https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9490
Issue ID: 9490
Summary: Make it so keepalive settings can be configured in
ldap.conf
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: libraries
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
There are certain cases where it would be helpful to be able to set a system
wide set of keepalive settings for any applications that use libldap (at least
on linux).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9491
Issue ID: 9491
Summary: memleak in asyncmeta
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: backends
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
Due to some code skew between old Symas repo and public repo, asyncmeta in
master/2.5 leaks a memctx on every operation.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9504
Issue ID: 9504
Summary: Assertion failure after reconfiguring
olcDbIDAssertBind in slapd-ldap
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: backends
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: tero.saarni(a)est.tech
Target Milestone: ---
OpenLDAP crashes to following assert error:
slapd: bind.c:2657: ldap_back_proxy_authz_ctrl: Assertion `0' failed.
The crash can be reproduced by executing following sequence:
1. create proxy with OLC configuration
2. execute modify operation that changes olcDbIDAssertBind (replace or
delete&add)
but do set mode=legacy as the value
3. execute ldapsearch as user that maps into idassert-bind
4. slapd crashes with the above error message
mode=legacy is the default and everything works after initial configuration (1)
even without adding mode=legacy into the configuration, but when doing
re-configuration using OLC (2) the default value does not seem to get
initialized
correctly anymore. This causes next LDAP operation (3) to fail after changing
the
configuration since the server crashes (4).
The assert in question is here, in the default branch when "mode" variable is
not
set at all:
https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/c9ee2ccd1c8aadaef9db90742…
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9501
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9480
Issue ID: 9480
Summary: Update default slapd.conf and slapd.ldif to include
back-monitor
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: ---
Now that back-monitor is always built into the slapd binary, we should update
the default slapd.conf and slapd.ldif files so it's present.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9453
Issue ID: 9453
Summary: Move argon2 overlay out of contrib
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: ---
The argon2 module should be moved out of contrib and into mainline OpenLDAP.
Additionally, configure options needs to be added to test for the presence of
libsodium or libargon2 if the argon2 module is to be built
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9446
Issue ID: 9446
Summary: back_passwd: invalid parsing of gecos field
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: ---
Created attachment 788
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=788&action=edit
fix
Parsing gecos(comment) field of /etc/passwd in
servers/slapd/back-passwd/search.c`pw2entry() has issues. I expands '&':
1) anywhere in in gecos, but the expansion must be limited by user's full name.
2) only 1st '&', but all `&'s in full name must be expanded
(nice explanation:
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/535189/ampersand-in-the-passwd-gec…)
fix attached. It expands each `&', left to right, until expanded user's full
name fits into internal { char buf[1024]; }
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9382
Issue ID: 9382
Summary: client tools ldapvc.c tracks criticality but doesn't
use it
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: client tools
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
In clients/toolsldapv.c, we have:
switch ( i ) {
char *control, *cvalue;
int crit;
...
case 'E': /* vc extension */
crit = 0;
if( optarg[0] == '!' ) {
crit = 1;
and then we never use "crit" again. It would appear the intention was to
determine whether or not this control is marked critical and then do something
based on that, but there is in fact nothing ever done.
This leads to a warning that crit is set but unused.
If the criticality of the control doesn't matter, than this variable should be
eliminated. If it does matter, then the missing code needs to be added.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9347
Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.