OpenLDAP gidNumber and group membership inconsistency

marismmm

4/28/24, 9:48 AM

I encountered an interesting problem while examining a specific AD/OpenLDAP interop case. On the OpenLDAP server, there is a user1, whose gidNumber corresponds to a group1. There is another user2, whose gidNumber corresponds to group2. However, group1 lists only user2 as its member, group2 lists both of them. How is this possible?

I expected gidNumber in Linux environments to work similarly to how primaryGroupID works in AD - but in AD, the fields memberOf and member are properly linked together and primaryGroupID is excluded from this link, but the user is understood as a member of its primary group. However, for OpenLDAP, there is no memberOf field and it seems like specifying a gidNumber does not seem to grant you group membership. Is it then incorrect to consider the user1 as a member of group1? Is there some documentation on proper behaviour in this case?

My specific problem is that in AD, the user1 is NOT a member of group1 and shouldn't be, but a new interop owning group logic uses its gidNumber in OpenLDAP to map him to this group as a primary group nonetheless and overwrite the primaryGroupID (Domain Users) on AD. This causes trouble if I e.g. intend to deny access to users of group1 and allow it to users of group2 - user1 now unexpectedly loses access because of this mapping, although I'd expect user1 to be allowed and only user2 to be denied.

Will be happy for corrections and advice on this.

126

0 + 0

openldap

active-directory

Elon Musk

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

EN: OpenLDAP gidNumber and group membership inconsistency

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.