Re: (ITS#3639) Inconsistent access checking in back-shell?

[ando@sys-net.it]

OK. p.


> I think that slap.access(5) should only contain a general statement
> that support for full ACL semantics is limited to a subset of the
> backends, namely "primary" backends (HDB, BDB, LDBM) and that the
> backend documentation should be consulted for discussions on
> particular limitations.  Then, in back-shell, discuss this and
> other particular limitations (such as no evaluation of "search"
> permissions).
>
> At 08:31 AM 4/8/2005, ando@sys-net.it wrote:
>
>>> Here's some discussion of this change in the thread:
>>> http://www.openldap.org/lists/openldap-devel/200210/msg00008.html
>>
>>OK, so now this issue bolis down to: it was intended, as (my guess) a
>>cheap replacement to creating the appropriate entry(es) and applying
>>consistent checks.  So the issue now moves towards documenting this
>> (apart
>>from the mail archives).  I'll add notes to slapd.access(5), with links
>>from the slapd-<backend>(5) man pages.
>>
>>p.
>>
>>--
>>Pierangelo Masarati
>>mailto:pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it
>>
>>
>>    SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax:
>> +390382476497
>
>


-- 
Pierangelo Masarati
mailto:pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it


    SysNet - via Dossi,8 27100 Pavia Tel: +390382573859 Fax: +390382476497