openldap-bugs September 2025

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
204 discussions

[Issue 9596] New: Python test suite
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 21 Oct '26

21 Oct '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9596 Issue ID: 9596 Summary: Python test suite Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- The bash test suite is extremely limited, hard to write for and slow. We can't lose it as it is also portable, but something should be introduced for developers/CI on more modern systems and increase coverage. A Python 3 seed for one is in development in MR!347. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 12

[Issue 9398] New: Stale accesslog cookie due to unclean shutdown
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 21 Oct '26

21 Oct '26

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.

1 12

[Issue 10311] New: Work with IETF LDAP working group to update password hashing mechanism RFC
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 21 Oct '26

21 Oct '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10311 Issue ID: 10311 Summary: Work with IETF LDAP working group to update password hashing mechanism RFC 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: --- Work with the IETF ldap working group to update the RFC to make the suggested hashing mechanism be what is currently "best practice" rather than a specific hashing mechanism. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10236] New: fragmentation makes mdb_page_alloc slow
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 14 Oct '26

14 Oct '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10236 Issue ID: 10236 Summary: fragmentation makes mdb_page_alloc slow Product: LMDB Version: 0.9.31 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: aalekseyev(a)janestreet.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1022 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1022&action=edit patch is relative to LMDB_0.9.31 It's a known problem that mdb_page_alloc can be slow when the free list is large and fragmented. [1] [2] [3] I'm not sure it's known *how* slow it can be. In our workload we saw a fragmented freelist leading to a pathological O(n^2) behavior. To handle a multi-page allocation we iterate loading chunks of the free list one by one, and at every iteration we do O(n) work to check if the allocation can succeed. Even small-ish allocations (tens of pages) are repeatedly hitting this edge case, with free list growing to ~1000000, and the outer loop taking ~2000 iterations (10^9 worth of work in total, just to allocate a few pages). Even though I'm sure there are ways to avoid hitting this pathological scenario so much (avoid values larger than 4k, or fix whatever causes fragmentation), it seems unacceptable to have a performance cliff this bad. I made a patch to make the allocation take ~O(n*log(n)), by loading and merging multiple chunks at once instead of doing it one-by-one. I'd appreciate it if someone could review the patch (attached), improve it, and/or come up with an alternative fix. The code in `midl.c` is kinda meme-y, including a contribution from GPT-4o, but it performs well enough to speed up our pathological workload by ~20x (which is still ~3x away from the non-fragmented case). Anyway, the main thing that warrants scrutiny is the change in `mdb.c`: I understand very little about lmdb internals and I worry that loading multiple pages at once instead of one-by-one might break something. [1] issue #8664 [2] https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-bugs@openldap.org/threa… [3] 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 14

[Issue 10286] New: ldap_pvt_gettime may result in "not new enough csn" problems in multi-thread case.
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 25 Sep '26

25 Sep '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10286 Issue ID: 10286 Summary: ldap_pvt_gettime may result in "not new enough csn" problems in multi-thread case. Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.6 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: 971748261(a)qq.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1041 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1041&action=edit the log of adding two entry which shows the time sequence. I used openldap as krb5's database, and openldap was deploymented in mirrormode. I tried to add kerberos principals via kadmin.local -q "addprinc -randkey principal. slapd log showed that the entry of kadmin/admin was added earlier than the entry of ossuser. But the csn of kadmin/admin was greater than ossuser. In this case, when the two entry began to sync to the other slapd server, ossuser was ignored because of "csn not new enough" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 9

[Issue 10282] New: MSVC builds are not supported
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '26

08 Sep '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10282 Issue ID: 10282 Summary: MSVC builds are not supported Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.18 Hardware: All OS: Windows Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: cmb(a)php.net Target Milestone: --- I'm a maintainer of an OpenLDAP port[1] which is used to build liblber and libldap for PHP on Windows. So far this uses hand-made configuration and Visual Studio solutions, but that is not sustainable in the long run. Instead, I'd rather like to use the autotools based build chain with MSYS2 (or Cygwin), but still using the MSVC build tools (cl.exe, link.exe, etc.) and the MS Windows SDK for best compatibility with other builds for PHP on Windows. Apparently, this is not yet supported by OpenLDAP (2.5.18). I've managed to add some patches[2] to get where I'd like this to go[3]. Some of the patches are highly PHP (BC) specific, some are just quick hacks (because I don't know better), but some appear to be appropriate for inclusion into the OpenLDAP sources. Are you generally interested in supporting MSVC tools and MS Windows SDKs? If so, what would be the best way to contribute -- sending MRs to the repo[4]? Should these tackle individual issues, or rather be complete (note that I'm likely not able to provide a full-fledged solution due to my very limited knowledge of autotools and Linux, and limited time). [1] <https://github.com/winlibs/openldap> [2] <https://github.com/winlibs/openldap/tree/cmb/2.5.18> [3] <https://github.com/cmb69/winlib-builder/actions/runs/11713086509> [4] <https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap> -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 9786] New: liblber: missing export of ber_pvt_wsa_err2string
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

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.

1 10

[Issue 9816] New: slapcat cordeumps during mdb subtree dump with -s
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9816 Issue ID: 9816 Summary: slapcat cordeumps during mdb subtree dump with -s Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.11 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: khoffmann(a)united-internet.de Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 887 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=887&action=edit gdb backtrace of slapcat run When trying to use slapcat in combination with -b and -s in order to create a LDIF backup of a mdb subtree, slapd crashes with a coredump (please see the attached snippet with gdb output from a reproduced test tree). The problem was reporducible with different mdb databases / suffixes and only appears with option -s. The same dump with -H 'ldap:///ou=users,o=company,c=de??sub?' instead of -s ou=users,o=company,c=de works perfectly fine, as long as the "attrs part" is empty in the ldap-uri. Also using slapcat with -b only (for a full database dump) works fine as well. I'm aware of the fact that -s option is marked as DEPRECATED - I'm not sure if you are going to fix this bug or if you rather take the change to remove the option completely from future major versions. Please let me also know if it's expected behaviour that the -H option doesn't work whenever the attribute part isn't empty and if I should contribute to a documentation update for this edge case. Best regards, Kris -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 9972] New: SSS needs READ instead of SEARCH access
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

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.

1 13

[Issue 9748] New: Deleted values of pwdFailureTime seem to reappear
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9748 Issue ID: 9748 Summary: Deleted values of pwdFailureTime seem to reappear 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 854 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=854&action=edit accesslog for uid=dm01-R2H2-956,ou=People,dc=example,dc=com Somehow, ppolicy seems to be able to reference values of pwdFailureTime that had been deleted before the actual bind even started. In the attached accesslog, trace, deletion of everything (including "20211115154510.478330Z") is recorded from reqSession: 3, then a bind comes in and the same value is explicitly removed again. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 10

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 September 2025