https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10383
Issue ID: 10383
Summary: slapd-meta ignores olcDbIDAssertBind if olcDbURI
defined after it
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.9
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: david.frickert(a)protonmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Hi,
We are using slapd-meta to connect an OpenLDAP server to another external LDAP
server and it works well on first configuration.
However, if we want to update any info, e.g. the external LDAP URI, we must
replace the olcDbURI attribute. This means that the ordering of the attributes
change and this attribute is now defined after olcDbIDAssertBind.
Didn't think this would be important, but after this change the "meta"
connection stops working and upon enabling debugging i can see that the
external LDAP server is responding with:
"ldap_bind: Inappropriate authentication (48)
additional info: Anonymous Simple Bind Disabled"
This seems to imply that the olcDbIDAssertBind attribute is being ignored,
likely due to being defined before olcDbURI (my assumption).
Is this intended? If so, what can we do to mitigate this problem?
Do we need to perform a replace on all attributes of the object to ensure
correct ordering, or is there any way to perform an in-place attribute
modification without making it shift its position in the object?
Example:
First configuration (OK):
# {0}uri, {2}meta, config
dn: olcMetaSub={0}uri,olcDatabase={2}meta,cn=config
objectClass: olcMetaTargetConfig
olcMetaSub: {0}uri
--> olcDbURI: ldap://REDACTED/ou=users,REDACTED
olcDbIDAssertBind: bindmethod=simple starttls=yes tls_reqcert=demand
binddn="REDACTED" credentials="REDACTED"
olcDbRewrite: {0}suffixmassage REDACTED REDACTED
olcDbKeepalive: 0:0:0
olcDbBindTimeout: 100000
olcDbCancel: abandon
After URI update (NOK):
# {0}uri, {2}meta, config
dn: olcMetaSub={0}uri,olcDatabase={2}meta,cn=config
objectClass: olcMetaTargetConfig
olcMetaSub: {0}uri
olcDbIDAssertBind: bindmethod=simple starttls=yes tls_reqcert=demand
binddn="REDACTED" credentials="REDACTED"
olcDbRewrite: {0}suffixmassage REDACTED REDACTED
olcDbKeepalive: 0:0:0
olcDbBindTimeout: 100000
olcDbCancel: abandon
--> olcDbURI: ldap://REDACTED/ou=users,REDACTED
The olcDbURI attribute is shifted to the bottom after a modify operation, and
seems to cause these issues.
Best Regards,
David
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
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.
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.
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.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10528
Issue ID: 10528
Summary: core.ldif fails to load via "include:" in cn=config on
Symas OpenLDAP 2.6.13-3 (RHEL 9)
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.13
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: lucas.vicente(a)ebz.tec.br
Target Milestone: ---
Hello,
We are experiencing an issue while trying to load the core.ldif schema default
using the dynamic configuration (cn=config).
When using the following in my LDIF:
include: file:///opt/symas/etc/openldap/schema/core.ldif
I get this error:
olcAttributeTypes: value #48 olcAttributeTypes: Unexpected token before MUST c
MAY ( searchGuide $ description ) )
slapadd: could not add entry dn="cn={0}core,cn=schema,cn=config" (line=14):
olcAttributeTypes: Unexpected token before MUST c MAY ( searchGuide $
description ) )
Obs:
If I create a slapd.conf that includes the core schema and run:
slaptest -f slapd.conf -F /tmp/slapd.d
It works without errors. However, when trying to load the same schema using
slapadd + include: in cn=config, it fails.
For reference, I tested the same steps on version 2.6.10 and it worked without
errors.
Steps to reproduce:
Install Symas OpenLDAP 2.6.13 on RHEL 9
Try to load the core schema using:
dn: cn=schema,cn=config
objectClass: olcSchemaConfig
cn: schema
include: file:///opt/symas/etc/openldap/schema/core.ldif
Would you be able to verify this behavior?
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10423
Issue ID: 10423
Summary: It is possible via cn=config to add an entry of one
database type with the object class of another,
causing OpenLDAP to crash
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: nivanova(a)symas.com
Target Milestone: ---
This happens specifically because the user by mistake attempts to create a meta
database by specifying the object class for back-ldap. Since these share a lot
of common attributes, schema checks do not fail. As a result, slapd initializes
a meta database (based on olcDatabase value), but attempts to manipulate an
initialized back-ldap database after that, and segfaults.
Like this:
dn: olcDatabase=meta,cn=config
objectClass: olcDatabaseConfig
objectClass: olcLDAPConfig
olcDatabase: meta
olcDbURI: "ldap://example.com"
While it seems this is only possible for the proxy databases, we cannot rely
that schema checks on attributes will fail for other database combinations, who
knows what common attributes can be added or supplied in the future, we we have
to fix this.
The issue is reproducible via slapadd and at runtime with ldapadd.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10641
Issue ID: 10641
Summary: Missing bound check on X.509 SAN string before
wildcard matching
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: backends
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: xfding(a)google.com
Target Milestone: ---
In tls_o.c:1082,
https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/…
(sn[0] == '*') && (sn[1] == '.')
was tested before checking ( sl > 1 )
Similarly, on 1191,
https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap/-/blob/master/libraries/libldap/…
( cnstr[0] == '*' ) && ( cnstr[1] == '.' )
also has a missing bound check ( cnlen > 1 )
Note that OpenSSL would stop null-terminating strings by default in the major
releases.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10639
Issue ID: 10639
Summary: Change --enable-balancer to default to mod
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: lloadd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Preferably in 2.7.x as well but that will need an admin guide entry.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10640
Issue ID: 10640
Summary: paged results requests with size 0 are undefined in
RFC2696
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: ---
Apart from "abandoning" the paged result state (and even then, there's no
indication what the result should be), the behaviour for a cookie-less paged
search with size is completely unspecified. We should probably reject that on
parsing.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10645
Issue ID: 10645
Summary: ldapsearch -E vlv behaviour is near useless
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: client tools
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
It pretends to walk the filter when asked to continue but there are issues:
- there is no way to stop it (EOF is the same as Enter and no other options
available)
- setting "after" count to 0 has it keep issuing the same search over and over
- no end of list detection, so it happily overshoots and then fails with
rangeError
- ignores the returned position that the server sent so can't resume after
re-positioning (e.g. with value based search)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.