nsslapd-minssf valid value range is not clear

[389-ds-bot]

Cloned from Pagure issue: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/50049

• Created at 2018-11-27 08:57:03 by amsharma (@amsharma3)
• Closed at 2020-02-26 16:57:31 as invalid
• Assigned to nobody

---

Description of problem:
nsslapd-minssf valid value range is not clear

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
389-ds-base-1.4.0.19-1.module+el8+1+a8d5e036.x86_64

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
In Admin Guide, It is written - "The default nsslapd-minssf attribute value is 0, which means there is no minimum SSF for server connections. The value can be set to any reasonable positive integer. The value represents the required key strength for any secure connection."

But -
[root@server /]# dsconf -D "cn=Directory Manager" ldap://server.example.com config replace nsslapd-minssf=130
Enter password for cn=Directory Manager on ldap://server.example.com:
Error: {'desc': 'Server is unwilling to perform', 'info': 'Minimum SSF not met.'}

[root@server /]# dsconf -D "cn=Directory Manager" ldap://server.example.com config replace nsslapd-minssf=0
Enter password for cn=Directory Manager on ldap://server.example.com:
Error: {'desc': 'Server is unwilling to perform', 'info': 'Minimum SSF not met.'}

Expected results:
Valid value range should be defined for the attribute.

[389-ds-bot]

Comment from firstyear (@Firstyear) at 2018-11-28 23:53:29

The entire concept of minssf is a complete disaster and makes no actual sense. It is meant to mean "the required number of encryption bits to allow operations to proceed".

However, there are flaws that mean ldap leaks data plaintext anyway when you use this, and the representation of bits has not been accurately reported by libraries for a long time.

As a result, the only secure option is to use LDAPS. StartTLS and GSSAPI both have other issues that can continue to confuse and cause dataleaks.

So your error here is that you do the ldap operation as plaintext, so your encryption is 0, so you don't meet the minssf requiremnt. Try LDAPS instead.

[389-ds-bot]

Comment from firstyear (@Firstyear) at 2018-11-28 23:53:29

Metadata Update from @Firstyear:

• Custom field component adjusted to None
• Custom field origin adjusted to None
• Custom field reviewstatus adjusted to None
• Custom field type adjusted to None
• Custom field version adjusted to None

[389-ds-bot]

Comment from mreynolds (@mreynolds389) at 2019-01-03 17:50:25

Metadata Update from @mreynolds389:

• Issue set to the milestone: 1.4.1

[389-ds-bot]

Comment from mreynolds (@mreynolds389) at 2020-02-26 16:57:32

Metadata Update from @mreynolds389:

• Issue close_status updated to: invalid
• Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)