directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Updated: (DIRLDAP-38) Search request BER parser incorrectly parses complex filters.
Date Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:38:20 GMT
     [ ]

Alex Karasulu updated DIRLDAP-38:

       Priority: Blocker  (was: Major)
    Fix Version: 0.9.0

Have not had the time yet to look at this one but if you're right this is really serious.
 We cannot release 0.9 without it.  Can you attach a patch with a test case showing this bug
in effect?  If you are printing it out into a string it might be the visitor that prints out
the info or the normalizing visitor that is causing this.  The normalizing visitor tries to
rearrange the AST for the filter so terms in the same nesting level are in the same cannonical
order when printed out - this is done to be able to compare filter expressions.

> Search request BER parser incorrectly parses complex filters.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>          Key: DIRLDAP-38
>          URL:
>      Project: Directory LDAP
>         Type: Bug
>   Components: Common
>     Versions: 0.9.0
>  Environment: NA
>     Reporter: Jacob S. Barrett
>     Assignee: Alex Karasulu
>     Priority: Blocker
>      Fix For: 0.9.0

> Using the following search from an LDAP client, like Softera's browser or OpenLDAP's
ldapsearch, search for something like the following filter:
> (& (a=A) (| (b=B) (c=C) ) )
> The resulting expression object after the BER parser is finished is:
> (& (| (c=C) (b=B) (a=A) ) )
> This is obviously not the correct expression and results in bobus results.
> I thought at first it might have been the expression object serializing to a string form
that had issue, but passing the same filter string through the commons.filter.FilterParserImpl
produces the correct expression object and the correct serialized string.
> I am attempting to debug the problem further.  If I can produce a patch I will post it,
but if someone has a better idea of what is going please tackle this.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
If you want more information on JIRA, or have a bug to report see:

View raw message