s4: dSHeuristics syntax check
nivanova at samba.org
Wed Nov 3 02:41:21 MDT 2010
Ok, I will add a check on adds as well, although I am not sure I can make a
test for this that will pass against windows. As for whether its a necessary
feature, we definitely do not need to take all the flags into account, but
some of them make sense and alter the behavior of the server, as in the case
with blocking anonymous connections and the password resets, remember how
these tests did not pass against windows until we started playing with
dSHeuristics? At the very least we should not allow invalid data to be
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer <mdw at samba.org>wrote:
> Exactly, Andrew.
> Better to test more than less. This 1.) prevents problems when we enforce
> more and more constraints, 2.) keeps our database as consistent as possible.
> Well the "dSHeuristics" implementation as such I don't find the most needed
> feature - but well, if it's done correctly I'm fine with it.
> Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>> I still think we should do out best to always ensure we always validate
>> data entered into the directory.
>> Andrew Bartlett
More information about the samba-technical