Bug 47366

Summary:	always set univentionObjectType
Product:	UCS	Reporter:	Jannik Ahlers <ahlers>
Component:	UMC - System diagnostic	Assignee:	Daniel Tröder <troeder>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Dirk Wiesenthal <wiesenthal>
Severity:	normal
Priority:	P5	CC:	best, troeder
Version:	UCS 4.3
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	Other
OS:	Linux
What kind of report is it?:	Feature Request	What type of bug is this?:	---
Who will be affected by this bug?:	---	How will those affected feel about the bug?:	---
User Pain:		Enterprise Customer affected?:
School Customer affected?:		ISV affected?:
Waiting Support:		Flags outvoted (downgraded) after PO Review:
Ticket number:		Bug group (optional):
Max CVSS v3 score:

Description Jannik Ahlers

2018-07-17 15:53:09 CEST

Currently we cannot rely on univentionObjectType, for example if an LDAP object was created externally. Back then it was only implemented for performance improvements. The wish is that we can rely on the attribute, e.g. for search filters.

The idea is that there is a diagnostic module that finds the objects and adds the univentionObjectType with a button 'Fix Problem'.

Comment 1 Daniel Tröder

2018-08-13 13:42:50 CEST

(Btw: A listener module could do this "live".)

The question is mainly what the criteria are, for an LDAP object to be considered of a certain univentionObjectType.

Comment 2 Florian Best

2019-02-07 17:24:52 CET

I don't think we should change this. Why do you want to rely on univentionObjectType. This is currently forbidden. If you want to identify an object then you have to use the filter defined by that object type. I think UDM should work without the univentionObjectType attribute. Maybe one day we even can get rid of it completely.

Comment 3 Daniel Tröder

2019-02-11 12:47:06 CET


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 47844 ***

Comment 4 Dirk Wiesenthal

2019-02-11 12:58:55 CET

Yes duplicate.

(In reply to Florian Best from comment #2)
> I don't think we should change this. Why do you want to rely on
> univentionObjectType.

This is not for UDM, but rather for 3rd parties that want a convenient and reliable LDAP filter.

Comment 5 Daniel Tröder

2019-02-11 13:12:20 CET

It's also *much* faster than complex filters, like the one for users/user.