You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to bugs@httpd.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2007/12/04 04:01:16 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 44015] New: - Bug in util_ldap.c, mod_ldap
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG�
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44015>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND�
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44015
Summary: Bug in util_ldap.c, mod_ldap
Product: Apache httpd-2
Version: 2.2.6
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows 2000
Status: NEW
Severity: critical
Priority: P2
Component: mod_ldap
AssignedTo: bugs@httpd.apache.org
ReportedBy: agustin.herranz@alumnos.uva.es
First, sorry about my horrible english.
In util_ldap.c the max of returned entries for a search is defined as:
/* Default define for ldap functions that need a SIZELIMIT but
* do not have the define
* XXX This should be removed once a supporting #define is
* released through APR-Util.
*/
#ifndef APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT
#define APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT -1
#endif
Thats make is mistaken sizelimit in a search request because acording to
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2251.txt size limit is defined as:
sizeLimit INTEGER (0 .. maxInt), and with
maxInt INTEGER ::= 2147483647 -- (2^^31 - 1) --
this is signed integer, not unsigned as supoused on util_ldap.c
On page 26 rfc2251 tells that a value of sizeLimit = 0 means no client sizelimit
restrictions. So APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT should be:
/* Default define for ldap functions that need a SIZELIMIT but
* do not have the define
* XXX This should be removed once a supporting #define is
* released through APR-Util.
*/
#ifndef APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT
#define APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT 0
#endif
I believe this issue could solve other bugs of ldap use.
--
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 44015] - Bug in util_ldap.c, mod_ldap
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG�
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44015>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND�
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44015
covener@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
------- Additional Comments From covener@gmail.com 2007-12-04 04:58 -------
This is fixed in the most recent release of apr-util (1.2.12), there was a
lengthy discussion on the issue but several SDKS support -1 (use connection
default limit) and don't always have LDAP_DEFAULT_LIMIT defined.
(the other SDKS don't send the -1 over the wire)
--
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 44015] - Bug in util_ldap.c, mod_ldap
Posted by bu...@apache.org.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG�
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44015>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND�
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44015
agustin.herranz@alumnos.uva.es changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severity|critical |trivial
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Priority|P2 |P3
Resolution|FIXED |
------- Additional Comments From agustin.herranz@alumnos.uva.es 2007-12-04 10:49 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is fixed in the most recent release of apr-util (1.2.12), there was a
> lengthy discussion on the issue but several SDKS support -1 (use connection
> default limit) and don't always have LDAP_DEFAULT_LIMIT defined.
>
> (the other SDKS don't send the -1 over the wire)
Microsoft LDAP SDK send -1 (0xFFFFFFFF) over the wire...
I have build apr, apr-util, mod_ldap and mod_authnz_ldap with Visual C++ 2005
Express and tested with apache 2.2.6 on an W2k server with Openldap server and
works well.
Still had to delete APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT definition on util_ldap.c like said th
comment, and sync apr_ldap.hw to an apr_ldap.h.in style for:
#if APR_HAS_ZOS_LDAPSDK || APR_HAS_MICROSOFT_LDAPSDK
#define APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT LDAP_NO_LIMIT
#else
#ifdef LDAP_DEFAULT_LIMIT
#define APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT LDAP_DEFAULT_LIMIT
#else
#define APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT -1 /* equivalent to LDAP_DEFAULT_LIMIT */
#endif
#endif
or better:
#ifdef LDAP_DEFAULT_LIMIT
#define APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT LDAP_DEFAULT_LIMIT
#else
#if APR_HAS_XXX_LDAPSDK /* who dont have defined LDAP_DEFAULT_SIZELIMIT but
support -1 */
#define APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT -1 /* equivalent to LDAP_DEFAULT_LIMIT */
#else
#define APR_LDAP_SIZELIMIT LDAP_NO_LIMIT
#endif
#endif
I thought this version is better because LDAP_DEFAULT_SIZELIMIT = -1 is defined
in a draft that update RFC1823 what is an informational document, as far i can
see, and LDAP_NO_LIMIT = 0 is defined in RFC2251 - RFC4511 LDAP v3 protocol what
is a proposed standard.
--
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org