https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10149
Issue ID: 10149
Summary: [PATCH] Allow certificates and keys to be read from
URIs.
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: libraries
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: minfrin(a)sharp.fm
Target Milestone: ---
Add the LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_URIS and LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_CACERTURIS
options to allow certificates and keys to be set using OpenSSL
provider URIs.
The attached patch file is derived from OpenLDAP Software. All of the
modifications to OpenLDAP Software represented in the following patch(es) were
developed by Graham Leggett minfrin(a)sharp.fm. I have not assigned rights and/or
interest in this work to any party.
The attached modifications to OpenLDAP Software are subject to the following
notice:
Copyright 2023 Graham Leggett
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted only as authorized by the OpenLDAP Public License.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10064
Issue ID: 10064
Summary: Add modrdn support for Cft_Misc entries
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: ---
Currently in cn=config, there is some special handling to maintain overlays/dbs
entries to allow list-like management. All module defined entries are marked
Cft_Misc and this behaviour is not available there.
It boils down to allowing the module to screen rename/renumber requests and
having bconfig defer to that callback if it's defined.
Use-case: policy selection rules in ITS#9343 would benefit from being managed
this way rather than having to reparse a long line every time a rule is
adjusted.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10330
Issue ID: 10330
Summary: TIMEOUT and NETWORK_TIMEOUT not respected when
receiving bad data during TLS negotiation
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.9
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: libraries
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: michael.kourlas(a)solace.com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 1063
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1063&action=edit
Test program
This seems related to bug 8047.
Steps to reproduce:
1. Setup a netcat server on a host: "nc -l -k -p 636".
2. On a different host, attempt to connect to the host running "nc" as if it
were an LDAP server via ldaps: "ldapsearch -o NETWORK_TIMEOUT=5 -o TIMEOUT=5 -H
ldaps://<ip>:636".
3. During the 5 second timeout period, switch back to the netcat server and
transmit a newline by pressing enter.
4. ldapsearch will hang forever until the TCP connection is closed (e.g. by
killing the netcat server).
My expectation would be that ldapsearch would exit after 5 seconds, per the
NETWORK_TIMEOUT and TIMEOUT options.
I'm using the following version of ldapsearch on Fedora 41 (x86-64):
> ldapsearch: @(#) $OpenLDAP: ldapsearch 2.6.9 (Mar 27 2025 00:00:00) $
> openldap
> (LDAP library: OpenLDAP 20609)
This problem is also observable when directly using the OpenLDAP C API. This is
more of an issue, since any application using the API could become unresponsive
if these timeout values aren't respected.
I've attached a short test program which can be used instead of ldapsearch. If
I abort the test program while it is stuck in this state, the traceback looks
like this:
> #0 0x00007f50b7a25811 in __GI___libc_read (fd=3, buf=0x2aaf9ac5, nbytes=3) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/read.c:26
> #1 0x00007f50b792f8b9 in sb_debug_read (sbiod=0x2aadf390, buf=0x2aaf9ac5, len=3)
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/liblber/sockbuf.c:829
> #2 0x00007f50b7b61156 in tlso_bio_read (b=0x2aadf9c0, buf=0x2aaf9ac5 "", len=3)
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/tls_o.c:1279
> #3 0x00007f50b7221ea3 in bread_conv (bio=<optimized out>, data=<optimized out>, datal=<optimized out>, readbytes=0x7ffd1cf2e3f0)
> at crypto/bio/bio_meth.c:121
> #4 0x00007f50b7226047 in bio_read_intern (b=b@entry=0x2aadf9c0, data=0x2aaf9ac5, data@entry=0x555f3588, dlen=3, dlen@entry=18446744072487067717,
> readbytes=readbytes@entry=0x7ffd1cf2e3f0) at crypto/bio/bio_lib.c:285
> #5 0x00007f50b72261db in BIO_read (b=0x2aadf9c0, data=0x555f3588, dlen=-1222483899) at crypto/bio/bio_lib.c:311
> #6 BIO_read (b=b@entry=0x2aadf9c0, data=data@entry=0x2aaf9ac5, dlen=dlen@entry=3) at crypto/bio/bio_lib.c:303
> #7 0x00007f50b783ce03 in tls_default_read_n (rl=0x2aaec1c0, n=5, max=<optimized out>, extend=<optimized out>, clearold=<optimized out>,
> readbytes=0x7ffd1cf2e4b8) at ssl/record/methods/tls_common.c:406
> #8 0x00007f50b784151b in tls_get_more_records (rl=0x2aaec1c0) at ssl/record/methods/tls_common.c:583
> #9 0x00007f50b783b8ea in tls_read_record (rl=0x2aaec1c0, rechandle=0x2aaeb600, rversion=0x2aaeb608, type=0x2aaeb60c "", data=0x2aaeb610,
> datalen=0x2aaeb620, epoch=0x0, seq_num=0x0) at ssl/record/methods/tls_common.c:1130
> #10 0x00007f50b783969a in ssl3_read_bytes (ssl=<optimized out>, type=22 '\026', recvd_type=0x7ffd1cf2e684 "", buf=0x2aaee480 "\001", len=4,
> peek=0, readbytes=0x7ffd1cf2e688) at ssl/record/rec_layer_s3.c:689
> #11 0x00007f50b784f5a7 in tls_get_message_header (s=0x2aaea980, mt=<synthetic pointer>) at ssl/statem/statem_lib.c:1554
> --Type <RET> for more, q to quit, c to continue without paging--
> #12 read_state_machine (s=0x2aaea980) at ssl/statem/statem.c:625
> #13 state_machine (s=<optimized out>, server=0) at ssl/statem/statem.c:479
> #14 0x00007f50b7b615c3 in tlso_session_connect (ld=<optimized out>, sess=0x2aaea980, name_in=<optimized out>)
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/tls_o.c:693
> #15 0x00007f50b7b65bf2 in ldap_int_tls_connect (ld=ld@entry=0x2a9b2430, conn=conn@entry=0x2a9b25d0, host=host@entry=0x2a9b2550 "192.168.133.56")
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/tls2.c:425
> #16 0x00007f50b7b6636f in ldap_int_tls_start (ld=0x2a9b2430, conn=0x2a9b25d0, srv=<optimized out>)
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/tls2.c:1245
> #17 0x00007f50b7b3d4c2 in ldap_int_open_connection (ld=0x2a9b2430, conn=0x2a9b25d0, srv=0x2a9b24d0, async=0)
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/open.c:515
> #18 0x00007f50b7b5212d in ldap_new_connection (ld=0x2a9b2430, srvlist=0x2a9b2878, use_ldsb=1, connect=<optimized out>, bind=0x0, m_req=0, m_res=0)
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/request.c:491
> #19 0x00007f50b7b3c7b4 in ldap_open_defconn (ld=0x2a9b2430)
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/open.c:42
> #20 0x00007f50b7b52ed8 in ldap_send_initial_request (ld=0x2a9b2430, msgtype=96, dn=0x4023a9 "cn=admin,dc=solace,dc=com", ber=0x2a9b2570, msgid=1)
> at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/request.c:131
> #21 0x00007f50b7b429b9 in ldap_sasl_bind (ld=0x2a9b2430, dn=0x4023a9 "cn=admin,dc=solace,dc=com", mechanism=0x0, cred=0x7ffd1cf2eb90, sctrls=0x0,
> cctrls=0x0, msgidp=0x7ffd1cf2eb8c) at /usr/src/debug/openldap-2.6.9-1.fc41.x86_64/openldap-2.6.9/libraries/libldap/sasl.c:164
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9431
Issue ID: 9431
Summary: back-mdb: Always have an equality index for
objectClass
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: backends
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
Data storage backends require an equality index on objectClass to function
correctly. As this is a hard requirement it should be automatic with back-mdb.
Why this wasn't done in the past with other backends isn't exactly clear, it
may have been due to their requirements to have additional cache layers. That
however is not necessary with back-mdb.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9204
Bug ID: 9204
Summary: slapo-constraint allows anyone to apply Relax control
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.4.49
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: overlays
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ryan(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
slapo-constraint doesn't limit who can use the Relax control, beyond the global
limits applied by slapd. In practice, for many modifications this means any
configured constraints are advisory only.
In my opinion this should be considered a bug, in design if not implementation.
I expect many admins would not read the man page closely enough to realize the
behaviour does technically adhere to the letter of what's written there.
Either slapd should require manage privileges for the Relax control globally,
or slapo-constraint should perform a check for manage privilege itself, like
slapo-unique does.
Quoting ando in https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5705#c4:
> Well, a user with "manage" privileges on related data could bypass
> constraints enforced by slapo-constraint(5) by using the "relax"
> control. The rationale is that a user with manage privileges could be
> able to repair an entry that needs to violate a constraint for good
> reasons. Note that the user:
>
> - must have enough privileges to do it (manage)
>
> - must inform the DSA that intends to violate the constraint (by using
> the control)
but such privileges are currently not being required.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10308
Issue ID: 10308
Summary: Implement cn=monitor for back-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: ---
Currently back-asyncmeta has no cn=monitor capabilities. It will be useful to
implement some, specifically to monitor targets and target connection states.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10494
Issue ID: 10494
Summary: require none still has no effect
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: backends
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ondra(a)mistotebe.net
Target Milestone: ---
Both frontend and DB requires are unconditionally ORed, contrary to what the
documentation says. Probably a disconnect between ITS#4574 and ITS#5857
understanding of what should happen.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10499
Issue ID: 10499
Summary: Enable test-level tracking in CI
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: ---
Gitlab supports parsing junit-style XML reports. We can emit something like
this from our test suite and get a better idea how our tests perform/which test
failed at a glance.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10250
Issue ID: 10250
Summary: syncrepl_diff_entry assumes attributes come in the
same order
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: ---
When trying to diff an entry, syncrepl_diff_entry explicitly assumes attribute
come in the same order. That's not always the case and could cause it to report
a spurious rewrite of the attribute.
Normally this is ok, unless the rewrite itself (not) occurring has other
side-effects, when it could cause issues. (e.g. a DB with memberof
inconsistencies being mysteriously repaired in some scenarios, which is how it
was found).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10465
Issue ID: 10465
Summary: accesslog_purge mdb scheduling is unfair
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: ---
On most systems, a running accesslog purge task on a back-mdb data will starve
other modifications for oxygen:
It issues deletes to the DB with a very narrow gap where it might be usefully
preempted, on a multi-CPU systems it usually manages to reacquire the TXN mutex
before another waiting thread can even wake up. Meanwhile a live modification
has to issue a modification to the original DB, then get to the point where it
waits to acquire a write TXN on the accesslog DB, all the while holding
li_rmutex preventing any other modification from getting under way. So even one
wins the mutex, another one is unlikely to do so straight away.
This means that write latencies can and usually do shoot through the roof until
the purge task finishes. If 1% of time is spent on write ops on average and an
accesslog purge is scheduled to run every 30 mins, that is ~18 seconds of work
for the purge task to remove those entries. On a busy system, write latencies
of above 1 second (which this can easily spiral to) might be unacceptable,
especially when ppolicy/lastbind etc. are configured.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.