openldap-bugs May 2025

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
189 discussions

[Issue 10345] New: Potential memory leak in function rbac_create_session
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 29 Jan '26

29 Jan '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10345 Issue ID: 10345 Summary: Potential memory leak in function rbac_create_session Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: contrib Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: alexguo1023(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- In `rbac_create_session`, we have the following code: ```c if ( rc < 0 ) { rs->sr_err = LDAP_OTHER; rs->sr_text = "internal error"; } else { (void)ber_flatten( ber, &rs->sr_rspdata ); rs->sr_rspoid = ch_strdup( slap_EXOP_CREATE_SESSION.bv_val ); // first rs->sr_err = LDAP_SUCCESS; } ber_free_buf(ber); done:; // always put the OID in the response: rs->sr_rspoid = ch_strdup( slap_EXOP_CREATE_SESSION.bv_val ); //second ``` The second `ch_strdup` at the `done` label overwrites `rs->sr_rspoid` without freeing the previous string, resulting in a memory leak. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 10304] New: Unable to remove item from directory as part of transaction if it is the last item in that directory
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 29 Jan '26

29 Jan '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10304 Issue ID: 10304 Summary: Unable to remove item from directory as part of transaction if it is the last item in that directory Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.13 Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: sophie.elliott(a)arcticlake.com Target Milestone: --- I am running my ldap server on Debian 11.3, with the mdb backend, using the backported openldap version 2.5.13. I am not 100% certain if this is an issue with OpenLDAP or liblmdb, but I have been running tests in the repo and it looks like the liblmdb tests work fine, so I think it's with OpenLDAP itself. I have been performing a transaction, and deleting entries from a directory during this transaction. This works fine if the item that I am deleting isn't the last entry in its directory, but when it is I get a MDB_NOTFOUND error on the commit transaction call and the delete doesn't go through. Here is an excerpt of the logs when this happens: ``` 67a64334.14e1fc32 0x766ad2a00700 => index_entry_del( 108, "accessGroupID=f23de82f-3a1c-4f88-86bb-bb07f9a0992d,o=[COMPANY],ou=accessGroups,dc=local,dc=[COMPANY],dc=com" ) 67a64334.14e21912 0x766ad2a00700 mdb_idl_delete_keys: 6c [62d34624] 67a64334.14e22812 0x766ad2a00700 <= index_entry_del( 108, "accessGroupID=f23de82f-3a1c-4f88-86bb-bb07f9a0992d,o=[COMPANY],ou=accessGroups,dc=local,dc=[COMPANY],dc=com" ) success 67a64334.14e23a91 0x766ad2a00700 mdb_delete: txn_commit failed: MDB_NOTFOUND: No matching key/data pair found (-30798) ``` Please let me know if I should submit this issue elsewhere, or if this is something that has already been fixed in a more recent version. I'm also happy to provide more details if necessary. Thank you! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 8

[Issue 10343] New: Potential Memory Leak in function slap_uuidstr_from_normalized
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 29 Jan '26

29 Jan '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10343 Issue ID: 10343 Summary: Potential Memory Leak in function slap_uuidstr_from_normalized Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: alexguo1023(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1070 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1070&action=edit Patch: Change 1 to -1. In function slap_uuidstr_from_normalized, the code allocates a new `struct berval` with ```c new = (struct berval *)slap_sl_malloc(sizeof(struct berval), ctx); ``` and then attempt to allocate `new->bv_val`. If that second allocation fails, it sets `rc = 1` and jumps to the `done` cleanup label. However, the cleanup code only runs when `rc == -1`, so the memory pointed by `new` is never freed, causing a memory leak. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 10342] New: Potential Memory Leak in function mdb_txn_begin
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 29 Jan '26

29 Jan '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10342 Issue ID: 10342 Summary: Potential Memory Leak in function mdb_txn_begin Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: alexguo1023(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1069 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1069&action=edit Free txn->mt_u.dirty_list before freeing txn The function `mdb_txn_begin` allocates the dirty list via ```c txn->mt_u.dirty_list = malloc(sizeof(MDB_ID2) * MDB_IDL_UM_SIZE); ``` Later, when `txn != env->me_txn0`, it calls ```c free(txn); ``` without first freeing `txn->mt_u.dirty_list`. This orphaned allocation leads to a memory leak. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10341] New: Two potential buffer overruns in function mdb_cmp_cint.
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 29 Jan '26

29 Jan '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10341 Issue ID: 10341 Summary: Two potential buffer overruns in function mdb_cmp_cint. Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: alexguo1023(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1068 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1068&action=edit Patch: Fix buffer overrun in function mdb_cmp_cint We found two potential bugs in `mdb_cmp_cint`’s backward‐scan loop: ```c u = (unsigned short *)((char *)a->mv_data + a->mv_size); c = (unsigned short *)((char *)b->mv_data + a->mv_size); do { x = *--u - *--c; } while (!x && u > (unsigned short *)a->mv_data); ``` 1. **Underflow when `a->mv_size == 0`** If `a->mv_size` is zero, `u` is initialized to point one past the end of the zero‐length buffer. The first `--u` then moves it before `a->mv_data`, and the subsequent dereference is undefined. The original API allows lengths from 0 to `0xFFFFFFFF`, so a zero length is possible can could lead to pointer underflow here. 2. **Overflow of `b->mv_data` when `b->mv_size < a->mv_size`** The code uses `a->mv_size` to advance both `u` and `c`, and only bounds‐checks `u`. If `b->mv_size` is smaller than `a->mv_size`, `c` may run past the end of its buffer before the loop terminates, causing a buffer overrun. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 10340] New: Potential Buffer Overflow in mdb_rebalance
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 29 Jan '26

29 Jan '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10340 Issue ID: 10340 Summary: Potential Buffer Overflow in mdb_rebalance Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: alexguo1023(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1067 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1067&action=edit Add an early return when `mc->mc_top == 0` In `mdb_rebalance`, we do: ```c int ptop = mc->mc_top - 1; node = mc->mc_pg[ptop]; ``` However, `mc->mc_top` defaults to 0 in many contexts, so `ptop` can become `-1`. Indexing `mc->mc_pg[-1]` causes invalid memory access. Elsewhere this is handled by checking `mc->mc_top > 0` before decrementing. To fix this, we add an early return when `mc->mc_top == 0`. A root page (or one without a parent) doesn’t need rebalancing, so this guard prevents `ptop` from ever being negative and eliminates the out-of-bounds access. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10132] New: manage syncrepl as a cn=config entry
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 27 Jan '26

27 Jan '26

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.

1 2

[Issue 9884] New: Document "set" patterns in ACLs
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 06 Jan '26

06 Jan '26

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.

1 6

[Issue 9936] New: slapd attempting free on address which was not malloced
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 12 Dec '25

12 Dec '25

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.

1 8

[Issue 10100] New: Non-sequential timestamps being logged on Windows
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 09 Dec '25

09 Dec '25

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.

1 8

← Newer
1
...
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Older →

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs May 2025