[email protected] wrote:
> Hi, 
> 
> Anyway, I consider this issue a denial of service vulnerability and OpenLDAP 
> 2.4.45 will not be used for production here.
> 
> The only major change in configuration was switching from hdb to mdb, so I 
> will have to check whether mdb may be the cause of this issue.

You never answered Quanah's questions about your config. Are you actually
running on a server with 4096 CPUs? If not, why is your maxreaders set to 4096?
> 
> Regards Juergen
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Quanah Gibson-Mount [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Mittwoch, 30. Januar 2019 15:53
> To: Sprenger Jürgen, INI-ONE-CIS-SDI-HES <[email protected]>; 
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: OpenLDAP 2.4.45 possible denial of service vulnerability?
> 
> --On Wednesday, January 30, 2019 9:43 AM +0000 [email protected] 
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> After upgrading to the latest Release (Solaris 11.3 SRU35, OpenLDAP
>> 2.4.45) we are experiencing massive workloads caused by single clients 
>> consuming all available threads and CPU-resources.
> 
> Solaris 11.4 is out (just to note).  And the latest OpenLDAP release is
> 2.4.47 (just to note).
> 
>> tool-threads 8
> 
> A tool-threads setting > 2 is ignored with back-mdb.
> 
>> maxreaders      4096
> 
> This is an extremely large value (default is 126).  Are you sure you need 
> this bumped so high?
> 
>> searchstack     64
> 
> Similarly here.
> 
>> So far we experienced this behavior with clients of Oracle Enterprise 
>> Linux 6.x, Redhat Enterprise Linux 6.x and AIX. Service requests are 
>> opened at vendors support, but I'd prefer to have an installation 
>> which is less vulnerable and more resilient to issues of this kind.
> 
> I'd estimate that your ability to get a useful response from either is near 
> zero.  If you have an enterprise operation that needs support for OpenLDAP 
> you may want to look at Symas' enterprise OpenLDAP builds (Symas Gold).  We 
> provide builds and support for Solaris 11.
> 
>> To avoid performance issues loglevel is now "none stats sync" but can 
>> be changed for some time to track down the cause.
> 
> You could just do "stats sync", not really a reason to leave "none" in the 
> list.
> 
> Generally if you hit an issue such as this, you would want to provde a full 
> backtrace of the slapd process from a utility such as GDB.
> 
> Warm regards,
> Quanah
> 
> --
> 
> Quanah Gibson-Mount
> Product Architect
> Symas Corporation
> Packaged, certified, and supported LDAP solutions powered by OpenLDAP:
> <http://www.symas.com>
> 
> 
> 


-- 
  -- Howard Chu
  CTO, Symas Corp.           http://www.symas.com
  Director, Highland Sun     http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
  Chief Architect, OpenLDAP  http://www.openldap.org/project/

Reply via email to