[389-users] upgraded to latest 389, now anon binds return no results

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi 389-users,

Perhaps you can help solve a mystery for me.

I just upgraded 389 Directory on RHEL5, 64bit from 389-ds-base 1.2.2 to 1.2.9.9.

  yum --enablerepo=epel upgrade
  setup-ds-admin.pl -u

... as prescribed in the release notes:

  http://directory.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Release_Notes


Here is the problem.  I used to be able to query using ldapsearch like this:

  ldapsearch -x -ZZ -h <HOST> -b <BASE> -LLL "(uid=<USER>)" gecos

And I would see:

  dn: uid=<USER>,<BASE>
  gecos: System User


Now, after the upgrade, this returns no results and no errors, but if
I bind like this, then it works _fine_:

  ldapsearch -x -ZZ -D "cn=directory manager" -W -h <HOST> -b <BASE>
-LLL "(uid=<USER>)" gecos


Here is some log output showing the anon. bind search and the
non-anon. bind search (sanitized):

[07/Dec/2011:14:52:14 -0800] conn=120 SSL 256-bit AES
[07/Dec/2011:14:52:14 -0800] conn=120 op=1 BIND dn="" method=128 version=3
[07/Dec/2011:14:52:14 -0800] conn=120 op=1 RESULT err=0 tag=97
nentries=0 etime=0 dn=""
[07/Dec/2011:14:52:14 -0800] conn=120 op=2 SRCH
base="dc=EXAMPLE,dc=COM" scope=2 filter="(uid=USERNAME)" attrs="gecos"
[07/Dec/2011:14:52:14 -0800] conn=120 op=2 RESULT err=0 tag=101
nentries=0 etime=0
[07/Dec/2011:14:52:14 -0800] conn=120 op=3 UNBIND
[07/Dec/2011:14:52:14 -0800] conn=120 op=3 fd=71 closed - U1

[07/Dec/2011:14:53:37 -0800] conn=121 SSL 256-bit AES
[07/Dec/2011:14:53:40 -0800] conn=121 op=2 BIND dn="cn=directory
manager" method=128 version=3
[07/Dec/2011:14:53:40 -0800] conn=121 op=2 RESULT err=0 tag=97
nentries=0 etime=0 dn="cn=directory manager"
[07/Dec/2011:14:53:40 -0800] conn=121 op=3 SRCH
base="dc=EXAMPLE,dc=COM" scope=2 filter="(uid=USERNAME)" attrs="gecos"
[07/Dec/2011:14:53:40 -0800] conn=121 op=3 RESULT err=0 tag=101
nentries=1 etime=0
[07/Dec/2011:14:53:40 -0800] conn=121 op=4 UNBIND
[07/Dec/2011:14:53:40 -0800] conn=121 op=4 fd=71 closed - U1

The only difference I can see is the nentries=1 in the latter test.

So, I looked into the latest features and see there are some more

  nsslapd-anonlimitsdn:
  nsslapd-allow-anonymous-access: on

... which I have left as defaults.  It looks like anonymous binds
should still work.

So, I am wondering, why do anonymous binds no longer return results?  Any ideas?

--Brian
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users



[Index of Archives]     [Fedora User Discussion]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora QA]     [Fedora Triage]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Linux Apps]     [Maemo Users]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Maemo Users]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux