IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Overflow is unlikely ever to occur, but you never know.
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
This matches the use of uint32_t for security_token::num_sids.
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Accessing the wrong member of a union invokes undefined behaviour.
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
We should not be making modifications to caller memory. In
particular, this causes problems for logging of requests if the
original request becomes modified.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15442
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Wed Aug 2 12:10:20 UTC 2023 on atb-devel-224
We should not be stealing caller memory like this, and while a
talloc_reference() is not much better, this combined with a
shallow copy should be a little better in terms of polite
memory management.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15442
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15442
Signed-off-by: Arvid Requate <requate@univention.de>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
[abartlet@samba.org combination of two patches by the above authors]
By doing this we use the common samdb_get_system_container_dn() routine and we
avoid doing a linerize and parse step on the main DN, instead using the
already stored parse of the DN. This is more hygenic.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9959
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
If a talloc function returns NULL, indicating failure, the failure could
be masked by the next talloc call allocating on the NULL context.
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
ldb_attr_in_list() already exists and does essentially the same thing.
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Schneider <asn@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Rob van der Linde <rob@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Autobuild-User(master): Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Apr 6 01:33:05 UTC 2023 on atb-devel-224
Signed-off-by: Rob van der Linde <rob@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
This early return would mistakenly allow an unprivileged user to delete
the dNSHostName attribute by making an LDAP modify request with no
values. We should no longer allow this.
Add or replace operations with no values and no privileges are
disallowed.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15276
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
In the unlikely case that someone adds a confidential indexed attribute
to the schema, LDAP search expressions on that attribute could disclose
information via timing differences. Let's not use the index for searches
on confidential attributes.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15270
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
If the AS_SYSTEM control is present, we know we have system privileges,
and have no need to call dsdb_module_am_system().
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15270
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Add a hook, acl_redact_msg_for_filter(), in the aclread module, that
marks inaccessible any message elements used by an LDAP search filter
that the user has no right to access. Make the various ldb_match_*()
functions check whether message elements are accessible, and refuse to
match any that are not. Remaining message elements, not mentioned in the
search filter, are checked in aclread_callback(), and any inaccessible
elements are removed at this point.
Certain attributes, namely objectClass, distinguishedName, name, and
objectGUID, are always present, and hence the presence of said
attributes is always allowed to be checked in a search filter. This
corresponds with the behaviour of Windows.
Further, we unconditionally allow the attributes isDeleted and
isRecycled in a check for presence or equality. Windows is not known to
make this special exception, but it seems mostly harmless, and should
mitigate the performance impact on searches made by the show_deleted
module.
As a result of all these changes, our behaviour regarding confidential
attributes happens to match Windows more closely. For the test in
confidential_attr.py, we can now model our attribute handling with
DC_MODE_RETURN_ALL, which corresponds to the behaviour exhibited by
Windows.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15270
Pair-Programmed-With: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
These variables are often used together, and it is useful to have the
setup code in one place.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15270
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
In extended_dn_fix_filter() we had:
req->op.search.tree = ldb_parse_tree_copy_shallow(req, req->op.search.tree);
which overwrote the parse tree on an existing ldb request with a fixed
up tree. This became a problem if a module performed another search with
that same request structure, as extended_dn_in would try to fix up the
already-modified tree for a second time. The fixed-up tree element now
having an extended DN, it would fall foul of the ldb_dn_match_allowed()
check in extended_dn_filter_callback(), and be replaced with an
ALWAYS_FALSE match rule. In practice this meant that <GUID={}> searches
would only work for one search in an ldb request, and fail for
subsequent ones.
Fix this by creating a new request with the modified tree, and leaving
the original request unmodified.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15270
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
It is better to explicitly abort than to dereference a NULL pointer or
try to read data cast to the wrong type.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15270
Signed-off-by: Joseph Sutton <josephsutton@catalyst.net.nz>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Backlinks which are not allowed by the schema are hidden by default,
so we already set DSDB_RMD_FLAG_HIDDEN_BL on store, so we have a cheap
way to hide the backlinks.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12967
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Mar 23 08:19:20 UTC 2023 on atb-devel-224
We now check for DSDB_RMD_FLAG_DELETED, as we'll check for
DSDB_RMD_FLAG_HIDDEN_BL in the next step and it's better to
call dsdb_dn_val_rmd_flags() just once.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12967
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
This only verifies internals store operations, adding invalid forward
links is already checked in other places.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12967
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
If we find that the backlink should not be visible on the given objectClass
by default, we now set DSDB_RMD_FLAG_HIDDEN_BL.
We'll evaluate that in the next commits in order to hide the
backlink by default.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12967
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
We first create source_dn as trimmed down copy of bl->forward_dn
and then only use it for debug messages.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12967
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
