February 2021 - openldap-bugs

[Issue 9363] New: removing olcReadOnly on a DB does not set it to FALSE

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9363 Issue ID: 9363 Summary: removing olcReadOnly on a DB does not set it to FALSE Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.53 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: maxime.besson(a)worteks.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 771 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=771&action=edit ldif config that reproduces the issue I am running the following test: * add olcReadOnly: TRUE on a MDB database in cn=config * Try to write to the MDB database => fails with "unwilling to perform" as expected * remove the olcReadOnly attribute from the MDB database * Try to write to the MDB database => still fails with the same error * Restart slapd * Try to write to the MDB database => OK However the following test works as expected: * add olcReadOnly: TRUE on a MDB database in cn=config * Try to write to the MDB database => fails with "unwilling to perform" as expected * modify olcReadOnly to FALSE on the MDB database * Try to write to the MDB database => OK It seems a little counter intuitive to me that removing a setting does not reset it to its default value. The fact that a slapd restart make writing possible again in the first test described above makes it seem to the casual user that olcReadOnly cannot be undone without a restart at all. Tested in 2.4.53 and 2.4.44, config attached but it probably works with any config (hdb, etc) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 3 months

2
9
0 / 0

[Issue 9272] New: Invalid search results for subordinate/glued database

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9272 Issue ID: 9272 Summary: Invalid search results for subordinate/glued database Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.47 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: grapvar(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Here is a trivial test case. Look at the following bunch of glued dit's/databases, declared in this order: | suffix ou=a,ou=1,ou=T # subordinate; contains only one (top-level) entry | suffix ou=2,ou=T # subordinate; contains only one (top-level) entry | suffix ou=b,ou=1,ou=T # subordinate; contains only one (top-level) entry | suffix ou=T # master database, has two entries, top-level | ` ou=1 # ... and this child entry let's query the united database: | $ ldapsearch -b ou=1,ou=T -s sub '' nx | dn: ou=1,ou=T | dn: ou=a,ou=1,ou=T | dn: ou=b,ou=1,ou=T Nice! But wait, what if ... | $ ldapsearch -b ou=1,ou=T -s sub -E\!pr=2/noprompt '' nx | dn: ou=1,ou=T | dn: ou=a,ou=1,ou=T | | # pagedresults: cookie=//////////8= ... BANG! ... | Server is unwilling to perform (53) The problem is the glue_op_search(), which has issues * different parts of code make different assumptions about data structures * different parts of code track state inconsistently * code that looks like a highly probably dead code I mean that likely possible to build another bug-triggering test cases, and glue_op_search() needs not just a fix of the bug above, but intense cleaning and structuring. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 3 months

1
12
0 / 0

[Bug 9219] New: Streamline tool API for 2.5

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9219 Bug ID: 9219 Summary: Streamline tool API for 2.5 Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- The current tool API is a mess and needs fixing for 2.5. This affects things like slapacl (The fix for bug#7920 was a kludge to deal with this, needs revisiting). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 years, 3 months

1
4
0 / 0

[Issue 9295] New: ppolicy and replication: pwdLockedTime replication fails to replicate

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9295 Issue ID: 9295 Summary: ppolicy and replication: pwdLockedTime replication fails to replicate Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- If you have the following setup, a replica will hit an error during replication. a) ppolicy is configured on provider(s) and replicas. Replica has schemachecking=on in its syncrepl configuration b) account gets locked on the replica, so pwdAccountLockedTime is set on the replica but not on the provider(s) c) admin does a MOD/ADD op against a provider for the user entry to add a value to pwdAccountLockedTime dn: ... changetype: modify add: pwdAccountLockedTime pwdAccountLockedTime: ... d) provider accepts this modification. e) replica rejects this modification because the resulting change means that there would be two pwdAccountLockedTime values on the account in question Generally I believe that in this scenario, the MOD/ADD on the provider should be treated as a replace OP instead of an ADD op -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 4 months

1
18
0 / 0

[Issue 9396] New: Docs might recommend applicationProcess for ppolicy entries

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9396 Issue ID: 9396 Summary: Docs might recommend applicationProcess for ppolicy entries Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: documentation Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: kop(a)karlpinc.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 779 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=779&action=edit Suggested doc patch Hello, The ppolicy section of the Admin Guide does not say why the "people" object class is present in the example policy entry. I suggest that the docs explain. Otherwise the reader is left wondering why the particular choice of structural object class was made. The less informed reader is left wondering why a second object class is required at all. I also suggest that instead of the "people" object class, that the applicationProcess object class be used in the example to provide the structural object class the entry requires. The slapo-ppolicy man page might also provide guidance. Attached is a suggested patch, provided so that you have something to work from. If you're not happy with the patch go ahead and discard it, I'm not advocating any particular wording. I, Karl O. Pinc, hereby place the following modifications to OpenLDAP Software (and only these modifications) into the public domain. Hence, these modifications may be freely used and/or redistributed for any purpose with or without attribution and/or other notice. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 4 months

1
12
0 / 0

[Issue 9337] New: Slapd crash with lastbind overlay

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9337 Issue ID: 9337 Summary: Slapd crash with lastbind overlay Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.50 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: frederic.poisson(a)admin.gmessaging.net Target Milestone: --- Hello, I have an issue with a 2.4.50 OpenLDAP instance configured with replication (1 master and 1 replica), and when i activate the lastbind overlay. The replica server crash like this : slapd[8433]: segfault at 1d0 ip 000000000049f70b sp 00007f189f7fd1a0 error 4 in slapd[400000+1d8000] The database is this one with overlay loaded : dn: cn=module{0},cn=config olcModuleLoad: {0}sssvlv.la olcModuleLoad: {1}ppolicy.la olcModuleLoad: {2}syncprov.la olcModuleLoad: {3}lastbind.la olcModuleLoad: {4}pw-sha2.la dn: olcDatabase={3}mdb,cn=config objectClass: olcDatabaseConfig objectClass: olcMdbConfig olcUpdateRef: ldap://master.server:389/ If i add this configuration it crash : dn: olcOverlay={2}lastbind objectClass: olcOverlayConfig objectClass: olcLastBindConfig olcOverlay: {2}lastbind olcLastBindPrecision: 60 olcLastBindForwardUpdates: TRUE Does the release 2.5.51 or 2.5.52 could solve this issue ? Regards, -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 4 months

1
11
0 / 0

[Issue 9461] New: Deletion causes cursor to repeat

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9461 Issue ID: 9461 Summary: Deletion causes cursor to repeat Product: LMDB Version: 0.9.27 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: github(a)nicwatson.org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 795 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=795&action=edit repro of cursor delete bug See attached source code for reproduction. The test behaves correctly in 0.9.26 and fails in 0.9.27 and 0.9.28. The failing sequence is: 1. In a dupsort DB, create two different keys and values. 2. Create a cursor, setting the position to the second key. 3. Delete the first key. 4. Have the cursor get the next key. mdb_get_key will return the second key instead of returning MDB_NOT_FOUND. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 5 months

1
6
0 / 0

[Issue 9470] New: Add homedir overlay to core

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9470 Issue ID: 9470 Summary: Add homedir overlay to core Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Symas will contribute its homedir overlay as a core overlay Home directory provisioning overlay The homedir overlay causes slapd to notice changes involving RFC-2307bis style user-objects and make appropriate changes to the local filesystem. This can be performed on both master and replica systems, so it is possible to perform remote home directory provisioning. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 5 months

1
6
0 / 0

[Issue 9445] New: ITS#9339/1748ec59a crashes slapd on ip connect in tcpwrappers

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9445 Issue ID: 9445 Summary: ITS#9339/1748ec59a crashes slapd on ip connect in tcpwrappers Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: grapvar(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- When openldap is configured with tcpwrappers, servers/slapd/daemon.c`slap_listener() calls: > hosts_ctl("slapd", dnsname != NULL ? dnsname : SLAP_STRING_UNKNOWN, > peeraddr, ... where `peeraddr' must be client ip addr or literal "unknown" string. Commit [2020-09-06 1748ec59a ITS#9339 Add syncrepl status to cn=monitor] is made so that `peeraddr' contains fixed NULL value. This causes immediate crash of slapd inside tcpwrappers library when client connects using ip protocol at least on Solaris x86-64. I did not verify this on linux, but even if slapd doesn't crash on linux, then tcpwrappers do not work as expected anyway. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 6 months

1
4
0 / 0

[Issue 9482] New: slapi_int_get_plugins() may return uninitialized data

by openldap-its＠openldap.org

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9482 Issue ID: 9482 Summary: slapi_int_get_plugins() may return uninitialized data Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: grapvar(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- ... because > if ( be == NULL ) { > goto done; > } returns before output variable ppFuncPtrs has been initialized. This may be not affect openldap code, but, if I understand correctly, slapi_int_get_plugins() is part of api and may affect 3rd party. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

2 years, 6 months

1
6
0 / 0

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs February 2021