On 08/19/2014 04:31 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
> On 08/19/2014 02:05 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>
>> On 08/19/2014 12:43 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
>>> On 08/19/2014 10:37 AM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 08/18/2014 04:39 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
>>>>> On 08/18/2014 04:24 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you Pavel for comments, I was mostly able to fix patches
>>>>>> as you
>>>>>> asked for but I have a little problem with default_dn. Could you
>>>>>> please
>>>>>> see my comments inline?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 08/18/2014 12:13 PM, Pavel Březina wrote:
>>>>>>> On 08/15/2014 03:13 PM, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 08/11/2014 04:51 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 04:19:22PM +0200, Pavel
Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH 7/9] SDAP: new option -
DN to ppolicy on LDAP
>>>>>>>>>>> Do we need to make the DN configurable? When
you install the
>>>>>>>>>>> ppolicy,
>>>>>>>>>>> can you actually set the DN?
>>>>>>>>>> I haven't tested setting different DN, but I
believe it's
>>>>>>>>>> possible.
>>>>>>>>>> During weekend I was putting my notes for setting
ppolicy on
>>>>>>>>>> OpenLDAP on
>>>>>>>>>> this wiki page
>>>>>>>>>>
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/wiki/openldap_ppolicy#Loadingppolicyoverlay
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (this is work in progress and I'm not even
sure we care to have
>>>>>>>>>> such a
>>>>>>>>>> how-to on our wiki), but I believe you can see
from there that
>>>>>>>>>> DN is
>>>>>>>>>> configurable.
>>>>>>>>> Any howto is good as long as it's up to date.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And from the howto it seems clear that
olcPPolicyDefault is
>>>>>>>>> the DN
>>>>>>>>> setting, so yes, this should be configurable.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Still we could use a default DN if user
didn't set DN himself:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "cn=ppolicy,ou=policies,$search_base"
>>>>>>>>> That sounds like a good idea.
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> sssd-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>>> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>>>>>>>>>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> please note that attached patches requires to be patches
from
>>>>>>>> "SDAP:
>>>>>>>> refactor sdap_access" thread to pushed first.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Patch 7:
>>>>>>> Nack.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + /* cached results of access control checks */
>>>>>>> ^ cached_access contain only one result
>>>>>>> bool cached_access;
>>>>>>> const char *basedn;
>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please remove sdap_access_{filter|lockout}_decide_offline and
use
>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>> sdap_access_decide_offline that will take bool instead of
>>>>>>> tevent_req
>>>>>>> as parameter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Patch 8:
>>>>>>> Ack.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Patch 9:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + case LDAP_ACCESS_LOCKOUT:
>>>>>>> + ret = EOK;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + subreq = sdap_access_lock_send(state,
state->ev,
>>>>>>> state->be_ctx,
>>>>>>> + state->domain,
>>>>>>> + state->access_ctx,
>>>>>>> + state->conn,
>>>>>>> + state->pd->user,
>>>>>>> + state->user_entry);
>>>>>>> + if (subreq == NULL) {
>>>>>>> + DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE,
"sdap_access_lock_send
>>>>>>> failed.\n");
>>>>>>> + return ENOMEM;
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + state->ac_type =
SDAP_ACCESS_CONTROL_PPOLICY_LOCK;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + tevent_req_set_callback(subreq,
sdap_access_done,
>>>>>>> req);
>>>>>>> + return EAGAIN;
>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no need for ret = EOK and break.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +static char*
>>>>>>> +get_default_ppolicy_dn(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, struct
sdap_options
>>>>>>> *opts)
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> + char *search_base;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + search_base = dp_opt_get_string(opts->basic,
>>>>>>> SDAP_SEARCH_BASE);
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + return talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx,
"cn=ppolicy,ou=policies,%s",
>>>>>>> search_base);
>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ldap_search_base option may contain more than one search base
>>>>>>> and it
>>>>>>> may also contain filter. This option is parsed during
>>>>>>> initialization
>>>>>>> of the provider and stored in sdap_domain->*search_base.
But since
>>>>>>> there may be more, you need to iterate over them.
>>>>>> Could you please elaborate a bit more about this? I'm afraid
I
>>>>>> don't
>>>>>> fully understand.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would you like me to create an array of possible default DN's
and
>>>>>> query
>>>>>> ldap server for every one? Or is there a way how to use multiple
dn
>>>>>> in a
>>>>>> single ldap query?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, you have to iterate over all of them. There is no way how to
>>>>> search all of them in one query AFAIK.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I think it is sufficient to use only domain components to
>>>>> create default dn, i.e. basedn of domain (dc=example,dc=com).
>>>>> This can
>>>>> be obtained from sdap_domain structure. Then you wouldn't have
to
>>>>> iterate over all search bases.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I think it is sufficient to use only dc part here so
>>>>>>> you can
>>>>>>> use basedn from sdap_domain structure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, I think it would be better if this function is removed
>>>>>>> and the
>>>>>>> default value is set in ldap_get_options() with
>>>>>>> dp_opt_set_string if
>>>>>>> the option is not set.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> sssd-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>>>>>>>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> sssd-devel mailing list
>>>>>> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>>>>>>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sssd-devel mailing list
>>>>> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>>>>>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
>>>>
>>>> Hello, please see updated patches.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Pavel Reichl
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I have just last few nitpicks.
>>>
>>> + /* option was configured */
>>> + if (ppolicy_dn != NULL) {
>>> + state->ppolicy_dns = talloc_array(state, const char*, 2);
>>> + if (state->ppolicy_dns == NULL) {
>>> + DEBUG(SSSDBG_CRIT_FAILURE, "Could not allocate
>>> ppolicy_dns.\n");
>>> + tevent_req_error(req, ENOMEM);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + state->ppolicy_dns[0] = ppolicy_dn;
>>> + state->ppolicy_dns[1] = NULL;
>>> +
>>> + } else {
>>> + /* try to determine default value */
>>> + DEBUG(SSSDBG_CONF_SETTINGS,
>>> + "ldap_pwdlockout_dn was not defined in configuration
>>> file.\n");
>>> +
>>> + state->ppolicy_dns = get_default_ppolicy_dns(state,
>>> state->opts->sdom);
>>> + if (state->ppolicy_dns == NULL) {
>>> + tevent_req_error(req, ERR_ACCESS_DENIED);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>>
>>> Why do you return ENOMEM on the top and ERR_ACCESS_DENIED on the
>>> bottom? Shouldn't it be the same?
>>>
>>> errno_t sdap_access_lock_step(struct tevent_req *req)
>>>
>>> When we iterate over an array, the convention is that the step
>>> function will return EOK if we are at the end, EAGAIN if it created
>>> another tevent_req and error on error.
>>>
>>> Also, I would prefer to use an index to access state->ppolicy_dns
>>> instead of dereferencing it and using pointer arithmetic.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> OK, I hope that attached patches address all your concerns!
>
> Ack.
>
> I just squash into the 3rd patch the following change:
>
> - *state->ppolicy_dns,
> + state->ppolicy_dns[state->ppolicy_dns_index],
>
>
Thanks attached patches include this fix.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sssd-devel mailing list
> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel