directory-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Emmanuel Lecharny" <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Unrequested attributes returned on ldap search
Date Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:55:07 GMT
Well, I think I get it fixed now, and as the fix also fixes a real bug
we have (can you confirm that if you do a ldapsearch with cn and *,
you get all the attrs instead of just the cn, as expected wrt the RFC
?)

Thanks !

On 8/28/07, Stefan Zoerner <stefan@labeo.de> wrote:
> Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> > well, we can change the server behavior, but it won't be that easy. I
> > tried to change during the past hour, but the pb is that we have many
> > different cases :
> > - if the user doesn't pass any attributes, it defaults to '*'
> > - if a use passes at least an attribute, then we should discard '1.1'
> > and '*' attributes (btw, it's a potential bug we may have : searching
> > for "cn *" or "cn 1.1" should be rejected)
> >
> > Now, we have two more special cases :
> > - the user is passing a single and empty attribute (30 04 04 00) : it
> > should be considered as a '*'
> > - the user is passing some attributes plus an empty one : (30 06 04 02
> > sn 04 00) : this is what we (get here.
> >
> > I currently have a fix for 1.5, but I'm not sure I will inject it in 1.0...
> >
> > Why do we have to workaround all the damn wrongly pieces of software
> > all around us ???)
> >
> > Integration tests running...
>
>
> I think it is not necessary to fix it, especially if it is difficult.
> And as you have noticed a workaround for an erroneous client.
>
> But we can still raise an JIRA issue, mark it as illegal, and give users
> with this behavior a link which describes what happens and why.
>
> Greetings,
>      Stefan
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel L├ęcharny
www.iktek.com

Mime
View raw message