[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: slapd/acl.c: using "filter=()" in an acl does not trigger an overlay's search callback

Howard Chu wrote:

Howard Chu wrote:

Daniel wrote:

Hi,

my experimental overlay intercepts search requests and modifies the
filter-expressions (e.g. removes/expand AND|OR). Therefore the overlay
modifies "struct Filter op->ors_filter" on the fly, handles memory
(op->o_tmpmemctx/filter_free) and so on. It works fine, currently no
memleaks (valgrind) etc and I would like contribute it (once it's
finished... ;-) )

To get the maximum flexibility out of the current prototyp I'm looking
after a solution to have my overlay intercept the following "search", too: 

access to filter=(description=editMe)
      by self write
      by * none

The ACL's filter seems not to "fire" a search request because in acl.c
lines 704 to 709 "test_filter(NULL, e, a->acl_filter)" get's called
directly. This results in bypassing the overlay's search callback. Was
this for performance reasons?

Are there any chances to replace "test_filter()" by some kind of
slapd_internal_search() in a way to enable overlay stack processing, for 
this internal search?


No.
Thanks a lot for your second reply. I think I need to explain this stupid thing in more detail: 
To clarify - there is no search operation at all here.
Yes, that's what I've already (not) found out before. And it was the reason for my initial question. Why is test_filter() called directly here instead of an internal search (my assumption: probably because fo performance)?
It is simply comparing the ACL terms to the target entry for which access is being checked. The target entry may be the target of a Modify, Compare, etc., not necessarily a Search request. And there is no reason to perform an internal search, since the target entry is already in hand, being evaluated.
Ok, this answers why test_filter() is called directly - thanks. But how can an overlay possibly intercept this or what has to be change that an overlay can intercept this? My thought was: maybe by doing a "internal_search(scope base on entry e with filter a->acl_filter)" (how about performance?).
Whatever your overlay is doing, it seems silly to invoke it here. If you want a different filter, just write the desired filter into the ACL. Rewriting a static configuration item every time it's evaluated is rather wasteful.
These were exactly my doubts too, please see: http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-technical/200907/msg00144.html 


Background-Information:
I've been searching after some kind of new LDAP feature (currently aka protocol-violation ;-) ) - mostly comparable to SQL's "select * from * where timestamp=now()". Translated into LDAP this would perhaps mean something like: "ldapsearch ... -H ... '(validnow=*)'"
Violating the LDAP-protocol by highjacking a "search-filter-expression" seems not to be the most elegant ldap-way (in regard to protocol extensions and the use of new extend controls etc), but: This functionality should be a server-side-controlled&enforced feature (customizable for different subtrees etc. pp.). The Server is able to detect the above "special" PRESENT-filter and replace it on-the-fly into: '(&(validNotBefore<=op's time)(validNotAfter>=op's time))'.
Additionally the server (overlay) enforces this kind of filtering transparently below distinct subtrees. This means: an incoming ldapsearch '(objectclass=*)' gets extended to (&(objectClass=*)(validnow=*)) and "validnow=*" itself explodes into "(&(vNB...)(vNA...))".
EQUALITY-Filters are handle the way that any incoming filter that contains: "validnow=19700101000000Z" get transformed into '(&(vNB<=1970...Z)(vNA>=1970...Z))'. Only in case the req_ndn is allowed to bypass or the resulting objects are allowed to be ignored.
Although this feature could be completly integrated into an catch-all-overlay I've split it into two parts: a slapd-internal validnow-core-part (very rare changes to filter.c only three additional functions, no changes to existing code) to fulfill the above (simple) feature. And an validnow-ctrl-part to handle subtree-configuration, exceptions, etc. The validnow-ctrl uses a fine grained configuration matrix to allow distinct entries and rdn-subtrees to bypass the server side enforcement under special circumstances (globally and/or locally configurable).
All this works fine: under enforced subtrees only valid objects are returned and only valid objects are allowed to authenticate, exceptions are handled correctly etc. I've successfully tested the behavior regarding bind-operation (simple & sasl) and various search request-scenarios. If the server respond (with an enforced/limited reply) extended control's are added to the reply, to inform validnow-capable clients (already tested). Currently the compare, add and modify is work in progress.
Now I want to come back to the original question: It would be nice to let validnow also take effect on slapd's ACL processing, e.g. 

access to filter=(validnow=*)
     by users search
     by * none
I've already tried to "modify/replace" the a->acl_filter struct (quick&dirty hardcoded within in acl.c). It has worked fine for the first request but during the second request slapd segfaults away ;-). I think the overlay traversal [sh|w]ould work better...
In my opinion the above partially described feature (possibly not this solution) would be a very interessting LDAP feature especially in regard to authorization, provisioning and de-provisioning, data privacy and so on... 

What kind of alternative solutions exist or do you see?

Cheers
Daniel