RE: patch for mod_ldap_authnz

2010-04-27 Thread Thomas, Peter
This is an alternate path that I considered in my AuthType Cert work. I didn't choose it, because it was actually meaningful in my situation to declare a user with an otherwise valid certificate "unauthenticated" if no matching LDAP record could be found. I agree with Eric that "AUTHENTICATE_"

Re: patch for mod_ldap_authnz

2010-04-27 Thread Eric Covener
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Kevin Kalupson wrote: > Hi, >  mod_authnz_ldap will put the attributes from the AuthLdapUrl in the > request environmental variables if ldap is the authentication source. > However, if mod_authnz_ldap is only providing Authorization and another > module is the auth

UTF-8 strings through ap_log_cerror()?

2010-04-27 Thread Sander Temme
Folks, Referring to this exchange: http://www.mail-archive.com/openssl-us...@openssl.org/msg60934.html the culprit calling X509_NAME_oneline() is obviously us, around ssl_engine_kernel.c: 1318 in 2.2.x-head. While this code has moved to ssl_engine_log.c in trunk, we're still calling the dep

patch for mod_ldap_authnz

2010-04-27 Thread Kevin Kalupson
Hi, mod_authnz_ldap will put the attributes from the AuthLdapUrl in the request environmental variables if ldap is the authentication source. However, if mod_authnz_ldap is only providing Authorization and another module is the authentication source, the attributes are not available as request va

Re: [Survey] Maintained builds - was Re: httpd trunk, apr/apu 1.4 branches and Linux

2010-04-27 Thread Chris Darroch
William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: Maintainers, which of the below do you *frequently* use during development against trunk (as opposed to occasional/infrequent testing)? [X] ./configure and build entirely in-tree (httpd/srclib/* etc) [ ] ../httpd/configure into a single seperate vpath tree [ ] c

Re: [Survey] Maintained builds - was Re: httpd trunk, apr/apu 1.4 branches and Linux

2010-04-27 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Apr 26, 2010, at 12:10 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 4/26/2010 10:27 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 12:07 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >> >>> On 4/23/2010 8:03 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 4/23/2010 7:58 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > For those wh