openldap-bugs June 2026

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
209 discussions

[Issue 10460] New: Stray uses of fprintf in libldap
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10460 Issue ID: 10460 Summary: Stray uses of fprintf in libldap Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.12 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: minor Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: hyc(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- avl.c, cyrus.c, error.c, ldap_sync.c, ldifutil.c contain uses of `fprintf(stderr,...)` which should probably use Debug instead. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 8

[Issue 10310] New: Update pbkdf2 overlay so iterations can be configurable
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10310 Issue ID: 10310 Summary: Update pbkdf2 overlay so iterations can be configurable Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: contrib Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- The pbkdf2 password hashing contrib overlay has the number of iterations hard coded at 10,000. It would be helpful to update the module to allow this to be configurable instead, as is done with other password hashing modules. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 9577] New: slapd -V should be deprecated
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9577 Issue ID: 9577 Summary: slapd -V should be deprecated Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: slapd Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: smckinney(a)symas.com Target Milestone: --- Sometimes a user's (present one included) ignorance gets them in trouble unnecessarily. The -V option is an example... Normally, when one wants to determine the version of a process, they use -V, or perhaps -v. With slapd, the daemon actually continues to run, which can have negative consequences. The doc clearly states that -VV is probably what the user wants, but is counter-intutive. Who RTFM's before checking the version? -V print version info (-VV exit afterwards, -VVV print info about static overlays and backends) I propose we eliminate the option to allow slapd to continue running after displaying the version. Perhaps we eliminate the -V option entirely, or just make it work the same as -VV. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 9

[Issue 10301] New: Use assertion control in lastbind chaining
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

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 5

[Issue 9305] New: ldap_connect_to_host: Return code from getaddrinfo() discarded, troubleshooting difficult
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9305 Issue ID: 9305 Summary: ldap_connect_to_host: Return code from getaddrinfo() discarded, troubleshooting difficult Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.4.46 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: client tools Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: minfrin(a)sharp.fm Target Milestone: --- When the ldap_connect_to_host() function sees a failure from getaddrinfo(), the meaningless return code -1 is returned. This makes troubleshooting difficult on a webserver, where the low level printf debugging is not practical. (gdb) step ldap_connect_to_host (ld=ld@entry=0x7fffc4002e10, sb=0x7fffc400b240, proto=1, srv=srv@entry=0x7fffc400b2f0, async=async@entry=0) at os-ip.c:543 543 { (gdb) next 546 ber_socket_t s = AC_SOCKET_INVALID; (gdb) 562 if ( srv->lud_host == NULL || *srv->lud_host == 0 ) { (gdb) 568 port = srv->lud_port; (gdb) 570 if( !port ) { (gdb) 578 switch(proto) { (gdb) 580 osip_debug( ld, (gdb) warning: Source file is more recent than executable. 71 return __builtin___memset_chk (__dest, __ch, __len, __bos0 (__dest)); (gdb) 598 hints.ai_flags = AI_ADDRCONFIG; (gdb) 601 hints.ai_socktype = socktype; (gdb) 602 snprintf(serv, sizeof serv, "%d", port ); (gdb) 605 LDAP_MUTEX_LOCK(&ldap_int_resolv_mutex); (gdb) 607 err = getaddrinfo( host, serv, &hints, &res ); (gdb) 609 LDAP_MUTEX_UNLOCK(&ldap_int_resolv_mutex); (gdb) 611 if ( err != 0 ) { (gdb) 612 osip_debug(ld, "ldap_connect_to_host: getaddrinfo failed: %s\n", (gdb) print host $3 = <optimized out> (gdb) print serv $4 = "636\000\000\000" (gdb) next 614 return -1; (gdb) The ldap_connect_to_host() function needs to return proper error codes. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 8

[Issue 10278] New: Move away from python-ldap0 in the test suite
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10278 Issue ID: 10278 Summary: Move away from python-ldap0 in the test suite 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: --- While python-ldap0 has a superior API, it seems the module is no longer receiving any development. We should move our python test suite over to another module that can be supported long-term. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

[Issue 9367] New: back-mdb: encryption support
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9367 Issue ID: 9367 Summary: back-mdb: encryption support Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: backends Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Need to add encryption support to the back-mdb backend, depends on issue#9364 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 12

[Issue 10458] New: improve handling of large entry modifications
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10458 Issue ID: 10458 Summary: improve handling of large entry modifications 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 modifying a huge entry (e.g. a super-large group with countless members), we (back-mdb) spends about 50% of time on memmove() in attr_dup2 just copying the data around. We don't need this, this e_attrs doesn't outlive the mdb_modify that transitively calls it nor do we write into the data themselves. We should be able to tell attrs_dup that it can reuse parts of the original attributes and set `SLAP_ATTR_DONT_FREE_DATA` on the resulting attributes if the caller claims it will take care of the lifetimes accordingly, including any new values it puts in. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 4

[Issue 9796] New: Deprecate GnuTLS support
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9796 Issue ID: 9796 Summary: Deprecate GnuTLS support Product: OpenLDAP Version: 2.6.1 Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: libraries Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org Target Milestone: --- Support for GnuTLS was added specifically for the Debian (and thus Ubuntu) due to the license objections at the time that the Debian project had for the OpenSSL license. Since that time, Debian has reclassified OpenSSL as a core library and the OpenSSL project has resolved the original complaint by licensing OpenSSL 3 and later under the Apache License v2. Thus there is no longer a reason to maintain support for GnuTLS and given the long standing concerns over the security and quality of the GnuTLS bridge in addition to the extra cost of maintaining that code, it should be marked as deprecated and removed in a future release. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 9

[Issue 10338] New: constraint overlay rejects empty modifications
by openldap-its＠openldap.org 07 Aug '26

07 Aug '26

https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10338 Issue ID: 10338 Summary: constraint overlay rejects empty modifications Product: OpenLDAP Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: needs_review Severity: normal Priority: --- Component: overlays Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net Target Milestone: --- If configured even with no rules, a modification with a NULL op->orm_modlist is rejected, despite not being able to break any constraints, e.g.: dn: cn=example changetype: modify # no modifications attached This should at least be configurable. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.

1 5

← Newer
1
...
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
...
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 June 2026