openldap-bugs

openldap-bugs@openldap.org

1 participants
20965 discussions

(ITS#8967) back-mdb "unchecked" limit broken vs. search scope
by h.b.furuseth＠usit.uio.no 30 Jan '19

30 Jan '19

Full_Name: Hallvard Breien Furuseth Version: 2.4.47 OS: Linux URL: Submission from: (NULL) (2001:700:100:202::105) The size.unchecked limit does not seem to consider search scope other than 'base' in back-mdb. $ ldapsearch -LLL -xh localhost:3890 -b l=there '(l=over)' 1.1 dn: l=over,l=here,l=there $ ldapsearch -LLL -xh localhost:3890 -b l=over,l=here,l=there 1.1 Administrative limit exceeded (11) $ ldapsearch -LLL -xh localhost:3890 -b l=over,l=here,l=there -s base 1.1 dn: l=over,l=here,l=there $ cat test.ldif dn: l=there objectClass: locality dn: l=here,l=there objectClass: locality dn: l=over,l=here,l=there objectClass: locality dn: l=under,l=here,l=there objectClass: locality $ cat test.conf include schema/core.schema loglevel 0 sizelimit size.unchecked=3 database mdb directory test.db suffix l=there index l,objectClass eq

1 0

Re: (ITS#8957)
by quanah＠symas.com 30 Jan '19

30 Jan '19

--On Wednesday, January 30, 2019 1:44 AM -0500 Vernon Smith <vsmith(a)interlinknetworks.com> wrote: > I Tried to upload it to the openldap ftp server but was not successful so > I am trying the patch again here. > > diff --git a/libraries/libldap/open.c b/libraries/libldap/open.c > index bb81d86..20b3dfc 100644 > --- a/libraries/libldap/open.c > +++ b/libraries/libldap/open.c > @@ -489,7 +489,7 @@ ldap_int_open_connection( > #endif > > #ifdef HAVE_TLS > - if (rc == 0 && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || > + if ((rc == 0 || rc == -2) && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == > LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || strcmp( srv->lud_scheme, "ldaps" ) == 0 )) > { > ++conn->lconn_refcnt; /* avoid premature free */ That worked, thanks! --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com>

1 0

Re: (ITS#8957)
by vsmith＠interlinknetworks.com 29 Jan '19

29 Jan '19

I Tried to upload it to the openldap ftp server but was not successful so I am trying the patch again here. diff --git a/libraries/libldap/open.c b/libraries/libldap/open.c index bb81d86..20b3dfc 100644 --- a/libraries/libldap/open.c +++ b/libraries/libldap/open.c @@ -489,7 +489,7 @@ ldap_int_open_connection( #endif #ifdef HAVE_TLS - if (rc == 0 && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || + if ((rc == 0 || rc == -2) && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || strcmp( srv->lud_scheme, "ldaps" ) == 0 )) { ++conn->lconn_refcnt; /* avoid premature free */ Thanks, Vern On Tue, January 29, 2019 12:29 pm, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: > --On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 4:51 PM +0000 vsmith(a)interlinknetworks.com > wrote: > > > > >> --- openldap-2.4.47/libraries/libldap/open.c?????? 2018-12-19 >> 10:57:06.000000000 -0500 >> +++ openldap-2.4.47.mod/libraries/libldap/open.c?????? 2019-01-26 >> 18:24:48.000000000 -0500 >> @@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ >> ??#endif >> >> >> ??#ifdef HAVE_TLS >> -?????? if (rc == 0 && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == >> LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || +?????? if ((rc == 0 || rc == -2) && ( >> ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || ???????? ?????? strcmp( >> srv->lud_scheme, "ldaps" ) == 0 )) ???????? { >> ???????? ?????? ++conn->lconn_refcnt;?????? /* avoid premature free */ >> > > This is not a valid patch. I don't know if it's your email client that is > destroying the patch? I suggest uploading it to the FTP site and responding with the > link to the file. > > Thanks, > Quanah > > > > -- > > > Quanah Gibson-Mount > Product Architect > Symas Corporation > Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: > <http://www.symas.com> > > >

1 0

(ITS#8966) changelog support for syncrepl
by hyc＠openldap.org 29 Jan '19

29 Jan '19

Full_Name: Howard Chu Version: 2.5 OS: URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/ Submission from: (NULL) (80.233.38.213) Submitted by: hyc The syncrepl consumer has had stubs for changelog support ever since delta-syncrepl was added using the accesslog overlay. Time to flesh out the rest of it.

1 0

Re: (ITS#8957)
by quanah＠symas.com 29 Jan '19

29 Jan '19

--On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 4:51 PM +0000 vsmith(a)interlinknetworks.com wrote: > --- openldap-2.4.47/libraries/libldap/open.c?????? 2018-12-19 > 10:57:06.000000000 -0500 > +++ openldap-2.4.47.mod/libraries/libldap/open.c?????? 2019-01-26 > 18:24:48.000000000 -0500 > @@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ > ??#endif > > ??#ifdef HAVE_TLS > -?????? if (rc == 0 && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == > LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || +?????? if ((rc == 0 || rc == -2) && ( > ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || > ???????? ?????? strcmp( srv->lud_scheme, "ldaps" ) == 0 )) > ???????? { > ???????? ?????? ++conn->lconn_refcnt;?????? /* avoid premature free */ This is not a valid patch. I don't know if it's your email client that is destroying the patch? I suggest uploading it to the FTP site and responding with the link to the file. Thanks, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com>

1 0

(ITS#8957)
by vsmith＠interlinknetworks.com 29 Jan '19

29 Jan '19

I reviewed some of the initial discussion about this same issue which lead to this fix in version 2.4.26, "Fixed libldap ASYNC TLS setup (ITS#6828)", and looked at the code that Ian Puleston suggested should be fixed in ldap_int_open_connection. This routine does have the code to do what was need for TSL to work but was not called since it received an error code of -2 not 0. The -2 simply indicated that this was an asynchronous call. I changed the test to call the TSL setup if the return code was either 0 or -2. This fixes my issue. Here is my patch. --- openldap-2.4.47/libraries/libldap/open.c 2018-12-19 10:57:06.000000000 -0500 +++ openldap-2.4.47.mod/libraries/libldap/open.c 2019-01-26 18:24:48.000000000 -0500 @@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ #endif #ifdef HAVE_TLS - if (rc == 0 && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || + if ((rc == 0 || rc == -2) && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || strcmp( srv->lud_scheme, "ldaps" ) == 0 )) { ++conn->lconn_refcnt; /* avoid premature free */ Thanks, Vernon

1 0

(ITS#8965) ldap proxy segmentation fault
by praveen.adini＠fireeye.com 29 Jan '19

29 Jan '19

Full_Name: Praveen Adini Version: 2.4.47-r2 OS: Alpine Containers URL: Submission from: (NULL) (209.135.212.252) I'm trying to setup a openldap proxy wherein the proxy denies any search requests for uid=root. When i tried using the rwm overlay to stop the operation(#), i'm getting a segmentation fault although i see the unwilling to perform operation 53 message being printed. here is the snippet of the conf that i'm using. overlay rwm rwm-rewriteEngine on rwm-rewriteContext searchFilter rwm-rewriteRule "(.*)(uid=root)(.*)" "$1$2$3" "#"

1 0

Re: (ITS#8957)
by quanah＠symas.com 29 Jan '19

29 Jan '19

Hi, Please read: <https://www.openldap.org/devel/contributing.html> and re-submit the patch accordingly. Please do not use HTML email. Thanks! --On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 6:05 AM +0000 vsmith(a)interlinknetworks.com wrote: > <html> > <head> > > <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> > </head> > <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> > I reviewed some of the initial discussion > about this same issue which lead to this fix in version 2.4.26, > "Fixed libldap ASYNC TLS setup (ITS#6828)", and looked at > the code that Ian Puleston suggested should be fixed in > ldap_int_open_connection. This routine does have the code to do > what was need for TSL to work but was not called since it received > an error code of -2 not 0. The -2 simply indicated that this was > an asynchronous call. I changed the test to call the TSL setup if > the return code was either 0 or -2. This fixes my issue. Here is > my patch. > --- openldap-2.4.47/libraries/libldap/open.c?????? 2018-12-19 > 10:57:06.000000000 -0500 > +++ openldap-2.4.47.mod/libraries/libldap/open.c?????? 2019-01-26 > 18:24:48.000000000 -0500 > @@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ > ??#endif > ?? > ??#ifdef HAVE_TLS > -?????? if (rc == 0 && ( ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == > LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || > +?????? if ((rc == 0 || rc == -2) && ( > ld->ld_options.ldo_tls_mode == LDAP_OPT_X_TLS_HARD || > ???????? ?????? strcmp( srv->lud_scheme, "ldaps" ) == 0 )) > ???????? { > ???????? ?????? ++conn->lconn_refcnt;?????? /* avoid premature > free */ > Thanks, > Vern > > </body> > </html> > > > -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Product Architect Symas Corporation Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP: <http://www.symas.com>

1 0

(ITS#8964) ldap proxy segmentation fault
by praveen.adini＠fireeye.com 29 Jan '19

29 Jan '19

1 0

(ITS#8963) Start TLS failed errors on back-ldap binds / short timeout, config option request
by janne.peltonen＠helsinki.fi 29 Jan '19

29 Jan '19

Full_Name: Janne Peltonen Version: 2.4.44 OS: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 URL: https://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201901/msg00038.html Submission from: (NULL) (2001:708:110:1820:3664:a9ff:fe04:7363) Proxied BINDs on back-ldap sometimes create Start TLS failed errors on the connection from proxy to backend, and the client of the proxy receives the error 52. We had a look at the code, and it appears that in back-ldap/bind.c, the timeout argument of the function ldap_back_start_tls always ends up as zero, so the timeout tv.sec and tv.usec end up being set as 0 and 100000, respectively, by the macro LDAP_BACK_TV_SET defined in back-ldap/back-ldap.h. This means that the actual timeout waiting for starttls operation to complete will be 0.1 seconds, which is sometimes too little if there are latencies. We did a quick&dirty hack to just set tv.sec to 3 and tv.usec to 0, and were no longer able to get any Start TLS failed errors on the proxy bind. We did find that the back-ldap has an "extended" timeout defined in back-ldap/config.c - except that is commented out as "not implemented". Seems to us that if that were implemented, you could set the timeout in your ldap database section by something like "timeout extended=" and then you could have a longer timeout. Steps to reproduce: 1. Configure an openldap proxy-backend pair, the proxy using the "ldap" database and using ldap urls to connect to the backend (using ldaps urls might actually be a workaround). Configure the binds to be proxied to the backend, too. 2. Create a script that creates multiple - say, 200 - simultaneous connections to the proxy, using an ldaps url to connect to the proxy, and using the same DN to bind as. (We haven't tried to connect to the frontend using ldap+starttls, but I would suppose that would have a similar result, since the client establishes TLS anyway before trying to bind to the proxy.) 3. Observe some of the binds fail (we typically get 5-6 fails for 200 simultaneous connection), with the client of the proxy getting a "Server is unavailable: 52" type of error, and the proxy log containing lines such as "conn=7716 op=0 RESULT tag=97 err=52 text=Start TLS failed" after the BIND from the client. Possible workaround: Configure the proxy to use ldaps urls to the backend. Suggested fix: Implement the "extended" timeout type in back-ldap/config.c timeout_table, so that people can set the StartTLS timeout to a larger value than the default 0.1 seconds. References: discussion thread on the OpenLDAP-Technical mailing list.

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

openldap-bugs