[389-users] Re: ACI Issues After 389-ds Package Upgrade

Hi,

On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 5:53 PM Zechmeister Christopher via 389-users <389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

Happy new year everyone!

May I ask about the status of this presumable bug? Is there already some ticket I simply cannot find or is it currently not possible to reproduce the described behaviour?

I'm in a similar situation and have currently locked the pkg version on our hosts, with the consequence that I cannot update other packages as well due to broken dependencies. I would be very interested in any news I missed.

Do you also have the issue with the same versions of 389-ds-base? I.e. after upgrading 389-ds-base-2.6.1-12.el9_6.x86_64 to 389-ds-base-2.7.0-7.el9_7.x86_64?

There is a known issue when some searches may return incomplete or empty results, but it affects 389-ds-base-2.6.1-12 too. 

Could you please check if dsctl <instance> healthcheck returns DSBLE0007 errors?

Thanks.

Thanks for your answer in advance!

Best regards

Christopher Zechmeister

Dipl.-Ing. Christopher Zechmeister
Senior Software Developer
Online Systeme

APA-Tech
Laimgrubengasse 10
1060 Wien

www.apa.at

On 20.11.2025, at 16:11, Mark Reynolds via 389-users <389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

On 11/20/25 8:57 AM, Trenc, Mike via 389-users wrote:

Hi everyone,

We recently performed OS patching within our Test LDAP environment consisting of six RHEL 9 servers (2 primaries and 4 replicas) such that it upgraded from Red Hat Enterprise Linux release 9.6 to Red Hat Enterprise Linux release 9.7.  During the patching process, the 389-DS packages below were also updated.

389-ds-base-2.6.1-12.el9_6.x86_64 ===> 389-ds-base-2.7.0-7.el9_7.x86_64

389-ds-base-libs-2.6.1-12.el9_6.x86_64 ===> 389-ds-base-libs-2.7.0-7.el9_7.x86_64

Shortly after patching and rebooting, we noticed an issue whereby the service accounts associated with applications in our Test environment were no longer able to search the OU that they were previously able to search successfully prior to patching.  To correct the issue, we ended up moving the ACIs associated with application service accounts one level higher in the OU.

As an example, below represents the change that we made to an ACI before and after the OS patching event to resolve the issue: 

Original pre-patching ACI when service account searches were successful:

DN: ou=people,dc=university,dc=edu

(targetattr = "*") (version 3.0;acl "app-user";allow (read,search,compare)(userdn = "ldap:///uid=app-user,ou=ldap-apps,dc=university,dc=edu");)

Post-Patching change made when service account searches no longer worked with the above original ACI configuration:

DN: dc=university,dc=edu

(targetattr = "*") (version 3.0;acl "app-user";allow (read,search,compare)(userdn = "ldap:///uid=app-user,ou=ldap-apps,dc=university,dc=edu");)

Has anyone else experienced any changes in ACI behavior when upgrading to the latest 389-ds-base-2.7.0-7 and 389-ds-base-libs-2.7.0-7 packages?

This is a regression :-(  I'm going to try and reproduce it and then file a bug.  I'll let you know what the ticket is once it's created.

Thanks,

Mark

Thanks,

Mike

—

Michael Trenc

Senior DevOps Engineer | Technology Partner Services

Harvard University Information Technology

P:(617) 496-6544 | W:huit.harvard.edu

--   Identity Management Development Team

--
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

--
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

--

Viktor