openldap-bugs February 2025

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
41 discussions

[Issue 10313] New: 3-way multimaster oathHOTPCounter attribute update code missing
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 26 Mar '25

26 Mar '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10313 Issue ID: 10313 Summary: 3-way multimaster oathHOTPCounter attribute update code missing Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.6 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: agrru01(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- I posted on openldap technical mail list and got a response saying I should file a feature request. I am using a 3-way multimaster syncrepl setup with the slapo-otp module. My problem is that when authenticating with a user using HOTP, the attribute oathHOTPCounter only updates the value on the target ldap instance. This means the other two ldap instances do not get the updated HOTP-counter value and therefore will allow authentication using the same HOTP code. Interestingly enough, if I manually edit the oathHOTPCounter value it synchronizes with the other masters. Please see the technical mail list discussion: https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10169] New: Add support for token only authentication with otp overlay
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Mar '25

25 Mar '25

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.

1 6

[Issue 10020] New: dynlist's @groupOfUniqueNames is considered only for the first configuration line
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Mar '25

25 Mar '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10020 Issue ID: 10020 Summary: dynlist's @groupOfUniqueNames is considered only for the first configuration line Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.13 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: msl(a)touk.pl Target Milestone: --- If we consider the following configuration of dynlist: {0}toukPerson labeledURI uniqueMember+memberOf@groupOfUniqueNames {1}groupOfURLs memberURL uniqueMember+dgMemberOf@groupOfUniqueNames The {0} entry will correctly populate the memberOf relatively to static group membership. The {1} entry will produce dgMemberOf with dynamic group membership correctly (based on memberURL query) but it will not populate static entries IF {0} entry in configuration is present. IF I remove {0} from the dynlist configuration - or - remove @groupOfUniqueNames part from this configuration line, then both dynamic and static entries will be populated correctly for {1}. So the effects are as follows on some user entry: if both {0} and {1} are present - {1} produced only dynamic groups: memberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl memberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=dyntouk,ou=dyntest,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl if both {0} and {1} are present and @groupOfUniqueNames is removed from {0} - {1} produced static+dynamic groups: dgMemberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=dyntouk,ou=dyntest,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl If only {1} is present - {1} produced static+dynamic groups: dgMemberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=dyntouk,ou=dyntest,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl For completness - if only {0} is present: memberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl memberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl I would expect this behavior to be correct for the first case - {0} and {1}. memberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl memberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=dyntouk,ou=dyntest,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=adm,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl dgMemberOf: cn=touk,ou=touk,ou=group,dc=touk,dc=pl -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 11

[Issue 9934] New: slapd-config(5) should document how to store certificates for slapd usage
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Mar '25

25 Mar '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9934 Issue ID: 9934 Summary: slapd-config(5) should document how to store certificates for slapd usage Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.13 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: --- Commit 7b41feed83b expanded the ability of cn=config to save the certificates used for TLS by slapd directly in the config database. However the documentation for the new parameters was never added to the slapd-config(5) man page. olcTLSCACertificate $ olcTLSCertificate $ olcTLSCertificateKey -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 10

[Issue 10258] New: test050 failure: connection_close race?
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Mar '25

25 Mar '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10258 Issue ID: 10258 Summary: test050 failure: connection_close race? 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: --- Created attachment 1032 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1032&action=edit tail of slapd log Running test050 repeatedly, the slapd managed to get itself into an apparent inconsistency in the connections structure. The logs suggest that there might be a race closing the connection. Unfortunately the sanitiser didn't initiate a core dump in this case. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10274] New: Replication issue on MMR configuration
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Mar '25

25 Mar '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10274 Issue ID: 10274 Summary: Replication issue on MMR configuration Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.14 Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: falgon.comp(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1036 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1036&action=edit In this attachment you will find 2 openldap configurations for 2 instances + slamd conf exemple + 5 screenshots to show the issue and one text file to explain what you see Hello we are openning this issue further to the initial post in technical : https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/… Issue : We are working on a project and we've come across an issue with the replication after performance testing : *Configuration :* RHEL 8.6 OpenLDAP 2.5.14 *MMR-delta *configuration on multiple servers attached 300,000 users configured and used for tests *olcLastBind: TRUE* Use of SLAMD (performance shooting) *Problem description:* We are currently running performance and resilience tests on our infrastructure using the SLAMD tool configured to perform BINDs and MODs on a defined range of accounts. We use a load balancer (VIP) to poll all of our servers equally. (but it is possible to do performance tests directly on each of the directories) With our current infrastructure we're able to perform approximately 300 MOD/BIND/s. Beyond that, we start to generate delays and can randomly come across one issue. However, when we run performance tests that exceed our write capacity, our replication between servers can randomly create an incident with directories being unable to catch up with their replication delay. The directories update their contextCSNs, but extremely slowly (like freezing). From then on, it's impossible for the directories to catch again. (even with no incoming traffic) A restart of the instance is required to perform a full refresh and solve the incident. We have enabled synchronization logs and have no error or refresh logs to indicate a problem ( we can provide you with logs if necessary). We suspect a write collision or a replication conflict but this is never write in our sync logs. We've run a lot of tests. For example, when we run a performance test on a single live server, we don't reproduce the problem. Anothers examples: if we define different accounts ranges for each server with SALMD, we don't reproduce the problem either. If we use only one account for the range, we don't reproduce the problem either. ______________________________________________________________________ I have add some screenshots on attachement to show you the issue and all the explanations. ______________________________________________________________________ *Symptoms :* One or more directories can no longer be replicated normally after performance testing ends. No apparent error logs. Need a restart of instances to solve the problem. *How to reproduce the problem:* Have at least two servers in MMR mode Set LastBind to TRUE Perform a SLAMD shot from a LoadBalancer in bandwidth mode OR start multiple SLAMD test on same time for each server with the same account range. Exceed the maximum write capacity of the servers. *SLAMD configuration :* authrate.sh --hostname ${HOSTNAME} --port ${PORTSSL} \ --useSSL --trustStorePath ${CACERTJKS} \ --trustStorePassword ${CACERTJKSPW} --bindDN "${BINDDN}" \ --bindPassword ${BINDPW} --baseDN "${BASEDN}" \ --filter "(uid=[${RANGE}])" --credentials ${USERPW} \ --warmUpIntervals ${WARMUP} \ --numThreads ${NTHREADS} ${ARGS} -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 14

[Issue 10026] New: Refresh handling can skip entries (si_dirty not managed properly)
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Mar '25

25 Mar '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10026 Issue ID: 10026 Summary: Refresh handling can skip entries (si_dirty not managed properly) Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- Take MPR plain syncrepl with 3+ providers. When a provider's own syncrepl session transitions to persist and a it starts a new parallel session towards another host, that session always has to start as a refresh. If that refresh serves entries to us, our handling of si_dirty is not consistent: - if the existing persist session serves some of these entries to us, we can "forget" to pass the others to a newly connected consumer - same if the refresh is abandoned and we start refreshing from a different provider that might be behind what we were being served (again our consumers could suffer) - if we restart, si_dirty is forgotten and our consumers suffer even worse We might need to be told (at the beginning of the refresh?) what the end state we're going for is, so we can keep si_dirty on until then. And somehow persist that knowledge in the DB... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 9

[Issue 10205] New: SSL handshake blocks forever in async mode if server unaccessible
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Mar '25

25 Mar '25

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.

1 4

[Issue 10162] New: Fix for binary attributes data corruption in back-sql
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Mar '25

25 Mar '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10162 Issue ID: 10162 Summary: Fix for binary attributes data corruption in back-sql Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: dex.tracers(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1006 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1006&action=edit Fix for binary attributes corruption on backed-sql I've configured slapd to use back-sql (mariadb through odbc) and observed issues with the BINARY data retrievals from the database. The length of the attributes was properly reported, but the correct data inside was always 16384 bytes and after that point - some junk (usually filled-up with AAAAAAAA and some other attributes data from memory). During the debugging - I've noticed that: - The MAX_ATTR_LEN (16384 bytes) is used to set the length of the data for BINARY columns when SQLBindCol is done inside of the "backsql_BindRowAsStrings_x" function - After SQLFetch is done - data in row->cols[i] is fetched up to the specified MAX_ATTR_LEN - After SQLFetch is done - the correct data size (greater than MAX_ATTR_LEN) is represented inside of the row->value_len I'm assuming that slapd allocates the pointer in memory (row->cols[i]), fills it with the specified amount of data (MAX_ATTR_LEN), but when forming the actual attribute data - uses the length from row->value_len and so everything from 16384 bytes position till row->value_len is just a junk from the memory (uninitialized, leftovers, data from other variables). After an investigation, I've find-out that: - for BINARY or variable length fields - SQLGetData should be used - SQLGetData supports chunked mode (if length is unknown) or full-read mode if the length is known - it could be used in pair with SQLBindCol after SQLFetch (!) Since we have the correct data length inside of row->value_len, I've just added the code to the backsql_get_attr_vals() function to overwrite the corrupted data with the correct data by issuing SQLGetData request. And it worked - binary data was properly retrieved and reported over LDAP! My current concerns / help needed - I'm not very familiar with the memory allocation/deallocation mechanisms, so I'm afraid that mentioned change can lead to memory corruption (so far not observed). Please review attached patch (testing was done on OPENLDAP_REL_ENG_2_5_13, and applied on the master branch for easier review/application). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 8

[Issue 10299] New: slapacl -u segfaults on nonexistent user
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 10 Mar '25

10 Mar '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10299 Issue ID: 10299 Summary: slapacl -u segfaults on nonexistent user Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.9 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: client tools Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ratness(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1048 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1048&action=edit config.ldif 2.6.9, symas-packaged RPMs, Rocky 9. In slapacl, a rootDN user is, as you'd expect, allowed to do anything: # /opt/symas/sbin/slapacl -D 'cn=Manager,dc=example,dc=com' -u -b 'uid=fakeuser,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com' entry/write authcDN: "cn=manager,dc=example,dc=com" write access to entry: ALLOWED But, a user given full-manage rights, segfaults: # /opt/symas/sbin/slapacl -D 'uid=direct,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com' -u -b 'uid=fakeuser,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com' entry/write authcDN: "uid=direct,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com" Segmentation fault (core dumped) Traceback: Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x00007ffff7135888 in mdb_txn_begin (env=0x0, parent=parent@entry=0x0, flags=flags@entry=131072, ret=ret@entry=0x5555557f4940) at ./../../../libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c:2893 2893 flags |= env->me_flags & MDB_WRITEMAP; Missing separate debuginfos, use: dnf debuginfo-install glibc-2.34-60.el9.x86_64 libevent-2.1.12-6.el9.x86_64 sqlite-libs-3.34.1-6.el9_1.x86_64 (gdb) bt #0 0x00007ffff7135888 in mdb_txn_begin (env=0x0, parent=parent@entry=0x0, flags=flags@entry=131072, ret=ret@entry=0x5555557f4940) at ./../../../libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c:2893 #1 0x00007ffff71361a1 in mdb_opinfo_get (op=op@entry=0x7fffffffdce0, mdb=mdb@entry=0x7ffff7048010, rdonly=rdonly@entry=1, moip=moip@entry=0x7fffffffc410) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/back-mdb/id2entry.c:793 #2 0x00007ffff7136459 in mdb_entry_get (op=0x7fffffffdce0, ndn=0x7fffffffc640, oc=0x5555557a4360, at=0x5555557c3560, rw=0, ent=0x7fffffffc4c8) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/back-mdb/id2entry.c:620 #3 0x00005555555a77a0 in be_entry_get_rw (e=0x7fffffffc4c8, rw=0, at=0x5555557c3560, oc=0x5555557a4360, ndn=0x7fffffffc640, op=0x7fffffffdce0) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/backend.c:1438 #4 fe_acl_group (op=0x7fffffffdce0, target=<optimized out>, gr_ndn=0x7fffffffc640, op_ndn=0x7fffffffde10, group_oc=0x5555557a4360, group_at=0x5555557c3560) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/backend.c:1494 #5 0x000055555559ec5c in backend_group (op=0x7fffffffdce0, target=<optimized out>, gr_ndn=<optimized out>, op_ndn=<optimized out>, group_oc=<optimized out>, group_at=<optimized out>) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/backend.c:1690 #6 0x00005555555bfbc2 in slap_acl_mask (access=ACL_WRITE, state=0x7fffffffc660, count=1, matches=0x7fffffffcab0, val=<optimized out>, desc=<optimized out>, e=0x7fffffffd910, op=0x7fffffffdce0, mask=<synthetic pointer>, prev=0x0, a=0x5555557c3970) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/acl.c:1643 #7 slap_access_allowed (op=op@entry=0x7fffffffdce0, e=e@entry=0x7fffffffd910, desc=<optimized out>, val=<optimized out>, access=<optimized out>, state=<optimized out>, maskp=<optimized out>) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/acl.c:288 #8 0x00005555555c1e2e in fe_access_allowed (op=0x7fffffffdce0, e=0x7fffffffd910, desc=<optimized out>, val=<optimized out>, access=<optimized out>, state=<optimized out>, maskp=0x7fffffffd828) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/acl.c:352 #9 0x00005555555b7c74 in access_allowed_mask (op=0x7fffffffdce0, e=0x7fffffffd910, desc=0x55555573d540, val=<optimized out>, access=ACL_WRITE, state=0x0, maskp=0x7fffffffd900) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/acl.c:456 #10 0x0000555555620182 in slapacl (argc=<optimized out>, argv=0x7fffffffe398) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/slapacl.c:362 #11 0x000055555557658f in main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>) at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/main.c:540 I could understand it if it was a case of "trying to verify cn/write and not knowing if the user was objectClass=person" but for entry/write I don't see any reason these should be different. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs February 2025