https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10132
Issue ID: 10132
Summary: manage syncrepl as a cn=config entry
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Maybe it being exposed through both places (olcSyncrepl and the entry) could be
a way to manage the transition (unless we have a way to handle cn=config schema
upgrades internally). Uncertain as to how that affects cn=config replication.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9884
Issue ID: 9884
Summary: Document "set" patterns in ACLs
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: documentation
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
The slapd.access(5) man page has this exceptionally unhelpful line where sets
are concerned:
"The statement set=<pattern> is undocumented yet."
Even if it is an experimental feature, it should still be documented on how it
is meant to operate.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9936
Issue ID: 9936
Summary: slapd attempting free on address which was not
malloced
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.3
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: kimjuhi96(a)snu.ac.kr
Target Milestone: ---
I get invalid free running this on the latest openldap from git, built with
CFLAGS="-fsanitize=address" using clang 15.
Seems this is similar to https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9912.
./servers/slapd/slapd -T c -s1 -s1
Stopped reason: SIGABRT
__GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=0x6) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:50
50 ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c: No such file or directory.
gdb-peda$ bt
#0 __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=0x6) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:50
#1 0x00007ffff78ca859 in __GI_abort () at abort.c:79
#2 0x00005555556eb04f in __sanitizer::Abort ()
at
/home/juhee/project/foxfuzz/llvm-project/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_posix_libcdep.cpp:143
#3 0x00005555556e8aac in __sanitizer::Die ()
at
/home/juhee/project/foxfuzz/llvm-project/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_termination.cpp:58
#4 0x00005555556c5dda in __asan::ScopedInErrorReport::~ScopedInErrorReport
(this=0x7fffffffbe7e, __in_chrg=<optimized out>)
at
/home/juhee/project/foxfuzz/llvm-project/compiler-rt/lib/asan/asan_report.cpp:192
#5 0x00005555556c72b8 in __asan::ReportFreeNotMalloced (addr=<optimized out>,
free_stack=0x7fffffffca90)
at
/home/juhee/project/foxfuzz/llvm-project/compiler-rt/lib/asan/asan_report.cpp:199
#6 0x00005555556c02ab in __interceptor_free (ptr=0x7fffffffe359)
at
/home/juhee/project/foxfuzz/llvm-project/compiler-rt/lib/asan/asan_malloc_linux.cpp:53
#7 0x0000555555d3efe2 in ber_memfree_x ()
#8 0x0000555555847d33 in ch_free ()
#9 0x0000555555a31178 in slap_tool_init ()
#10 0x0000555555a2e54d in slapcat ()
#11 0x000055555570901f in main ()
#12 0x00007ffff78cc083 in __libc_start_main (main=0x555555706ef0 <main>,
argc=0x5, argv=0x7fffffffdfc8,
init=<optimized out>, fini=<optimized out>, rtld_fini=<optimized out>,
stack_end=0x7fffffffdfb8)
at ../csu/libc-start.c:308
#13 0x000055555561011e in _start ()
at
/home/juhee/project/foxfuzz/llvm-project/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_internal_defs.h:397
gdb-peda$
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10100
Issue ID: 10100
Summary: Non-sequential timestamps being logged on Windows
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.6
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Windows
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: smckinney(a)symas.com
Target Milestone: ---
Presents as a dsync during replication. Consumer will log
```
650af021.2eadd901 0000000000001b40 slap_queue_csn: queueing 0000000002ac1620
20230920131409.992477Z#000000#001#000000
650af021.2eaed239 0000000000001b40 slap_graduate_commit_csn: removing
0000000002ac1620 20230920131409.992477Z#000000#001#000000
650af021.317b2a35 000000000000185c do_syncrep2: rid=102 CSN too old, ignoring
20230920131409.040136Z#000000#001#000000
(uid=slapd-test1-FOO1-6,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com)
```
The entry was not be added.
The provider will log messages using non-sequential timestamps. For example,
when grepping the CSN from above (in provider log):
```
# This:
650af021.3b3060d9 0000000000001ad8 conn=1001 op=1 syncprov_sendresp: to=002,
cookie=rid=102,sid=001,csn=20230920131409.992477Z#000000#001#000000
# and:
650af021.02648749 0000000000001810 slap_get_csn: conn=1003 op=7 generated new
csn=20230920131409.040136Z#000000#001#000000 manage=1
```
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10277
Issue ID: 10277
Summary: How to deal with desync between cn=config and
back-ldif DNs
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
If someone deletes a cn=config entry offline (or through bugs in cn=config,
they exist, will file as I isolate), the X-ORDERED RDNs will not be contiguous.
cn=config papers over this internally at a cost of never being able to modify
the entries affected.
Right now the only remedy is slapcat+slapadd of the whole config DB, is that
the best we can do? When we detect this (doesn't always happen), should we fix
the on-disk copy on startup?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10269
Issue ID: 10269
Summary: slap-constraint: Refactor to use a sorted array
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.8
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: overlays
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
As noted in the comments for slapo-constraint:
/*
* Linked list of attribute constraints which we should enforce.
* This is probably a sub optimal structure - some form of sorted
* array would be better if the number of attributes constrained is
* likely to be much bigger than 4 or 5. We stick with a list for
* the moment.
*/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10217
Issue ID: 10217
Summary: autoca should support more key types
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.7
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: enhancement
Priority: ---
Component: overlays
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
Currently autoca only creates certificates using RSA keypairs. It should at
least have an option to use Elliptic Curve keypairs. It probably also needs
options to specify other signature algorithms other than the default of SHA256.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10086
Issue ID: 10086
Summary: test059 does not set up valid cn=config replication
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.4
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: test suite
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
For cn=config replication to be valid, the entryUUIDs must match throughout the
config database. However, this is not the case when test059 executes. The
entryUUID for 'dn: cn=config' differs between the two.
Example:
quanah@apito1:~/git/quanah/openldap-scratch/tests/testrun$ grep entryUUID:
cfcon.d/cn\=config.ldif
entryUUID: aea058c4-bf6e-103d-9e18-4582986e9372
quanah@apito1:~/git/quanah/openldap-scratch/tests/testrun$ grep entryUUID:
db.1.a/cn\=config\,cn\=consumer.ldif
entryUUID: ae9bd858-bf6e-103d-871e-5daccf782d22
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9584
Issue ID: 9584
Summary: cn=config replication ops/refresh should pause server
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Looking into this crash: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/jobs/7286
The thread in question is running a plain syncrepl refresh while another thread
seems to have done the same. This thread fetched the entryUUID attribute of the
'cn=config' entry as 'a' and in the meantime, that entry has been rewritten,
with 'a' presumably cleaned up and returned to the pool, so addressing
a->a_nvals[0] is a NULL-dereference now.
This might or might not be related to the fix in ITS#8102.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9881
Issue ID: 9881
Summary: Ability to track last authentication for database
objects
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
For simple binds, we have the ability to track the last success via the
lastbind functionality (pwdLastSuccess attribute). However this doesn't allow
one to see when an object that exists in a database last authenticated via
SASL.
It would be useful to add similar functionality for SASL binds.
This can be useful information that allows one to tell if an object is being
actively authenticated to (generally, users and system accounts, etc).
Obviously if something is directly mapped to an identity that doesn't exist in
the underlying DB, that cannot be tracked.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.