openldap-technical

openldap-technical@openldap.org

20 participants
9802 discussions

Password policy: possible DoS scenario
by Konstantin Boyandin 01 Mar '11

01 Mar '11

Hello, Thanks to everyone having answered me earlier, I've managed to set up password policy on the OpenLDAP provided in CentOS 5.5 repositories (current version 2.3.43). The setup: we have password policy enabled for users accounts in our intranet. After 5 unsuccessful attempts the account is blocked for short duration (30 seconds). Does that mean that anyone now can keep all the accounts blocked most of the time? Am I right that if anyone enters someone else' incorrect password 5 times (in the given case), they will block the target account (regardless of what IP address the attacker was connecting from)? Narrower question: do password policy module developers plan to take into account what IPs are used to connect (thus, blocking only access from specific IPs)? Thanks. All the best, Konstantin

2 3

Re: Problem unexpected failing slapd
by jekvb＠gmx.co.uk 27 Feb '11

27 Feb '11

"...now and then slapd just stops and always without any traces in the logfiles. Sometime three times a day, sometime a week without a failure. I can't find a pattern or any relation to any other service on the linux server." Is your LDAP environment installed on a VM or on plain metal box? Regards, Kuba ----- Original Message ----- From: Ruud Baart Sent: 27/02/11 12:57 PM To: openldap-technical(a)openldap.org Subject: Problem unexpected failing slapd Problem: For a customer we use LDAP for many years. Last year suddenly the slapd service just stopped without any traces in the logfiles. After a restart of slapd everything works fine again. But the problem was there: it was not an incident, now and then slapd just stops and always without any traces in the logfiles. Sometime three times a day, sometime a week without a failure. I can't find a pattern or any relation to any other service on the linux server. Environment: - Several (debian squeeze) servers , several windows servers. We use bdb database backend. - There is one master LDAP server which provides syncprov and two replica's LDAP servers (syncrepl). The master server is most intens used (mainly samba as primary domain controller: a few hundred useraccounts, lot of groupaccounts, workstations, acl's, etc.), one of the replica's is not very busy but handles the mail for all users (lookup: amavis, postfix, courier-imap, mailaccount settings etc). The third replica is not busy at all, it is a remote location. - Total LDAP is 3700 dn's, slapcat produces a file of 7,3 Mb. - It is only the master LDAP with stops suddenly. I have never seen a failure of a replica LDAP. Because I have no clear idea about the problem I have no idea which technical details are relevant: DB_CONFIG =========== set_cachesize 0 10485760 1 set_lk_max_objects 10000 set_lk_max_locks 10000 set_lk_max_lockers 10000 set_lg_dir /home/ldap-dbd The database is stored on a ext3 filesystem, kernel 2.6.32. The server has no problems, plenty of memory and a fast diskarray (SAS->SATA). Never technical problems with this server. And it worked without problems for a long period. Nothing has changed to the environment or the LDAP setup (except of course with the upgrade to debian squeeze but the problem was already there). What we have tried: - upgrade from openldap 2..4.17 (debian lenny+backports) to openldap 2.4.23 (debian squeeze). I saw in the release notes that problems related to syncrepl were solved. Therefor we waited for version 2.4.23 te become available in debian. This upgrade made no difference. - reindex, rebuilt the directory. When I rebuilt the LDAP with a clean LDIF file on the master LDAP or an other machine with ldapadd there is not one error or warning. The workaround for the moment: I have written a process monitor (perl daemon) which monitors the slapd daemon and if it suddenly stops, slapd is restarted. It is of course not a solution but the 300 user can work. If slapd stops without a restart within 1 minute a few hundred people can't work because samba stops working. I would like to receive suggestions what we can do to find the problem. Because there is no pattern, nothing in the logfiles I don't know where to start. -- Regards, Ruud Baart

1 0

Help needed with opeLDAP configuration
by sim123 25 Feb '11

25 Feb '11

Dear All, I am new to LDAP and openLDAP, just installed and configured openLDAP 2.4.23 with Berkeley DB 4.8 on CentOS 5.4 using http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/quickstart.html make test gave an error on replication similar to this http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201006/msg00256.html So I think installation is correct but when I try to do a search as described in the article, result is : # ldapsearch -x -b '' -s base '(objectclass=*)' namingContexts # extended LDIF # # LDAPv3 # base <> with scope baseObject # filter: (objectclass=*) # requesting: namingContexts # # dn: namingContexts: dc=example,dc=com # search result search: 2 result: 0 Success # numResponses: 2 # numEntries: 1 Can someone please help me identifying the problem. Thanks for the help and support.

3 3

Re: Help needed with opeLDAP configuration
by sim123 25 Feb '11

25 Feb '11

Thanks for your response, I did ignore the error. However, the search result is empty, not sure what could go wrong. my sladp.conf file is same as described in quick start guide. Thanks. On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah(a)zimbra.com>wrote: > --On Friday, February 25, 2011 11:36 AM -0800 sim123 <Sim3159(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > Dear All, >> >> >> I am new to LDAP and openLDAP, just installed and configured openLDAP >> 2.4.23 with Berkeley DB 4.8 on CentOS 5.4 >> using http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/quickstart.html >> >> make test gave an error on replication similar to >> this http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/201006/msg00256.ht >> ml >> >> So I think installation is correct but when I try to do a search as >> described in the article, result is : >> > > As noted repeatedly, even by the test itself, you should ignore any errors > from test058. That's why it exists with success. > > --Quanah > > > -- > > Quanah Gibson-Mount > Sr. Member of Technical Staff > Zimbra, Inc > A Division of VMware, Inc. > -------------------- > Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration >

2 1

sortvals oddities - with more information and hopefully to the right list
by Andrew Elble 25 Feb '11

25 Feb '11

We are using sortvals on both member and memberUid. We have been seeing duplicate member/memberUid attributes on some objects that have been modified (as well as a lack of sorting on those attributes). It seemed that there was a correlation between modifies to objects that experienced deadlocks and the objects that had duplicate member/memberUid attributes on them. We put the seqmod overlay in place - and this reduced the number of occurrences of the issue but did not eliminate them. Upon further investigation, I discovered that it was possible to bypass the sorting behavior if the object was not created with an instance of the attribute with sorting enabled as a part of it. It would seem that attr_merge() (in attr.c) should have something like this: if ( *a == NULL ) { *a = attr_alloc( desc ); if (desc->ad_type->sat_flags & SLAP_AT_SORTED_VAL) { (*a)->a_flags |= SLAP_ATTR_SORTED_VALS; } } else { Further pursuing the issue, I started to focus on the index deletion code that was changed as a part of ITS#5183. Specifically, the portion of code within bdb_modify_internal() (in back-bdb/modify.c) that is commented: /* Move deleted values to end of array */ This code modifies save_attrs, which is actually apparently a pointer to memory that resides within the cache. If a deadlock occurs, these changes are not reverted, thereby corrupting the entry in the cache. I replaced this code with the pre-ITS#5183 code and I am no longer able to 'break' the object and insert duplicate member/memberUids. I also found it surprising that the call to bdb_idl_cache_del() in bdb_idl_delete_key() in back-bdb/idl.c occurred prior to any calls to the database? I can answer any questions about the specifics of the environment in which where we are seeing this - it is a somewhat difficult problem to reproduce outside of our production environment. I'm not terribly familiar with the code - I'm looking to see if I have collected enough data here to open an ITS to have this fixed. (or if I'm just way off base) Thanks, Andy -- Andrew W. Elble aweits(a)discipline.rit.edu Infrastructure Engineer, Communications Technical Lead Rochester Institute of Technology PGP: BFAD 8461 4CCF DC95 DA2C B0EB 965B 082E 863E C912 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and destroy any copies of this information.

2 1

Migrating from Sun DSEE & Boolean values question
by Simon Fraser 25 Feb '11

25 Feb '11

Hi, We're planning to migrate to OpenLDAP from Sun Directory Server. So far the test setup works fine, with one potential problem. Sun's directory server treats boolean values as case-insensitive, while the RFC (and OpenLDAP) require upper-case TRUE and FALSE values. Is there a way of forcing case insensitivity on boolean values with OpenLDAP, so that any clients who are applying filters like "(foo=true)" will continue to work? Or is the only way to maintain stats logging and try to locate particular scripts on the machines that connect, and fix each one in turn? I realise the former option is not RFC compliant, but for me, it'll be very convenient to be permissive. Thanks, Simon. -- The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.

2 1

Advise on distributed directory service
by Germ van Ek 25 Feb '11

25 Feb '11

Hello, I am asked to design a replicated OpenLDAP implementation for use on 1500 of our customers servers who are now use a non-replicated configuration using the standard passwd/shadow backend combined with a PostgreSQL database. Our customers consist of primary schools and will use the database for authentication through Samba. The reason we want to replicate the data is so that we can offer email and other services from a central datacentre. Having considered several options ( Multi-Master, MirrorMode ), after some consulting in our team, I've decided we'll opt for the 'simple' Master-Slave setup, with a Master at each customer site and 7 (virtualised) servers each handling an everage of 215 customer databases. Having 7 servers however has the disadvantage of not knowing on which server a customer's database will be when a user is trying to authenticate on their email for example. My first thought was that I would configure a special 'redirection' server only containing referrals. I 'hoped' all common clients would cache these referrals so that load on this redirection server would be low. I'm now doubting this choice for 2 reasons: - The following of this referrals seams highly unstandardized. The biggest users of the referral functionality will probably be PHP, in the PHP manual the documentation on rebinding / referral chasing is not very thorough. Any automation of this is also not present, and I would need to implement any caching myself too. ( http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.ldap-set-rebind-proc.php ) This is 'annoying' for me, but I highly doubt third party applications will all implement this in a reasonable way, and I was not planning on customizing all of the software we use... - In the notes on the documentation of referrals for OpenLDAP 2.4 ( http://www.openldap.org/doc/admin24/referrals.html ), the following note is present: Note: the use of referrals to construct a Distributed Directory Service is extremely clumsy and not well supported by common clients. If an existing installation has already been built using referrals, the use of the chain overlay to hide the referrals will greatly improve the usability of the Directory system. A better approach would be to use explicitly defined local and proxy databases in subordinate configurations to provide a seamless view of the Distributed Directory. Though I am usually very stubborn, I try to avoid designing systems in a way the documentation says is not recommended. The use of 1 single proxy cache server seams to 'ease the pain' a bit, but does not seam like a very scalable approach. The use of proxy-overlays would make the server the client connects to function as a kind of non caching proxy, and in general 'be involved' in all of the requests, which again doesn't seam very desirable, and very single-point-of-failure. All servers that are configured (customer servers excluded unless they opt/pay for it) will be configured in a failover way, I didn't mention this above to avoid too much complication. What do you recommend for distributing the databases and still be able to easily use them? Do I overestimate the amount of traffic/work a server has in the proxy overlay method? Germ van Eck Engineer Station to Station B.V. --

3 3

Using OpenLDAP and Kerberos with linux instead of OpenDirectory with MacOSX
by Fabien COMBERNOUS 25 Feb '11

25 Feb '11

Hi the list, I would like to change my MacOSX server with a Debian server. Any experience report about this is appreciated. I searched on the web but informations are pretty old. Regards, -- *Fabien COMBERNOUS* /unix system engineer/ www.kezia.com <http://www.kezia.com/> *Tel: +33 (0) 467 992 986* Kezia Group

1 0

complex characters in UID attribute
by Vinay Kalkoti 25 Feb '11

25 Feb '11

Hi, I wanted to know what all complex characters can be included for an UID attribute. I have the following user names (uid). Please let me know which which of the following uid's are invalid - test_user: IT (LOC) sup_12$ test_user:IT(LOC) test_user-IT test_user IT test_user:IT test_user(IT) test_user.IT test_user/IT test_user/IT test_user#IT test_user*IT test_user@IT Thanks, Vinay

4 5

OpenLDAP performances on AIX?
by Marco Pizzoli 24 Feb '11

24 Feb '11

Hi all, on the same line of previous mail about openldap performances on Solaris, I would like to know if someone has experience about AIX. I'm evaluating a deploy on this platform and I would like to know about any performance comparison/experience between AIX (5.3/6.1/7.1) and Linux. Thanks in advance Marco -- _________________________________________ Non è forte chi non cade, ma chi cadendo ha la forza di rialzarsi. Jim Morrison

2 2

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

openldap-technical