https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10394
Issue ID: 10394
Summary: remove stroeder.com from support page
Product: website
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: website
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: michael(a)stroeder.com
Target Milestone: ---
HI!
for health reasons I gave up my business and I have retired . So it does no
longer make sense to be listed on the support page.
Ciao, Michael.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
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.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9343
Issue ID: 9343
Summary: Expand ppolicy policy configuration to allow URL
filter
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: overlays
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: quanah(a)openldap.org
Target Milestone: ---
Currently, ppolicy only supports a single global default policy, and past that
any policies must be manually added to a given user entry if they are supposed
to have something other than the default policy.
Also, some sites want no default policy, and only a specific subset to have a
policy applied to them.
For both of these cases, it would be helpful if it were possible to configure a
policy to apply to a set of users via a URL similar to the way we handle
creating groups of users in dynlist
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7981
--- Comment #7 from Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)openldap.org> ---
• d0d07810
by OndÅ™ej KuznÃk 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.
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 OndÅ™ej KuznÃk 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.
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=10356
Issue ID: 10356
Summary: Openldap -> Chasing the referral is not proceeding
further after 3 referrals
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.4.56
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: libraries
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: hharshitha2797(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Hi Team
I have an issue with OpenLDAP 2.4.56. Chasing the referral only yields 3
referrals; the user login does not proceed further to other referrals.
This issue is seen in CentOS with OPENSSL 3.0
In OpenLDAP 2.1.22, the same is working; here, OpenSSL is not used. Here
OPENSSL 3.0 is not used. We can see around 8 referrals here.
--
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=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.
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.