Re: Securing cn=config

[Ron Aitchison <ron@zytrax.com>]

Gavin Henry wrote:
> > And this where is got interesting:
> > 1. Access via ldap on the user DIT and on cn=monitor where both 
> > inhibited and connections (rightly) refused whereas in both cases 
> > access via ldaps was accepted.
> > 2. I could bind anonymously to rootDSE and cn=subschema which I wanted
> > 3. cn=config would accept either a ldap (389) or an ldaps (636) 
> > connection. Apparently by-passing the security simple_bind=128 check.
>
> How did you bind?
binds cn=monitor (rootdn), user DIT (normal user) and cn=config (rootdn) 
were simple authenticated binds. bind to rootDSE and cn=subschema were 
anonymous
> > a. Is this expected?
> > b. is there a better way to do it?
> > c. Am I (more than likely) missing something? (on searching the 
> > archives I saw a note from Quannah suggesting that he was using some 
> > sort of SASL service to inhibit access).
> > Many thanks in advance for any help on this matter.
> > Regards

--
Ron Aitchison                      www.zytrax.com
ZYTRAX                             ron@zytrax.com
                                  tel: 514-315-4296
                                  Suite 22
                                  6201 Chemin Cote St. Luc
                                  Hampstead QC H3X 2H2 Canada
Author: Pro DNS and BIND (Apress) ISBN 1-59059-494-0