https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10350
Issue ID: 10350
Summary: Free ch_calloc-allocated memory in error paths
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: alexguo1023(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 1079
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1079&action=edit
Free ch_calloc-allocated memory in error paths
1. In aa_operational, bv_allowed and bv_effective are allocated via ch_calloc.
If ja == 0 or je == 0, these memory objects are never freed and do not escape
the function, causing potential memory leak.
2. In memberof_db_init, the memory allocated by ch_calloc isn’t released on
error paths, leading to another potential leak.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10351
Issue ID: 10351
Summary: olcSaslHost lacks default value
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.5.13
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: fredrik(a)falk-net.se
Target Milestone: ---
I'm trying to configure multi-master replication with SASL for cn=config and
some other databases. However, I'm running into an issue with GSSAPI/SASL as it
also syncs olcSaslHost, which has to be unique to each host in order to work.
I'd like if olcSaslHost was left empty then it'd default to the hostname/FQDN
of the host running slapd, which would resolve the issue.
This issue has been encountered before:
https://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201508/msg00124.htmlhttps://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201001/msg00048.html
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6083
--- Comment #5 from OndÅ™ej KuznÃk <ondra(a)mistotebe.net> ---
On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 10:59:16AM +0000, openldap-its(a)openldap.org wrote:
> PS: and I would like to check, if a password is compromised. I already have an
> external checker for this. It just needs an interface to OpenLDAP. Information
> about compromised passwords and it's importance can be found at
> https://haveibeenpwned.com/
Hi Heiko,
if that's what you need, you could write your own policy checker
wrapper. If you feel you can design an interface fit for wider use, you
can even submit it for inclusion and it will be considered.
But remember the slapd-sock overlay exists already and should be able to
intercept the password change just fine if you don't need access to the
rest of the entry being changed.
Thanks,
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6083
--- Comment #4 from Heiko Zelt <hz(a)heikozelt.de> ---
PS: and I would like to check, if a password is compromised. I already have an
external checker for this. It just needs an interface to OpenLDAP. Information
about compromised passwords and it's importance can be found at
https://haveibeenpwned.com/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6083
--- Comment #3 from Heiko Zelt <hz(a)heikozelt.de> ---
I need this feature too. I would like to check if passwords contain only ASCII
characters, and a minimum of one uppercase, lowercase, digit and special
character. An external password syntax checker would be the most flexible
solution.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10303
Issue ID: 10303
Summary: Web site still presents the 2.5 version as LTS
Product: website
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: website
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: elecharny(a)apache.org
Target Milestone: ---
The OpenLDAP web site still indicates that the OpenLDAP 2.5 version is the LTS,
despite a mail announced on August 10, 2024 that starting from January 2025 teh
2.6 branch will be the LTS.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10312
Issue ID: 10312
Summary: olcSubordinate does not accept a 'false' keyword,
contrary to documentation
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.9
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: slapd
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: gray(a)nxg.name
Target Milestone: ---
The slapd-config(5) manpage documents the olcSubordinate keyword as
olcSubordinate: [TRUE | FALSE | advertise]
If, however, I try to create a database using
olcSubordinate: false
then slapadd objects with
olcSubordinate: value #0: suffix "ou=foo,o=bar": subordinate must be "TRUE"
or "advertise".
(For the sake of completeness, it might be worth noting in the manpage that the
(unsurprising) default is for a search of a superior database _not_ to be
propagated to the subordinate one – ie, the presumed behaviour of
olcSubordinate:false)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10325
Issue ID: 10325
Summary: Variant uses overlays OID instead of contrib OID
(OLcfgOvAt instead of OLcfgCtAt) for configuration
attributes
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: contrib
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: nivanova(a)symas.com
Target Milestone: ---
The variant contrib overlay uses the wrong base OID for its attributes, which
leads to OID duplication with DDS
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10299
Issue ID: 10299
Summary: slapacl -u segfaults on nonexistent user
Product: OpenLDAP
Version: 2.6.9
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: needs_review
Severity: normal
Priority: ---
Component: client tools
Assignee: bugs(a)openldap.org
Reporter: ratness(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 1048
--> https://bugs.openldap.org/attachment.cgi?id=1048&action=edit
config.ldif
2.6.9, symas-packaged RPMs, Rocky 9.
In slapacl, a rootDN user is, as you'd expect, allowed to do anything:
# /opt/symas/sbin/slapacl -D 'cn=Manager,dc=example,dc=com' -u -b
'uid=fakeuser,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com' entry/write
authcDN: "cn=manager,dc=example,dc=com"
write access to entry: ALLOWED
But, a user given full-manage rights, segfaults:
# /opt/symas/sbin/slapacl -D 'uid=direct,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com' -u -b
'uid=fakeuser,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com' entry/write
authcDN: "uid=direct,ou=users,dc=example,dc=com"
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
Traceback:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00007ffff7135888 in mdb_txn_begin (env=0x0, parent=parent@entry=0x0,
flags=flags@entry=131072, ret=ret@entry=0x5555557f4940) at
./../../../libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c:2893
2893 flags |= env->me_flags & MDB_WRITEMAP;
Missing separate debuginfos, use: dnf debuginfo-install
glibc-2.34-60.el9.x86_64 libevent-2.1.12-6.el9.x86_64
sqlite-libs-3.34.1-6.el9_1.x86_64
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00007ffff7135888 in mdb_txn_begin (env=0x0, parent=parent@entry=0x0,
flags=flags@entry=131072, ret=ret@entry=0x5555557f4940) at
./../../../libraries/liblmdb/mdb.c:2893
#1 0x00007ffff71361a1 in mdb_opinfo_get (op=op@entry=0x7fffffffdce0,
mdb=mdb@entry=0x7ffff7048010, rdonly=rdonly@entry=1,
moip=moip@entry=0x7fffffffc410)
at
/usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/back-mdb/id2entry.c:793
#2 0x00007ffff7136459 in mdb_entry_get (op=0x7fffffffdce0, ndn=0x7fffffffc640,
oc=0x5555557a4360, at=0x5555557c3560, rw=0, ent=0x7fffffffc4c8)
at
/usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/back-mdb/id2entry.c:620
#3 0x00005555555a77a0 in be_entry_get_rw (e=0x7fffffffc4c8, rw=0,
at=0x5555557c3560, oc=0x5555557a4360, ndn=0x7fffffffc640, op=0x7fffffffdce0)
at
/usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/backend.c:1438
#4 fe_acl_group (op=0x7fffffffdce0, target=<optimized out>,
gr_ndn=0x7fffffffc640, op_ndn=0x7fffffffde10, group_oc=0x5555557a4360,
group_at=0x5555557c3560)
at
/usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/backend.c:1494
#5 0x000055555559ec5c in backend_group (op=0x7fffffffdce0, target=<optimized
out>, gr_ndn=<optimized out>, op_ndn=<optimized out>, group_oc=<optimized out>,
group_at=<optimized out>)
at
/usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/backend.c:1690
#6 0x00005555555bfbc2 in slap_acl_mask (access=ACL_WRITE,
state=0x7fffffffc660, count=1, matches=0x7fffffffcab0, val=<optimized out>,
desc=<optimized out>, e=0x7fffffffd910, op=0x7fffffffdce0,
mask=<synthetic pointer>, prev=0x0, a=0x5555557c3970) at
/usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/acl.c:1643
#7 slap_access_allowed (op=op@entry=0x7fffffffdce0, e=e@entry=0x7fffffffd910,
desc=<optimized out>, val=<optimized out>, access=<optimized out>,
state=<optimized out>, maskp=<optimized out>)
at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/acl.c:288
#8 0x00005555555c1e2e in fe_access_allowed (op=0x7fffffffdce0,
e=0x7fffffffd910, desc=<optimized out>, val=<optimized out>, access=<optimized
out>, state=<optimized out>, maskp=0x7fffffffd828)
at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/acl.c:352
#9 0x00005555555b7c74 in access_allowed_mask (op=0x7fffffffdce0,
e=0x7fffffffd910, desc=0x55555573d540, val=<optimized out>, access=ACL_WRITE,
state=0x0, maskp=0x7fffffffd900)
at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/acl.c:456
#10 0x0000555555620182 in slapacl (argc=<optimized out>, argv=0x7fffffffe398)
at /usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/slapacl.c:362
#11 0x000055555557658f in main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>) at
/usr/src/debug/symas-openldap-2.6.9-1.el9.x86_64/servers/slapd/main.c:540
I could understand it if it was a case of "trying to verify cn/write and not
knowing if the user was objectClass=person" but for entry/write I don't see any
reason these should be different.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10168
Issue ID: 10168
Summary: olcdbindex doesn't cleanup cleanly
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 you run the following modify against slapd (notice the olcDbMultival data is
wrong), slapd aborts in mdb_cf_cleanup->mdb_attr_dbs_open when cleaning up the
olcDbIndex changes:
dn: olcDatabase={1}mdb,cn=config
changetype: modify
add: olcDbIndex
olcDbIndex: member eq
olcDbIndex: memberof eq
-
add: olcDbMultival
olcDbMultival: member,memberOf 5,15
-
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the issue.