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=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=9972
Issue ID: 9972
Summary: SSS needs READ instead of SEARCH access
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.3
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: overlays
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: dpa-openldap(a)aegee.org
Target Milestone: ---
I have configured an OpenLDAP 2.6 server with
dn: olcDatabase=mdb,cn=config
objectClass: olcDatabaseConfig
objectClass: olcMdbConfig
olcDatabase: mdb
olcAccess: to dn="cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org"
by * search # no problem if this is READ
olcAccess: to dn.sub="dc=aegee,dc=org"
by * read
…
dn: olcOverlay=sssvlv,olcDatabase={1}mdb,cn=config
objectClass:olcOverlayConfig
The content of the tree is available anymously by calling
ldapsearch -ZZxH ldap://ldap.aegee.org -b "dc=aegee,dc=org" -s sub .
When I modify the call to use SSS:
ldapsearch -ZxH ldap://ldap.aegee.org -b "dc=aegee,dc=org" -s sub -E
sss=ou:2.5.13.15
it also returns results, but ends with
```
# search result
search: 93
result: 50 Insufficient access
# numResponses: 3
# numEntries: 2
```
When I modify above:
olcAccess: to dn="cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org"
by * read
then the access is sufficient.
There is no entry called "dn:cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org", or rather the entry
shall not be returned on searches and `ldapsearch -ZxH ldap://ldap.aegee.org -b
"dc=aegee,dc=org" -s sub` does not return it.
These work without a problem:
ldapsearch -ZxH ldap://ldap.aegee.org -b "cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org" -s one -E
sss=ou:2.5.13.15
ldapsearch -ZxH ldap://ldap.aegee.org -b "cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org" -s sub
ldapsearch -ZxH ldap://ldap.aegee.org -b "cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org" -s one
This produces Insufficient access:
ldapsearch -ZxH ldap://ldap.aegee.org -b "cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org" -s sub -E
sss=ou:2.5.13.15
That said client-side-sorting does work without a problem, but server-side
sorting requires not only SEARCH, but also READ privileges on
dn="cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org".
I find this is a bug: SSS requires read-acesss to data, which is not supposed
to be returned to the client (dn:cn=bodies,dc=aegee,dc=org). For the
additional server-side sorting no additional privileges shall be required,
compared to returning the results without server-side-sorting.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9902
Issue ID: 9902
Summary: Make max index DBs for back-mdb configurable
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: backends
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
From ITS#9895:
Currently there is a hardcoded limit of 128 index DBs in back-mdb. Some sites
want more than this (although there's no evidence they actually use more than
128 attributes in all of their applications' search filters).
For 2.5/2.6 we can simply double the constant. For 2.7 consider making it
configurable.
Note that increasing the number increases the size of an LMDB transaction
structure, and also increases the time needed to initialize it whenever
creating a transaction, so it's a bad idea to just set this to an arbitrarily
large number.
--
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.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9829
Issue ID: 9829
Summary: set timeouts in remoteauth overlay
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5.11
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: overlays
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: david.coutadeur(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Currently, it seems there is no way to configure timeouts in the remoteauth
overlay.
For example, if I define a remoteauth_mapping with a file containing a
list of hostnames, the first one is checked first.
After "remoteauth_retry_count" * "connect_timeout" seconds, (210s on my
system), remoteauth test the second server in the list.
In some circumstances, it could be nice to set the connect timeout lower
(or higher).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9739
Issue ID: 9739
Summary: Undefined reference to ber_sockbuf_io_udp in 2.6.0
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.0
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: build
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: simon.pichugin(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
While I was trying to build OpenLDAP 2.6 on Fedora Rawhide I've got the error
message:
/usr/bin/ld: ./.libs/libldap.so: undefined reference to
`ber_sockbuf_io_udp'
I've checked commits from https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9673 and
found that 'ber_sockbuf_io_udp' was not added to
https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/liblber/…
I've asked on the project's mailing list and got a reply:
"That symbol only exists if OpenLDAP is built with LDAP_CONNECTIONLESS
defined, which is not a supported feature. Feel free to file a bug report
at https://bugs.openldap.org/"
https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/…
Hence, creating the bug.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9786
Issue ID: 9786
Summary: liblber: missing export of ber_pvt_wsa_err2string
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.1
Hardware: All
OS: Windows
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: libraries
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: tobias.junghans(a)veyon.io
Target Milestone: ---
When building (cross-compiling) OpenLDAP via GCC/mingw-w64, an undefined
reference to ber_pvt_wsa_err2string() is reported when libldap.dll is linked.
This can be fixed easily by adding ber_pvt_wsa_err2string() to
libraries/liblber/lber.map
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9782
Issue ID: 9782
Summary: regression test its8752 failure
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 a contextCSN update (new cookie) goes from server A through server B to
server C, server C will use that CSN to update entryCSN as well (which neither
A nor B did). This fails the initial replication check.
The issue has likely existed since deltasync was made possible, a version of
this is confirmed at least in 2.4.60 onwards to current master. In principle,
it is related to concerns raised in ITS#9580.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9652
Issue ID: 9652
Summary: Add "tee" capability to load balancer
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: lloadd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: mhardin(a)symas.com
Target Milestone: ---
This is a request for an enhancement that would add a "tee" or "fan-out"
capability to load balancer, where received operations are sent to two or more
destinations simultaneously.
The primary goal or the enhancement is to make it possible to keep multiple
independent and likely dissimilar directory systems in lock-step with each
other over hours, days, or possibly even weeks.
The enhancement would not necessarily need to include a mechanism for
converging the target systems should they become out of sync.
This is not intended to be a replication solution, rather it is viewed more as
a "copy" solution intended to be used for specific short-term tasks that need
multiple directory systems to be exactly synchronized but where replication is
not desirable or even possible.
At least two uses come to mind:
1. Test harnesses, evaluating side-by-side operation of separate directory
systems over time
2. Directory system transition validation harnesses
3. (maybe) Part of a test harness to record or replay LDAP workloads
* Other uses?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9431
Issue ID: 9431
Summary: back-mdb: Always have an equality index for
objectClass
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: backends
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
Data storage backends require an equality index on objectClass to function
correctly. As this is a hard requirement it should be automatic with back-mdb.
Why this wasn't done in the past with other backends isn't exactly clear, it
may have been due to their requirements to have additional cache layers. That
however is not necessary with back-mdb.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9398
Issue ID: 9398
Summary: Stale accesslog cookie due to unclean shutdown
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.4.56
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
If slapd terminates uncleanly, a checkpoint will be lost on the accesslog db.
Depending on the syncprov overlay checkpoint settings (usually no checkpointing
is enabled on the accesslog db) this can cause the system to refuse engage in
replication at startup.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9303
Issue ID: 9303
Summary: Add support for WolfSSL as an alternative to OpenSSL
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: libraries
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
For OpenLDAP 2.6, we should investigate adding support for WolfSSL as an
alternative to OpenSSL.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9284
Issue ID: 9284
Summary: Need man page for vc contrib overlay
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.4.50
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: contrib
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
The verified credentials overlay in contrib is missing a man page describing
its purpose
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
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.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9256
Bug ID: 9256
Summary: The ACLs required for SASL binding are not fully
documented
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5
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 727
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=727&action=edit
Patch massaging the SASL binding requirement docs
While some ACL requirements for SASL binding are documented, some are not.
E.g, that olcAuthzRegexp requires =x on objectClass when direct DN mapping is
not documented. Other requirements can be reasoned out based on the existing
documentation, but this can be very difficult when unfamiliar with all the
moving parts and the places they are documented. E.g. knowing that
(objectClass=*) is the default filter, and that there's _always_ _some_ filter,
and connecting this with ACLs required to do search-based SASL mapping.
The attached patch brings all the SASL binding requirements together in one
place in the docs and makes everything explicit. The word "SASL" is included,
for those searching for that keyword.
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 bug.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9220
Bug ID: 9220
Summary: Rewrite Bind and Exop result handling
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: ---
Bind and Exop result handling needs a rewrite so it is no longer a special case
for overlays.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9731
Issue ID: 9731
Summary: startup messages still go to syslog when logfile-only
is on
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.0
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: ---
When setting logfile-only on, slapd still logs its startup message to syslog:
Oct 29 21:07:47 u18test slapd[18534]: @(#) $OpenLDAP: slapd 2.6.0 (Oct 29 2021
05:12:17) $#012#011openldap
This is useful information to have consolidated into the specified logfile.
Note that:
617c62a3.16f03fdb 0x7f9325ed67c0 slapd starting
does make it to the logfile. However, it would be useful to have the build
date and version in the specified logfile.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9726
Issue ID: 9726
Summary: Admin guide and man pages need better documentation on
disabling syslog
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.0
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: ---
2.6.0 added the new feature allowing using a logfile for all debug/loglevel
messages and bypassing syslog entirely. However, there is no documentation on
the new settings or examples of how to do this in the admin guide, and the man
page sections on the new parameters for the logfile side do not note at
when/how they enable bypassing syslog.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10169
Issue ID: 10169
Summary: Add support for token only authentication with otp
overlay
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.6
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: ---
Currently the OTP overlay is password + token. It would be nice to be able to
configure it so it can run in a token only mode, similar to the slapo-totp
overlay in contrib. This would allow us to have a project supported solution
and retire that contrib module.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9564
Issue ID: 9564
Summary: Race condition with freeing the spilled pages from
transaction
Product: LMDB
Version: 0.9.29
Hardware: Other
OS: Mac OS
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: liblmdb
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: kriszyp(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 825
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=825&action=edit
Free the spilled pages and dirty overflows before unlocking the write mutex
The spilled pages (a transaction's mt_spill_pgs) is freed *after* a write
transaction's mutex is unlocked (in mdb.master3). This can result in a race
condition where a second transaction can start and subsequently assign a new
mt_spill_pgs list to the transaction structure that it reuses. If this occurs
after the first transaction unlocks the mutex, but before it performs the free
operation on mt_spill_pgs, then the first transaction will end up calling a
free on the same spilled page list as the second transaction, resulting in a
double free (and crash).
It would seem to be an extremely unlikely scenario to actually happen, since
the free call is literally the next operation after the mutex is unlocked, and
the second transaction would need to make it all the way to the point of saving
the freelist before a page spill list is likely to be allocated. Consequently,
this probably has rarely happened. However, one of our users (see
https://github.com/DoctorEvidence/lmdb-store/issues/48 for the discussion) has
noticed this occurring, and it seems that it may be particularly likely to
happen on MacOS on the new M1 silicon. Perhaps there is some peculiarity to how
the threads are more likely to yield execution after a mutex unlock, I am not
sure. I was able to reproduce the issue by intentionally manipulating the
timing (sleeping before the free) to verify that the race condition is
technically feasible, and apparently this can happen "in the wild" on MacOS, at
least with an M1.
It is also worth noting that this is due to (or a regression from) the fix for
ITS#9155
(https://github.com/LMDB/lmdb/commit/cb256f409bb53efeda4ac69ee8165a0b4fc1a277)
where the free call was moved outside the conditional (for having a parent)
that had previously never been executed after the mutex is unlocked, but now is
called after the unlock.
Anyway, the solution is relatively simple, the free call simply has to be moved
above the unlock. In my patch, I also moved the free call for mt_dirty_ovs. I
am not sure what OVERFLOW_NOTYET/mt_dirty_ovs is for, but presumably it should
be handled the same. This could alternately be solved by saving the reference
to these lists before unlocking, and freeing after unlocking, which would
slightly decrease the amount of processing within the mutex guarded code. Let
me know if you prefer a patch that does that.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10205
Issue ID: 10205
Summary: SSL handshake blocks forever in async mode if server
unaccessible
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5.17
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: libraries
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: regtube(a)hotmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
When ldaps:// scheme is used to connect to currently unaccessible server with
LDAP_OPT_CONNECT_ASYNC and LDAP_OPT_NETWORK_TIMEOUT options set, it blocks
forever on SSL_connect.
Here is a trace:
ldap_sasl_bind
ldap_send_initial_request
ldap_new_connection 1 1 0
ldap_int_open_connection
ldap_connect_to_host: TCP winserv.test.net:636
ldap_new_socket: 3
ldap_prepare_socket: 3
ldap_connect_to_host: Trying 192.168.56.2:636
ldap_pvt_connect: fd: 3 tm: 30 async: -1
ldap_ndelay_on: 3
attempting to connect:
connect errno: 115
ldap_int_poll: fd: 3 tm: 0
ldap_err2string
[2024-04-25 15:41:27.112] [error] [:1] bind(): Connecting (X)
[2024-04-25 15:41:27.112] [error] [:1] err: -18
ldap_sasl_bind
ldap_send_initial_request
ldap_int_poll: fd: 3 tm: 0
ldap_is_sock_ready: 3
ldap_ndelay_off: 3
TLS trace: SSL_connect:before SSL initialization
TLS trace: SSL_connect:SSLv3/TLS write client hello
Looks like it happens because non-blocking mode is cleared from the socket
(ldap_ndelay_off) after the first poll for write, and non-blocking mode is
never restored before attempt to do tls connect, because of the check that
assumes that non-blocking mode has already been set for async mode:
if ( !async ) {
/* if async, this has already been set */
ber_sockbuf_ctrl( sb, LBER_SB_OPT_SET_NONBLOCK, (void*)1 );
}
while in fact it was cleared.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9343
Issue ID: 9343
Summary: Expand ppolicy policy configuration to allow URL
filter
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: ---
Currently, ppolicy only supports a single global default policy, and past that
any policies must be manually added to a given user entry if they are supposed
to have something other than the default policy.
Also, some sites want no default policy, and only a specific subset to have a
policy applied to them.
For both of these cases, it would be helpful if it were possible to configure a
policy to apply to a set of users via a URL similar to the way we handle
creating groups of users in dynlist
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.