openldap-bugs July 2025

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
159 discussions

[Issue 10301] New: Use assertion control in lastbind chaining
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 26 Aug '25

26 Aug '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10301 Issue ID: 10301 Summary: Use assertion control in lastbind chaining 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: --- Take a setup with a bunch of consumers tracking lastbind information and replicating this back from the provider. If a client sends a lot of successful binds to it in a very short window, the changes might not have a chance to replicate down so each of these binds has to trigger a new modification to be forwarded. This results in a lot of DB churn and replication traffic that is actually meaningless (the pwdLastChange values before and after each of the mods will be the same). We probably can't avoid having to send something, but the change we send could have an assertion control attached that lets the provider skip it if pwdLastChange>=new_value, saving on all of the additional processing (and additional useless replication traffic). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Bug 9186] New: RFE: More metrics in cn=monitor
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 26 Aug '25

26 Aug '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9186 Bug ID: 9186 Summary: RFE: More metrics in cn=monitor Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: michael(a)stroeder.com Target Milestone: --- Currently I'm grepping metrics from syslog with mtail: https://gitlab.com/ae-dir/ansible-ae-dir-server/-/blob/master/templates/mta… With a new binary logging this is not possible anymore. Thus it would be nice if cn=monitor provides more metrics. 1. Overall connection count per listener starting at 0 when started. This would be a simple counter added to: entries cn=Listener 0,cn=Listeners,cn=Monitor 2. Counter for the various "deferring" messages separated by the reason for deferring. 3. Counters for all possible result codes. In my mtail program I also label it with the result type. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 16

[Issue 10092] New: Local logging doesn't build on Windows
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '25

19 Aug '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10092 Issue ID: 10092 Summary: Local logging doesn't build on Windows Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.6 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- slapd/logging.c uses writev() to write a prefix and the log message together in one call. This feature doesn't exist on Windows. The closest equivalent, WriteFileGather, only works on page sized and aligned writes. On Windows the only way to write as desired is to copy the message into a new buffer first. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 10140] New: Add microsecond timestamp format for local file logging
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 19 Aug '25

19 Aug '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10140 Issue ID: 10140 Summary: Add microsecond timestamp format for local file logging Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.6 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: gnoe(a)symas.com Target Milestone: --- Add microsecond-level timestamps to local file logging. Format is: "YYYY-mm-ddTHH:MM:SS.ffffffZ" The attached patch file is derived from OpenLDAP Software. All of the modifications to OpenLDAP Software represented in the following patch(es) were developed by Gregory Noe gnoe(a)symas.com. I have not assigned rights and/or interest in this work to any party. The attached modifications to OpenLDAP Software are subject to the following notice: Copyright 2023 Gregory Noe Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted only as authorized by the OpenLDAP Public License. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 11

[Issue 10378] New: A default build should NOT trigger asserts
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 29 Jul '25

29 Jul '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10378 Issue ID: 10378 Summary: A default build should NOT trigger asserts Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.10 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: daniel(a)haxx.se Target Milestone: --- Hello OpenLDAP peeps! The other day I filed a bug [1] against Debian's OpenLDAP packaging because the library they ship can assert and abort due to run-time conditions. A library should never abort (in a release build) but should return a proper error code to allow the application to decide the appropriate next step. I was then informed that this build setup is what upstream (you) recommend and encourage by default. So, I'm here with a weak bug that I think you should shoot down and close immediately if I am wrong. I want to make sure that Debian is wrong, and that we can use OpenLDAP libs in production without causing asserts going forward. Surely Debian can just switch off the debug option, run without asserts and not lose any important functionality? [1] = https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1109791 Thanks! / Daniel -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 10365] New: OOM during replication with a lot of updates
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 21 Jul '25

21 Jul '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10365 Issue ID: 10365 Summary: OOM during replication with a lot of updates Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.10 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: elecharny(a)apache.org Target Milestone: --- When applying millions of updates on a huge database (30M entries), the server can crash with an out of memory. What happens is that the replication client does not process the incoming updates fast enough, syncprov accumulate the changes in memory up to the point it crashes. The clear workaround: use more memory on the server. Context: the replication mode used is delta-syncrepl, 2 servers, MMR , with MDB and accesslog. My assumption is that it would be valuable to benefit from the fact that we know when the socket is ready for write to actually push data to the replica, which means we can use the changes stored in accesslog and not in memory, while keeping a state of replication. I assume it's a huge change in the way it currently works. There is no urgency, considering it's quite a specific use case, and it would be way faster to slapmodify the changes on a stopped base, then copy the content to the replica, then restart everything. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 9849] New: Update website to support LTS and Feature releases
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 15 Jul '25

15 Jul '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9849 Issue ID: 9849 Summary: Update website to support LTS and Feature releases Product: website Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: website Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: mnormann(a)symas.com Target Milestone: --- Modify .wlmrc variable names and website content to handle both Feature Release and Long Term Support release. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10357] New: Potential buffer underflow in function config_find_base
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 01 Jul '25

01 Jul '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 Issue ID: 10357 Summary: Potential buffer underflow in function config_find_base 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: --- In function `config_find_base`, we have the code: ```c char *c = dn->bv_val+dn->bv_len; for (;*c != ',';c--); ``` In the loop, if the string doesn't contain any commas, `c` will decrement below `dn->bv_val`, causing buffer underflow when `*c` is accessed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10354] New: Enhancement: Allow tuning of pwdLastSuccess (like authTimestamp)
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 01 Jul '25

01 Jul '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10354 Issue ID: 10354 Summary: Enhancement: Allow tuning of pwdLastSuccess (like authTimestamp) Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.13 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: u.windl(a)ukr.de Target Milestone: --- As I understand it, the function of the lastbind overlay were integrated to slapd core (under different names). While the overly used attribute authTimestamp, slapd uses attribute pwdLastSuccess to record the time of successful bind. So in principle one could activate both at the same time, but the purpose is unclear... Anyway the lastbind overlay allows to configure (among others) the "lastbind-precision", allowing to skip recording of too many successful binds for a while. Unfortunately the slapd core does not offer a comparable thing, so (for example) automated periodic binds (e.g. used for monitoring) may fill a changelog (delta-syncrepl) over time. The proposal is to implement some mechanism of rate limiting for the updates of pwdLastSuccess, or/and allow filtering of DNs that are included/excepted from this mechanism (so automated periodic system accounts may be excepted). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 2

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 July 2025