application establishes LDAP bind with version 2, when its hardcoded in code to only call version 3

Avi

2/6/23, 7:48 PM

we have a java based application that connects to customer´s LDAP lookup server. Customer wants to get rid of any bind requests to version 2. So our R&D updated the option in the code as per documentation from Oracle (java.naming.ldap.version The value of this property is a string that specifies the protocol version for the provider.) However when this is deployed in production...in tcpdump traces we see bind request for version 2 and version 3. (No failover due to issues observed)

I cant replicate this behaviour in test server (long story but its a legacy software has changed many hands over the years, so its possible that test and prod are entirely identical...also test will not have the same no of requests and hence issues as prod etc etc)

Anyone has come across this issue? Thanks for your time in advance.

13  2021-10-06 02:22:56.856380  172.29.129.150  217.171.130.8   LDAP    105 2   bindRequest(1) "cn=xxx" simple
14  2021-10-06 02:22:56.895004  217.171.130.8   172.29.129.150  TCP 68      16612 → 37036 [ACK] Seq=1 Ack=38 Win=14592 Len=0 TSval=117821307 TSecr=1359793477
15  2021-10-06 02:22:56.896298  217.171.130.8   172.29.129.150  LDAP    82      bindResponse(1) success

0 + 0

oracle

redhat

java

ldap

Elon Musk

I sit in a Tesla and translated this thread with Ai:

EN: application establishes LDAP bind with version 2, when its hardcoded in code to only call version 3

TH: แอปพลิเคชันสร้างการผูก LDAP กับเวอร์ชัน 2 เมื่อฮาร์ดโค้ดเป็นโค้ดเพื่อเรียกเฉพาะเวอร์ชัน 3

RO: aplicația stabilește legătura LDAP cu versiunea 2, când este codificată în cod pentru a apela doar versiunea 3

RU: приложение устанавливает привязку LDAP к версии 2, когда в коде жестко запрограммировано вызывать только версию 3

VI: ứng dụng thiết lập liên kết LDAP với phiên bản 2, khi nó được mã hóa cứng trong mã để chỉ gọi phiên bản 3

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.