diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/extended_dn_in.c | 23 |
1 files changed, 21 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/extended_dn_in.c b/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/extended_dn_in.c index 4071adda79..c39953f418 100644 --- a/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/extended_dn_in.c +++ b/source4/dsdb/samdb/ldb_modules/extended_dn_in.c @@ -276,8 +276,27 @@ static int extended_dn_in_fix(struct ldb_module *module, struct ldb_request *req int num_components = ldb_dn_get_comp_num(dn); int num_ex_components = ldb_dn_get_extended_comp_num(dn); - if (num_components != 0 || num_ex_components != 1) { - return ldb_error(ldb_module_get_ctx(module), LDB_ERR_INVALID_DN_SYNTAX, "invalid number of DN components"); + /* + windows ldap searchs don't allow a baseDN with more + than one extended component, or an extended + component and a string DN + + We only enforce this over ldap, not for internal + use, as there are just too many places where we + internally want to use a DN that has come from a + search with extended DN enabled, or comes from a DRS + naming context. + + Enforcing this would also make debugging samba much + harder, as we'd need to use ldb_dn_minimise() in a + lot of places, and that would lose the DN string + which is so useful for working out what a request is + for + */ + if ((num_components != 0 || num_ex_components != 1) && + ldb_req_is_untrusted(req)) { + return ldb_error(ldb_module_get_ctx(module), + LDB_ERR_INVALID_DN_SYNTAX, "invalid number of DN components"); } sid_val = ldb_dn_get_extended_component(dn, "SID"); |