strange ldap search

[simo]

On Tue, 2010-02-09 at 10:13 +0100, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
> Björn JACKE schrieb:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I've stumbled upon a strange but quite frequent LDAP search request:
> > 
> >   smbldap_search_ext: base => [o=foo,c=faa], filter => [(&(|(objectclass=sambaGroupMapping)(sambaGroupType=4))(|(sambaSIDList=S-1-5-21-828240920-535362782-526260432-501)(sambaSIDList=S-1-1-0)(sambaSIDList=S-1-5-2)(sambaSIDList=S-1-5-32-546)))], scope => [2]
> > 
> > I wonder if the (|(objectclass=sambaGroupMapping)(sambaGroupType=4)) part of
> > the search filter is actuallay intended. Shouldn't that be a & instead of |? In
> > the end this can be simplified to
> > 
> > (&(objectclass=sambaGroupMapping)(sambaGroupType=4)(|...
> > 
> > As patches get stripped by our mailman, here's the proposed patch inline:
> > 
> > diff --git a/source3/passdb/pdb_ldap.c b/source3/passdb/pdb_ldap.c
> > index 0d498c8..63790c0 100644
> > --- a/source3/passdb/pdb_ldap.c
> > +++ b/source3/passdb/pdb_ldap.c
> > @@ -3725,7 +3725,7 @@ static NTSTATUS ldapsam_alias_memberships(struct pdb_methods *methods,
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	filter = talloc_asprintf(mem_ctx,
> > -				 "(&(|(objectclass=%s)(sambaGroupType=%d))(|",
> > +				 "(&(objectclass=%s)(sambaGroupType=%d)(|",
> >  				 LDAP_OBJ_GROUPMAP, type);
> >  
> >  	for (i=0; i<num_members; i++)
> > 
> > Any comments?
> 
> For me the fix looks good.
> 
> Simo do you agree?

Yes, I can't see any reason for the original form. Looks like what Björn
proposes is what was intended.

Simo.


-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>