Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0. The upgrade date is tentatively scheduled for 2 December 2018, pending final testing and feedback.
Bug 1361134 - When fine-grained policy is applied, a sub-tree has a priority over a user while changing password
When fine-grained policy is applied, a sub-tree has a priority over a user wh...
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: 389-ds-base (Show other bugs)
7.3
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity unspecified
: rc
: ---
Assigned To: Noriko Hosoi
Viktor Ashirov
: Regression
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2016-07-28 07:52 EDT by Simon Pichugin
Modified: 2016-11-03 16:44 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version: 389-ds-base-1.3.5.10-6.el7
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-11-03 16:44:39 EDT
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)


External Trackers
Tracker ID Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2016:2594 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Moderate: 389-ds-base security, bug fix, and enhancement update 2016-11-03 08:11:08 EDT

  None (edit)
Description Simon Pichugin 2016-07-28 07:52:15 EDT
Description of problem:
If we setup fine-grained policy for a subtree and for a user under it and set passwordChange attribute to 'on' for the user and 'off' for the subtree, we wouldn't be able to change password while binding as user.
But, by the feature logic (thanks to Noriko for the info), fine-grained pwdpolicy on the entry has a priority over fine-grained pwdpolicy on the subtree the entry belongs to.

Version-Release number of selected component:
389-ds-base-1.3.5.10-5.el7.x86_64

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install Directory Server instance
2. Add a user to 'ou=people,dc=example,dc=com'
3. Set up password policy for the user and the subtree
4. Set passwordChange on the user pwdPolicy entry to 'on'
5. Set passwordChange on the subtree pwdPolicy entry to 'off'
5. Try to change userPassword binding as the user

Actual results:
UNWILLING_TO_PERFORM: {'info': 'user is not allowed to change password', 'desc': 'Server is unwilling to perform'}

Expected results:
User should be able to change a password

Additional info:
Looks like a regression, because TET CI test runs show no issue on the 389-ds-base-1.3.4.0 build
Comment 2 Simon Pichugin 2016-07-28 09:35:24 EDT
Upstream ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/48943
Comment 5 Simon Pichugin 2016-08-22 04:11:30 EDT
Build tested:
389-ds-base-1.3.5.10-8.el7.x86_64

[root@stal ds]# py.test -v dirsrvtests/tests/suites/password/pwd_change_policytest.py
========================= test session starts =========================
platform linux2 -- Python 2.7.5, pytest-3.0.0, py-1.4.31, pluggy-0.3.1 -- /usr/bin/python
cachedir: .cache
DS build: 1.3.5.10 B2016.231.199
389-ds-base: 1.3.5.10-8.el7
nss: 3.21.0-17.el7
nspr: 4.11.0-1.el7_2
openldap: 2.4.40-12.el7
svrcore: 4.1.2-1.el7

rootdir: /mnt/tests/rhds/tests/upstream/ds, inifile:
plugins: beakerlib-0.5, html-1.10.0, cov-2.3.1
collected 4 items

dirsrvtests/tests/suites/password/pwd_change_policytest.py::test_change_pwd[off-on-None] PASSED
dirsrvtests/tests/suites/password/pwd_change_policytest.py::test_change_pwd[on-on-None] PASSED
dirsrvtests/tests/suites/password/pwd_change_policytest.py::test_change_pwd[on-off-UNWILLING_TO_PERFORM] PASSED
dirsrvtests/tests/suites/password/pwd_change_policytest.py::test_change_pwd[off-off-UNWILLING_TO_PERFORM] PASSED

====================== 4 passed in 25.15 seconds ======================

Marking as verified.
Comment 7 errata-xmlrpc 2016-11-03 16:44:39 EDT
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-2016-2594.html

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.