Hello

...

We have several users who no longer need access, but may in the future, so we have set them to be Inactive in their profile. However, we noticed that these accounts have re-activated themselves and those users could log back in if they wanted to. How do we make accounts that we specifically make inactive by pressing the Inactivate button stay that way?

We are using the following 389 versions on CentOS 5.7 64-bit:

389-ds-base-1.2.9.9-1.el5 389-admin-1.1.29-1.el5 389-ds-console-1.2.6-1.el5 389-adminutil-1.1.15-1.el5 389-admin-console-1.1.8-1.el5 389-ds-console-doc-1.2.6-1.el5 389-ds-base-libs-1.2.9.9-1.el5 389-dsgw-1.1.9-1.el5 389-console-1.1.7-3.el5 389-admin-console-doc-1.1.8-1.el5 389-ds-1.2.1-1.el5

Thanks for any help! Harry

Add below attribute with same value in user's ldap entry.

nsAccountLock: true

# cat entry.ldif dn: uid=tuser, ou=people,dc=example,dc=com changetype: modify add: nsaccountlock nsaccountlock: true

# ldapmodify -x -a -D "cn=Directory manager" -w password -f entry.ldif

I don't think so. The original poster mentioned the Inactivate button. I assume this means using the Console feature to inactivate users. Users inactivated in this way should not just magically become re-activated. This is a problem.

Could be related to https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/300

I got a scenerio, where cos were getting corrupted & Disbaled Roles stopped working over a period of time. Upgrading to 8.2.9 fixed the issue.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-0510.html

* Prior to this update, the cos cache could become corrupted under load. As a consequence, passwd policies defined by the subtree could fail to work. This update modifies the update so that the cos cache no longer becomes corrupted and passwd policies now persist. (BZ#787743)

The problem with using plain ldapmodify is that it doesn't work with the mechanism used by the Console and the ns-inactivate.pl script, which use a Roles/CoS scheme to put inactive users into a specific Role and then use CoS to add nsAccountLock: TRUE to all members of that Role.

The first step is to make sure that when you do a search of the supposedly inactive user's entry like this:

ldapsearch -xLLL .... uid=inactiveuser * nsAccountLock

you see nsAccountLock: TRUE

and then at some point in the future you see nsAccountLock: FALSE or just don't see it at all.

When you say "log back in" - just after inactivating the user in the Console, did you verify that the user could not log in? And then did you at some point in the future see that the user could log in again? When you say "log back in" - do you mean the operating system login?

Regards Arpit Tolani