Thursday, July 4, 2024

[389-users] Re: Enable SSHA hashing scheme


On 7/4/24 12:54, Ralf Spenneberg wrote:
Hi Viktor,

I do not see any errors. I attached the log but nothing stands out to me.
It was not a fresh instance but the migrated instance.

Then I removed the database:
dsconf -D "cn=Directory Manager" -W ldap://localhost backend delete spenneberg_net --do-it
Deleting Backend cn=spenneberg_net,cn=ldbm database,cn=plugins,cn=config :
Type 'Yes I am sure' to continue: Yes I am sure
The database, and any sub-suffixes, were successfully deleted

Recreated it:
dsconf -D "cn=Directory Manager" -W ldap://localhost backend create --suffix="dc=spenneberg,dc=net" --be-name=spenneberg_net
The database was sucessfully created

Did the import again:
dsconf -D "cn=Directory Manager" -Wi ldap://localhost backend import dc=spenneberg,dc=net /userRoot.ldif
The import task has finished successfully

If I try to authenticate again, it does not work:
ldapsearch -h localhost -x -b dc=spenneberg,dc=net -D "uid=kolab-service,ou=Special Users,dc=spenneberg,dc=net" -W
ldap_bind: Invalid credentials (49)

The user has a SSHA password:
{SSHA}+4ZcRhy2/7h5Du5x/1MO....

Hi

If you compare the userpassword value (of a broken user), from the ldif and from ldapsearch. Does it differ ?

thierry


If I check the password, pwdhash states OK:
pwdhash -c {SSHA}+4ZcRhy2/7h5Du5x/1MO... qcG...
pwdhash: password ok.

If I reset the password using ldapmodify
dn: uid=kolab-service,ou=Special Users,dc=spenneberg,dc=net
changetype: modify
replace: userPassword
userPassword: qcG...

Now the user may access the tree again. I do not know, why the SSHA passwords are not honored.
Any ideas?

KInd regards,
Ralf


Am Do., 4. Juli 2024 um 12:37 Uhr schrieb Viktor Ashirov <vashirov@redhat.com>:
Hi Ralf,


On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 11:29 AM Ralf Spenneberg <rspenneberg@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Viktor,
thanks a lot for the suggestion.
So I did an export of the old tree running on 1.3.11 using db2dif:
db2ldif -s "dc=xxx,dc=net" -a /tmp/userRoot.ldif
And I did an import in the new tree running on 2.4:
Is it a fresh instance or migrated from the old install? 

dsconf -D "cn=Directory Manager" -W ldap://localhost backend import dc=...,dc=net /userRoot.ldif
The import task has finished successfully
Do you see any errors in the errors log in /var/log/dirsrv/slapd-your_instance/errors related to import or NSS? 

Directly afterwards the passwords stopped working again. I had to reset them again. Is there any additional step required?
It should work, I did a quick test with export/import and SSHA passwords and the migrated users are able to bind with the old password. 

Please check the documentation:

Thanks.
 

Kind regards,
Ralf

Am Mi., 3. Juli 2024 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Viktor Ashirov <vashirov@redhat.com>:


On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 3:48 PM Ralf Spenneberg <rspenneberg@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually I just upgrade the system from centos7 to almalinux9 using elevate. Essentially this is similar to a copy of the /etc/dirsrv and /var/lib/dirsrv directories and started the new ldapserver. 
We don't support or test in-place upgrades (leapp/elevate) and recommend using export/import or replication methods.

Directly afterwards I was not able to login using the cn=Directory Manager. I checked the hashed password in the dse.ldif  file (cn=config) using pwdhash. It was ok. 
Once I changed the password of the directory manager in the dse.ldif file after stopping the 389ds using PBKDF2-SHA512 hash, the Directory Manager was able to login. Other users required a reset of their password as well for successful login. But since I do not have access to all passwords I would rather reuse the old tree.
The nsslapd-allow-hashed-passwords is set to on.
Therefore I doubt that I have double hashed passwords. For the case of the Directory Manager I am positive.
And yes, dsconf lists SSHA in my case as well. Any ideas why this is not working?
Do you see any errors regarding NSS in the errors log?
NSS in EL7 was using an old datbase format, and if you just copied it to EL9, it's very likely to fail initialization. 


My passwordpolicy is quite open:
Global Password Policy: cn=config
------------------------------------
nsslapd-pwpolicy-local: off
passwordstoragescheme: SSHA512
passwordchange: on
passwordmustchange: off
passwordhistory: off
passwordinhistory: 6
passwordadmindn:
passwordtrackupdatetime: off
passwordwarning: 86400
passwordisglobalpolicy: off
passwordexp: off
passwordmaxage: 8640000
passwordminage: 0
passwordgracelimit: 0
passwordsendexpiringtime: off
passwordlockout: off
passwordunlock: on
passwordlockoutduration: 3600
passwordmaxfailure: 3
passwordresetfailurecount: 600
passwordchecksyntax: off
passwordminlength: 8
passwordmindigits: 0
passwordminalphas: 0
passwordminuppers: 0
passwordminlowers: 0
passwordminspecials: 0
passwordmin8bit: 0
passwordmaxrepeats: 0
passwordmincategories: 3
passwordmintokenlength: 3
nsslapd-allow-hashed-passwords: on
nsslapd-pwpolicy-inherit-global: off

Kind regards,
Ralf


Am Mi., 3. Juli 2024 um 10:42 Uhr schrieb Viktor Ashirov <vashirov@redhat.com>:
Hi Ralf,


On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 2:29 PM Ralf Spenneberg <rspenneberg@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there,
I am trying to update a ldap tree from 389ds 1.3.11 (centos7) to 2.4.5 (almalinux9). After migrating the tree all passwords stop working including the Directory Manager. The old tree used SSHA. Setting the rootpwstoragescheme does not help for the Directory Manager. Only manually resetting the passwords using pwdhash in the dse.ldif file and using a PBKDF2-SHA512 password works. Is there a way to enable the old SSHA scheme?
SSHA is still supported in the latest 389-DS:
# dsconf localhost pwpolicy list-schemes | grep SSHA
SSHA
SSHA256
SSHA384
SSHA512

How did you perform the migration? Via replication or export/import?
What is the value of nsslapd-allow-hashed-passwords in cn=config?
I suspect that your passwords after the migration might be doubly hashed instead of imported as is.
 
Kind regards,
Ralf
--
_______________________________________________
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
--
_______________________________________________
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
--
_______________________________________________
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
--
_______________________________________________
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

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)