openldap-bugs September 2025

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
49 discussions

[Issue 10344] New: Potential memory leak in function firstComponentNormalize and objectClassPretty.
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10344 Issue ID: 10344 Summary: Potential memory leak in function firstComponentNormalize and objectClassPretty. 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 1071 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1071&action=edit Patch: Ensure the first argument passed to `ber_dupbv_x` is not `NULL`. In `firstComponentNormalize`, the code calls `ber_dupbv_x` but ignores its return value. ```c ber_dupbv_x(normalized, val, ctx); ``` When `normalized` is `NULL`, `ber_dupbv_x` allocates a new `struct berval` and returns it; failing to capture that pointer means we lose ownership and leak the allocation. The same issue arises in `objectClassPretty`. We should follow the pattern in function `hexNormalize`, which asserts that its `normalized` argument is non-NULL before use: ```c assert(normalized != NULL); ``` -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 10335] New: [PATCH] ldapsearch: fix handling of -LL in print_reference()
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10335 Issue ID: 10335 Summary: [PATCH] ldapsearch: fix handling of -LL in print_reference() Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.9 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: client tools Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: bolek(a)live.com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1066 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1066&action=edit [PATCH] ldapsearch: fix handling of -LL in print_reference() I, Boleslaw Ciesielski, 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. The attached patch (against master) fixes a bug in ldapsearch where the -LL (or -LLL) option is ignored when printing the reference comments in print_reference(). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 10339] New: config_add_internal() use-after-free on failed cn=config mod
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10339 Issue ID: 10339 Summary: config_add_internal() use-after-free on failed cn=config mod 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 overlay startup/callback fails, bconfig.c:5593 uses the value of ca->argv[1] despite it being freed already. I guess we can just log the entry's DN. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 7981] Feature request: Crypt scheme in pwdPolicy
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7981 --- Comment #7 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- • d0d07810 by Ondřej Kuzník at 2025-06-23T16:47:48+00:00 ITS#7981 Allow setting a default hash per policy -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 7981] Feature request: Crypt scheme in pwdPolicy
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7981 Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |TEST Status|IN_PROGRESS |RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> --- • dad90d66 by Ondřej Kuzník at 2025-06-23T16:47:48+00:00 ITS#7981 Move default hash selection to slap_passwd_hash_type -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 0

[Issue 10355] New: mplay doesn't compile on musl
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10355 Issue ID: 10355 Summary: mplay doesn't compile on musl Product: LMDB Version: 0.9.33 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: tools Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: bgilbert(a)backtick.net Target Milestone: --- With the musl C library (e.g. Alpine Linux) mplay doesn't compile: gcc -pthread -O2 -g -W -Wall -Wno-unused-parameter -Wbad-function-cast -Wuninitialized -c mplay.c mplay.c: In function 'addpid': mplay.c:490:23: error: assignment of read-only variable 'stdin' 490 | stdin = fdopen(0, "r"); | ^ mplay.c:491:24: error: assignment of read-only variable 'stdout' 491 | stdout = fdopen(1, "w"); | ^ make: *** [Makefile:99: mplay.o] Error 1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 10346] New: mdb_env_copy2 on a database with a value larger than (2GB-16) results in a corrupt copy
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10346 Issue ID: 10346 Summary: mdb_env_copy2 on a database with a value larger than (2GB-16) results in a corrupt copy Product: LMDB Version: 0.9.31 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: liblmdb Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: mike.moritz(a)vertex.link Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 1072 --> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1072&action=edit reproduction source code Running mdb_env_copy2 with compaction on a database with a value larger than (2GB-16)bytes appears to complete successfully in that there are no errors, but the copied database cannot be opened and throws an MDB_CORRUPTED error. Looking at the copied database size, it appears that the value is either being skipped or significantly truncated. Running mdb_env_copy2 without compaction also completes successfully, and the copied database can be opened. I initially encountered this while using py-lmdb with v0.9.31 of LMDB, but was able to write up a simple script that uses the library directly. The source for the script is attached, and the results below are from running it with the latest from master. Without compaction: $ ./lmdb_repro test.lmdb $((2 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024 - 16 + 1)) testbak.lmdb LMDB Version: LMDB 0.9.70: (December 19, 2015) Set LMDB map size to 21474836330 bytes Successfully inserted key with 2147483633 bytes of zero-filled data Retrieved 2147483633 bytes of data First 16 bytes (hex): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ... Copying database to testbak.lmdb... Database copy completed successfully. Opening copied database and reading value... Retrieved 2147483633 bytes of data from copied database First 16 bytes from copy (hex): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ... Data size matches between original and copy With compaction: $ ./lmdb_repro -c test.lmdb $((2 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024 - 16 + 1)) testbak.lmdb LMDB Version: LMDB 0.9.70: (December 19, 2015) Set LMDB map size to 21474836330 bytes Successfully inserted key with 2147483633 bytes of zero-filled data Retrieved 2147483633 bytes of data First 16 bytes (hex): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ... Copying database to testbak.lmdb (with compaction)... Database copy completed successfully. Opening copied database and reading value... mdb_get (copy) failed: MDB_CORRUPTED: Located page was wrong type Size difference on corrupt DB: $ du -sh ./* 312K ./lmdb_repro 24K ./testbak.lmdb 2.1G ./test.lmdb With compaction at the perceived max size: $ ./lmdb_repro -c test.lmdb $((2 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024 - 16)) testbak.lmdb LMDB Version: LMDB 0.9.70: (December 19, 2015) Set LMDB map size to 21474836320 bytes Successfully inserted key with 2147483632 bytes of zero-filled data Retrieved 2147483632 bytes of data First 16 bytes (hex): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ... Copying database to testbak.lmdb (with compaction)... Database copy completed successfully. Opening copied database and reading value... Retrieved 2147483632 bytes of data from copied database First 16 bytes from copy (hex): 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ... Data size matches between original and copy -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 10342] New: Potential Memory Leak in function mdb_txn_begin
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

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 4

[Issue 10274] New: Replication issue on MMR configuration
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 05 Sep '25

05 Sep '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 15

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs September 2025