Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1092648
Negative value of nsSaslMapPriority is not reset to lowest priority
Last modified: 2015-03-05 04:34:33 EST
Description of problem: When setting an attribute nsSaslMapPriority on a mapping, the value is checked for invalid values. This is being done for values x==0 and x > 100 and it creates an error/warning message in the logs and resets the value to 100. If the value in modify operation is negative, it isn't reset in the entry. This bug doesn't seem to have an effect on the evaluation order, thus setting low severity. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 389-ds-base-1.3.1.6-25 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Set nsSaslMapPriority on a mapping entry. Actual results: The negative value is stored silently in the configuration. Expected results: The value stored is 100 and the server logs an error/warning message.
Upstream ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47791
Fix upstream for 7.1
[root@dhcp201-126 ~]# ldapmodify -p 389 -h localhost -D "cn=Directory Manager" -w Secret123 << EOF > dn: cn=example map,cn=mapping,cn=sasl,cn=config > changetype: add > objectclass: top > objectclass: nsSaslMapping > cn: example map > nsSaslMapPriority: -10 > nsSaslMapRegexString: \(.*\) > nsSaslMapBaseDNTemplate: ou=People > nsSaslMapFilterTemplate: (cn=\1) > EOF adding new entry "cn=example map,cn=mapping,cn=sasl,cn=config" [root@dhcp201-126 ~]# ldapsearch -p 389 -h localhost -D "cn=Directory Manager" -w Secret123 -LLL -b "cn=example map,cn=mapping,cn=sasl,cn=config" dn: cn=example map,cn=mapping,cn=sasl,cn=config objectClass: top objectClass: nsSaslMapping cn: example map nsSaslMapPriority: 100 nsSaslMapRegexString: \(.*\) nsSaslMapBaseDNTemplate: ou=People nsSaslMapFilterTemplate: (cn=\1) error :: [08/Jan/2015:13:53:56 +051800] - sasl_map_config_parse_entry: resetting invalid nsSaslMapPriority value (-10) to the lowest priority (100) Hence VERIFIED,
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