From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 Description of problem: When trying to get a DirectoryIndex when using mod_ssl with SSL certificates, it fails. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.A .htaccess file like so:Options +Indexes AuthType Basic AuthName "blah" AuthUserFile /blah/blah/.htpasswd Require valid-user SSLRequireSSL 2.httpd.conf contains:SSLOptions +FakeBasicAuth SSLVerifyClient require 3. .htpasswd file contains the subject from the SSL certificate and the encrypted password 'password' Actual Results: When configured as above, I am able to access pages correctly, but only if I type in the exact page name. So I can't do https://blah.mit.edu/directory and get an Index listing, but if I do https://blah.mit.edu/directory/picture_name.jpg it works. Expected Results: I should get a Directory listing. Additional info: This is a recognized bug that was fixed in mod_ssl 2.8.9. I would normally just upgrade the apache and mod_ssl myself, but we've moved to using the RedHat Network, and am unwilling to upgrade any packages that will put our systems out of sync. The URL listed above is a google groups communication confirming the bug exists and was fixed in 2.8.9, also the RELEASE-NOTES from the latest package list it as a fixed bug. The URL is too long for the Oracle, as it breaks. The URL is http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=e56bf71b.0206130144.423d95e%40posting.google.com&rnum=7&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Ddirectory%2Bindex%2Bmod_ssl%2Bvalid-user%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26selm%3De56bf71b.0206130144.423d95e%2540posting.google.com%26rnum%3D7
Thanks for the report. This is a mass bug update; since this release of Red Hat Linux is no longer supported, please either: a) try and reproduce the bug with a supported version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux or Fedora Core, and re-open this bug as appropriate after changing the Product field, or, b) if relevant, try and reproduce this bug using the current version of the upstream package, and report the bug upstream.