Bugfix/filter parser fails to parse blackets

[satoryu]

I forgot I sent a pull-request #72 to the upstream repository. the upstream has been evolving since I sent the pull request.
So I've merged the head of the branch master and rewrite a test code.

@jch Thank you for informing me.

[jch]

@satoryu 👍

I'm not familiar with the bracket syntax in your code. What does it mean, and how is it used? Could you point me to where it's declared in the spec? I found http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4511#section-4.5.1.7, but did not dig further into X.511 Clause 7.8.

[satoryu]

@jch

What does it mean, and how is it used?

Do you point this cn=[{something}] ? if so, this filter does not make sense as a filter.
As I read the article, I came to think FilterParser should parse a given string including []{} as a filter.

[jch]

I see, this just allows other valid characters to be constructed into a filter. @satoryu could you write an integration test against OpenLDAP to ensure this is valid? There are instructions here. Also, have you tested this to be valid against ActiveDirectory?

[satoryu]

I got it 🍣 I'll try to write an integration test.
now I'm using this patch against ActiveDirectory. it works well in my environment :)

[Scorcher]

I am not familiar with ruby, but I have a problem to set filter in Redmine, while this bug is present in this library. Developer sent me to this library... http://www.redmine.org/issues/11289
"Brackets" are valid symbols.
Example:
This is native ldap client and this command looking for Active users:

rugionpro:releases n$ ldapsearch -LLL -h localhost -p 2389 -z 1 -x -b "dc=rugion,dc=ru" -s sub '(&(objectClass=posixAccount)(sambaAcctFlags=[U          ]))' "dn" 
dn: *****************,dc=rugion,dc=ru

I fixed it temporarily like so:

root@samui:# diff -up ruby/1.9.1/gems/net-ldap-0.3.1/lib/net/ldap/filter.rb.bak ruby/1.9.1/gems/net-ldap-0.3.1/lib/net/ldap/filter.rb
--- ruby/1.9.1/gems/net-ldap-0.3.1/lib/net/ldap/filter.rb.bak 2014-11-11 16:25:00.619443359 +0500
+++ ruby/1.9.1/gems/net-ldap-0.3.1/lib/net/ldap/filter.rb     2014-11-13 13:34:51.391417719 +0500
@@ -733,7 +733,7 @@ class Net::LDAP::Filter
         scanner.scan(/\s*/)
         if op = scanner.scan(/<=|>=|!=|:=|=/)
           scanner.scan(/\s*/)
-          if value = scanner.scan(/(?:[-\w*.+@=,#\$%&!'\s]|\\[a-fA-F\d]{2})+/)
+          if value = scanner.scan(/(?:[-\w*.+@=,\[\]#\$%&!'\s]|\\[a-fA-F\d]{2})+/)
             # 20100313 AZ: Assumes that "(uid=george*)" is the same as
             # "(uid=george* )". The standard doesn't specify, but I can find
             # no examples that suggest otherwise.

[satoryu]

Sorry, guys. just I've confirmed the updates works well in Integration Test.

time INTEGRATION=openldap INTEGRATION_HOST=$ip bundle exec rake                                                   (git|bugfix/filter_parser_fails_to_parse_blackets)
/usr/local/var/rbenv/versions/2.1.0/bin/ruby -I"lib:test" -I"/usr/local/var/rbenv/versions/2.1.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rake-10.3.1/lib" "/usr/local/var/rbenv/versions/2.1.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rake-10.3.1/lib/rake/rake_test_loader.rb" "test/ber/core_ext/test_array.rb" "test/ber/core_ext/test_string.rb" "test/ber/test_ber.rb" "test/integration/test_add.rb" "test/integration/test_ber.rb" "test/integration/test_bind.rb" "test/integration/test_delete.rb" "test/integration/test_open.rb" "test/integration/test_return_codes.rb" "test/integration/test_search.rb" "test/test_dn.rb" "test/test_entry.rb" "test/test_filter.rb" "test/test_filter_parser.rb" "test/test_helper.rb" "test/test_ldap.rb" "test/test_ldap_connection.rb" "test/test_ldif.rb" "test/test_password.rb" "test/test_rename.rb" "test/test_search.rb" "test/test_snmp.rb" "test/test_ssl_ber.rb"
Run options:

# Running tests:

Finished tests in 2.000158s, 81.4936 tests/s, 365.4711 assertions/s.
163 tests, 731 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors, 0 skips

ruby -v: ruby 2.1.0p0 (2013-12-25 revision 44422) [x86_64-darwin14.0]
INTEGRATION=openldap INTEGRATION_HOST=$ip bundle exec rake  1.03s user 0.31s system 39% cpu 3.407 total

[jch]

@Scorcher thanks for the reproduction. @satoryu 🍻 This will be merged in the next release 0.10.0.

[satoryu]

@jch @Scorcher thanks a lot!

[Scorcher]

@jch @satoryu Thank you!