiIWWsWohlwZSo9oQkImKvSNArGio > > This is using an OTP seed of 00 and a password of foo > > https://scinet.supercomputing.org/~gv/slapd-totp-v3.txt Hi Greg, looking at the code, I think I'd be ok with this functionality and nothing major comes up for me. I would like to see a few changes though: - could you split it in two patches, one to check the previous time step (+doc) and one to support the new schemes (+doc)? - I don't think you need to allocate a copy of the passwd just come in, you can just frame it into separate bervals reusing the provided buffer so long as you keep in mind they are not NUL-terminated properly. Just a style note, if there's an else coming, could you make sure both the if and the else blocks are in {}? Regards, -- Ondřej Kuzník Senior Software Engineer Symas Corporation http://www.symas.com Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP

1 0

答复: (ITS#9072) openLdap client problem
by feng.wang＠iquantex.com 01 Sep '19

01 Sep '19

--_6DA7EF0F-7766-481F-9373-22F0846C9405_ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Thank you for your reply! =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 This problem has been solved, not the openldap pro= blem, but the problem with the use of the sssd service. Of course, I will c= onsider your suggestion to upgrade to version 2.4.48. =E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E8=87=AA Windows 10 =E7=89=88=E9=82=AE=E4=BB=B6=E5=BA=94= =E7=94=A8 =E5=8F=91=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: Quanah Gibson-Mount =E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9=97=B4: 2019=E5=B9=B48=E6=9C=8830=E6=97=A5 22= :07 =E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: feng.wang(a)iquantex.com; openldap-its(a)OpenLDAP.= org =E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98: Re: (ITS#9072) openLdap client problem --On Friday, August 30, 2019 7:14 AM +0000 feng.wang(a)iquantex.com wrote: > Thank you very much for getting support! > ???? In the production of openldap is the HA environment, other uses are > normal, only in the modification of the user to multiple groups (some > client new user information is updated, and some other host clients are > not updated). Please update to a current release of OpenLDAP, i.e, at least version=20 2.4.48 as numerous replication fixes have been made to the product since=20 that time. You were already told to upgrade in ITS#9053 as well. Please=20 stop filing ITSes until such a time as you have upgraded to a current=20 release. Regards, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com> --_6DA7EF0F-7766-481F-9373-22F0846C9405_ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" <html xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:sc= hemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/of= fice/2004/12/omml" xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta ht= tp-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8"><meta name= =3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style></style></head><body lang=3DZH-CN link=3Dblue vlink=3D"#954F72"><div cla= ss=3DWordSection1>Thank you for you= r reply!  &nbs= p;  This problem has been solved, not the openldap problem, but the pr= oblem with the use of the sssd service. Of course, I will consider your sug= gestion to upgrade to version 2.4.48.<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>=E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E8=87= =AA Windows 10 =E7=89=88<a hre= f=3D"https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=3D550986"><= span lang=3DEN-US>=E9=82=AE=E4=BB=B6</a>=E5=BA=94=E7= =94=A8<o:p> </o:p><div style=3D'mso-element:= para-border-div;border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0c= m 0cm 0cm'>=E5=8F= =91=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: <a = href=3D"mailto:quanah@symas.com">Quanah Gibson-Mount</a> =E5= =8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9=97=B4: 2019=E5=B9=B48=E6=9C=8830=E6=97=A5 22:07 =E6=94=B6= =E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: <a hre= f=3D"mailto:feng.wang@iquantex.com">feng.wang(a)iquantex.com</a>; <a href=3D"= mailto:openldap-its@OpenLDAP.org">openldap-its(a)OpenLDAP.org</a> <= b>=E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98: Re: = (ITS#9072) openLdap client problem</div><sp= an lang=3DEN-US style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:SimSun'><o:p> </= o:p><o:p> </o:p></s= pan><o:p> </o:p></p= >--On Friday, August 30, 2019 7:14 = AM +0000 feng.wang(a)iquantex.com wrote:<span= lang=3DEN-US><o:p> </o:p>> Thank you very much for getting support!> ???? In the production of openldap is = the HA environment, other uses are> normal, only in the modification of the user to multiple gro= ups (some> client new= user information is updated, and some other host clients are> not updated).<o:p> </o:p>Please update to a current release of OpenLDAP, i.= e, at least version 2.4.= 48 as numerous replication fixes have been made to the product since </span= >that time.=C2=A0 You were alre= ady told to upgrade in ITS#9053 as well.=C2=A0 Please stop filing ITSes until such a time as you = have upgraded to a current release.<o:p> </= o:p>Regards,<= p class=3DMsoNormal>Quanah<o:p> </o:p><span= lang=3DEN-US><o:p> </o:p>--<o:p> </= o:p>Quanah Gibson-Mount<= /span>Product Architect<= /p>Symas CorporationPackaged, certified, and supported LDAP= solutions powered by OpenLDAP:<http://www.symas.com><o:p> </o:p></div></body></html>= --_6DA7EF0F-7766-481F-9373-22F0846C9405_--

1 0

Re: (ITS#8383) msys build error "portable.h:1116:19: error: two or more data types in declaration specifiers"
by ryan＠nardis.ca 01 Sep '19

01 Sep '19

I've run into this myself while trying to test ITS#9069 on Windows. In my MinGW environment, <sys/socket.h> does not define socklen_t, so portable.h:1116 does '#define socklen_t int'. However, <ac/socket.h> includes <ws2tcpip.h> which does typedef socklen_t. base64.c includes "portable.h" first and then <ac/socket.h> later. This second include triggers the error as the original typedef essentially becomes "typedef int int". I think we can fix it by searching the Windows header as well, avoiding the #define appearing in "portable.h". https://github.com/openldap/openldap/compare/openldap:master...rtandy:its83…

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs September 2019