openldap-bugs September 2025

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
204 discussions

[Issue 9739] New: Undefined reference to ber_sockbuf_io_udp in 2.6.0
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9739 Issue ID: 9739 Summary: Undefined reference to ber_sockbuf_io_udp in 2.6.0 Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.0 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: build Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: simon.pichugin(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- While I was trying to build OpenLDAP 2.6 on Fedora Rawhide I've got the error message: /usr/bin/ld: ./.libs/libldap.so: undefined reference to `ber_sockbuf_io_udp' I've checked commits from https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9673 and found that 'ber_sockbuf_io_udp' was not added to https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/liblber/… I've asked on the project's mailing list and got a reply: "That symbol only exists if OpenLDAP is built with LDAP_CONNECTIONLESS defined, which is not a supported feature. Feel free to file a bug report at https://bugs.openldap.org/" https://lists.openldap.org/hyperkitty/list/openldap-technical@openldap.org/… Hence, creating the bug. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 21

[Issue 10364] New: back-asyncmeta should process a notice-of-disconnect and close the target connection
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10364 Issue ID: 10364 Summary: back-asyncmeta should process a notice-of-disconnect and close the target connection Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: nivanova(a)symas.com Target Milestone: --- At present, back-asyncmeta discards all unsolicited messages, received on the target connections. It should instead process Notice-of-Disconnection messages and close the connections on which they were received. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 7

[Issue 10363] New: Implement a target connection time-to-live in asyncmeta
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10363 Issue ID: 10363 Summary: Implement a target connection time-to-live in asyncmeta Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: nivanova(a)symas.com Target Milestone: --- Implement a feature that limits the maximum time before a target connection is reset, even if it is not idle - conn-ttl. To avoid too many target connections timing out at once, a minimum reset interval per target should also be configurable. So, a configuration of: conn-ttl 5s 5s would mean connections have a 5 seconds time-to-live, but a connection should be reset no more frequently that once every 5 seconds per target. This feature was requested by a customer. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 8

[Issue 10280] New: Combining positive & negated filters doesn't work with dynlist
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10280 Issue ID: 10280 Summary: Combining positive & negated filters doesn't work with dynlist Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.18 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: code(a)pipoprods.org Target Milestone: --- The directory contains 3 users & 2 groups. user1 is in group1, user2 is in group2, user3 isn't is any group. Filter [1] matches users that are either: - member of group1 - member of group2 ✅ It returns user1 & user2 Filter [2] matches user that are: - not member of group1 nor group2 ✅ It returns user3 Filter [3] should match users that are either: - member of group1 - member of group2 - not member of group1 nor group2 ❌ It should return the 3 users but only returns users matched by the first part of the filter (whatever the first part, if we swap both parts we get the complementary search results) Filter [1]: (|(memberOf=cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(memberOf=cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)) Filter [2]: (!(|(memberOf=cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(memberOf=cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com))) Filter [3]: (|(memberOf=cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(memberOf=cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(!(|(memberOf=cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)(memberOf=cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com)))) Here's my dynlist config: ``` dn: olcOverlay={2}dynlist,olcDatabase={1}mdb,cn=config objectClass: olcOverlayConfig objectClass: olcDynListConfig olcOverlay: {2}dynlist olcDynListAttrSet: {0}groupOfURLs memberURL member+memberOf@groupOfNames structuralObjectClass: olcDynListConfig entryUUID: 7df8328a-fd72-103e-82df-6fed25d5f6c8 creatorsName: cn=config createTimestamp: 20240902122741Z entryCSN: 20240902122741.257759Z#000000#000#000000 modifiersName: cn=config modifyTimestamp: 20240902122741Z ``` Here's a LDIF to initialise directory contents: ``` dn: ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: organizationalUnit ou: example-groups dn: ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: organizationalUnit ou: example-users dn: uid=user1,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: inetOrgPerson cn: User sn: One uid: user1 dn: uid=user2,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: inetOrgPerson cn: User sn: Two uid: user2 dn: uid=user3,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: inetOrgPerson cn: User sn: Three uid: user3 dn: cn=group1,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: groupOfNames cn: group1 member: uid=user1,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com dn: cn=group2,ou=example-groups,dc=example,dc=com changetype: add objectClass: groupOfNames cn: group2 member: uid=user2,ou=example-users,dc=example,dc=com ``` -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 9

[Issue 9593] New: excessive null check in set_chase()
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9593 Issue ID: 9593 Summary: excessive null check in set_chase() Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: grapvar(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Looks like slap_set_join( cp, nset, '|', vals ) can't return null, so return value at line 411 should be treated like one at line 402: servers/slapd/sets.c:399, set_chase(): for ( i = 0; !BER_BVISNULL( &set[ i ] ); i++ ) { vals = gatherer( cp, &set[ i ], desc ); if ( vals != NULL ) { /*402: */ nset = slap_set_join( cp, nset, '|', vals ); } } ber_bvarray_free_x( set, cp->set_op->o_tmpmemctx ); if ( closure ) { for ( i = 0; !BER_BVISNULL( &nset[ i ] ); i++ ) { vals = gatherer( cp, &nset[ i ], desc ); if ( vals != NULL ) { /*411: */ nset = slap_set_join( cp, nset, '|', vals ); if ( nset == NULL ) { break; } } } } diff --git a/servers/slapd/sets.c b/servers/slapd/sets.c index fc7b72c8b..17a6ec2c1 100644 --- a/servers/slapd/sets.c +++ b/servers/slapd/sets.c @@ -409,9 +409,6 @@ set_chase( SLAP_SET_GATHER gatherer, vals = gatherer( cp, &nset[ i ], desc ); if ( vals != NULL ) { nset = slap_set_join( cp, nset, '|', vals ); - if ( nset == NULL ) { - break; - } If I'm wrong, return value at line 402 must be checked for null. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 10060] New: libldap: ldap_result return value differs depending on if a search response is already in the response list or not
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10060 Issue ID: 10060 Summary: libldap: ldap_result return value differs depending on if a search response is already in the response list or not Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: david(a)hardeman.nu Target Milestone: --- ldap_result(3) is defined here: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/… On this line, ldap_result will call wait4msg: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/… wait4msg is defined here: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/… If a response for a given msgid is already stored in the response list, and all=1, the whole message chain will be returned by the call from wait4msg to chkResponseList here: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/… And rc will be set on the next line to the head of the message chain. If a response for a given msgid is *not* already stored in the response list, wait4msg will eventually call try_read1msg here: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/… If try_read1msg manages to receive the final search result message for a given msgid, it will be noted here: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/… The whole chain will be returned here: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/… And the return code will be the tag of the *last* message in the chain, as opposed to the *first* message in the chain: https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/… Which will result in different return codes for chains of multiple messages (i.e. search results with all=1). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 15

[Issue 10254] New: Allow upgrading password hash on bind
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10254 Issue ID: 10254 Summary: Allow upgrading password hash on bind Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: me(a)floriswesterman.nl Target Milestone: --- Many OpenLDAP installations are likely to contain relatively old password hashes such as SSHA and CRYPT, as modern alternatives such as Argon are only recent additions. Due to the nature of password hashes, it is of course not possible to "unhash" the old values and rehash them with a more modern algorithm. The presence of these old password hashes poses a liability in case of information leaks or hacks. Currently, the only way to upgrade a password hash is to wait for the user to change their password. This can be sped up by expiring passwords and forcing users to change them. However, this can be slow and frequent password rotation is no longer considered a best practice. It would be a very helpful addition to add support for upgrading a password hash on bind. This is implemented in the 389 directory server: https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/pwupgrade-on-bind.html Essentially, when a user binds, the password is checked like normal. In case of a successful bind, the proposed feature would check the hash algorithm used for the password; and in case it is not equal to the current `olcPasswordHash` value, the user-provided password is rehashed using the new algorithm and stored. This way, the old hashes are phased out more quickly, without being a disturbance to users. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 6

[Issue 9651] New: Add some kind of rate limiting option to ldapmodify
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9651 Issue ID: 9651 Summary: Add some kind of rate limiting option to ldapmodify Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.5.6 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: --- Component: client tools Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- When using ldapmodify to replay a testing workload it would be useful to be able to specify a request rate, instead of just performing multiple operations in immediate succession. As a simpler alternative, just being able to specify a time interval between operations would be helpful. As an even greater future enhancement, it would be nice to have an option to replay an accesslog.ldif directly, using its embedded timestamps to control the time interval between operations. Currently this isn't feasible since reqstart timestamps only have 1-second granularity, the fraction part is a linear counter and not a microsecond value. The reqStart fraction would need to be extended to 9 decimal places with full nanosecond resolution in order to be usable as actual fractional time. We already know that microsecond resolution is insufficient to avoid frequent collisions. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 10085] New: test029 can't pass with SLAPD_USE_SASL is set
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10085 Issue ID: 10085 Summary: test029 can't pass with SLAPD_USE_SASL is set Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: test suite Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- Running make test with SLAPD_USE_SASL set will fail test029. There is even a comment there that we can't support that functionality as-is when SASL binds are configured. We should probably remove that part of the test or skip it unconditionally for now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 3

[Issue 9667] New: 2.6 to 2.7 upgrade documentation
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9667 Issue ID: 9667 Summary: 2.6 to 2.7 upgrade documentation 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: --- Need to document any upgrade information for going from 2.6 to 2.7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 7

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
...
21
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 September 2025