RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1044194 - Complex filter in a search request doen't work as expected.
Summary: Complex filter in a search request doen't work as expected.
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: 389-ds-base
Version: 7.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
low
unspecified
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Rich Megginson
QA Contact: Viktor Ashirov
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-12-17 21:51 UTC by Nathan Kinder
Modified: 2020-09-13 20:46 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 389-ds-base-1.3.3.1-1.el7
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-03-05 09:32:53 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Github 389ds 389-ds-base issues 858 0 None None None 2020-09-13 20:46:15 UTC
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2015:0416 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Important: 389-ds-base security, bug fix, and enhancement update 2015-03-05 14:26:33 UTC

Description Nathan Kinder 2013-12-17 21:51:32 UTC 
This bug is created as a clone of upstream ticket:
https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47521

Hi,

Please find below the reproducer details with the examples.

Complex filter example:

"(&(&(uid=test1)(cn=t1 est))(&(gidnumber=20))(uidnumber=2558)(&(sn=est)))"

In the above filter as you can see, the "uidnumber=2558" sub filter is not associated with ant Boolean operator ( AND or OR or NOT) which results in missing this sub filter from the filter after decoding process. The error log details are given below.
======
[23/Sep/2013:04:42:58 +051800] index_subsys_assign_filter_decoders - before: (&(&(uid=test1)(cn=t1 est))(&(gidNumber=20))(uidNumber=2558)(&(sn=est)))
======
>>> The index subsystem takes the complex filter as argument for the decoding.
[23/Sep/2013:04:42:58 +051800] - slapi_filter_free type 0xA0
[23/Sep/2013:04:42:58 +051800] - slapi_filter_free type 0xA0
[23/Sep/2013:04:42:58 +051800] - slapi_filter_free type 0xA0
=====
[23/Sep/2013:04:42:58 +051800] index_subsys_assign_filter_decoders -  after: (&(uid=test1)(cn=t1 est)(gidNumber=20)(sn=est))
=====
>>> After decoding as you can see in the above line, the "uidnumber=2558" is missing which is not going to be considered during the database search.

Here, as the whole of complex filter is preceded by a outer "&" operator, Why the sub filter in this case is being ignored  from the search request?.
Comment 2 Amita Sharma 2014-12-29 07:37:00 UTC 
[root@dhcp201-126 ~]# ldapadd -x -h localhost -p 389 -D "cn=Directory Manager" -w Secret123  << EOF
> dn: uid=test1,dc=example,dc=com
> cn: t1 est
> sn: est
> givenname: ams
> gidnumber: 20
> uidnumber: 2558
> objectclass: top
> objectclass: person
> objectclass: organizationalPerson
> objectclass: inetOrgPerson
> objectClass: posixAccount
> uid: test1
> mail: ams
> homeDirectory: /home/test1
> userpassword: Secret123
> EOF
adding new entry "uid=test1,dc=example,dc=com"

[root@dhcp201-126 ~]# ldapsearch -LLL -D "cn=directory manager" -w Secret123 -p 389 -h localhost -b  "dc=example,dc=com" "(&(&(uid=test1)(cn=t1 est))(&(gidnumber=20))(uidnumber=2558)(&(sn=est)))"
dn: uid=test1,dc=example,dc=com
cn: t1 est
sn: est
givenName: ams
gidNumber: 20
uidNumber: 2558
objectClass: top
objectClass: person
objectClass: organizationalPerson
objectClass: inetOrgPerson
objectClass: posixAccount
uid: test1
mail: ams
homeDirectory: /home/test1
userPassword:: e1NTSEF9bVBaTldhRTl0dGRiZ3pLZ1FsQzFzczR2OUJ6bkNQang5QU1heXc9PQ=

worked as expected, hence VERIFIED.
Comment 4 errata-xmlrpc 2015-03-05 09:32:53 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-0416.html
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.