URL:
https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/432
Title: #432: CACHE_REQ: Better debugging for email conflicts
lslebodn commented:
"""
On (03/11/17 15:06), mzidek-rh wrote:
It will not generate the message you wrote.
It will never show shortname in the output.
Yes, I forgot to use fqname there. But it does not mean that
current state will help to find problematic entries.
Here is an example where it can generate the error:
- We have two users called email1 and email2 ... they both share the same email address
email1(a)ipadomain.test
```
[root@clietn ~]# getent passwd email1
email1:*:667000008:667000008:e mail:/home/email1:/bin/sh
[root@clietn ~]# getent passwd email2
email2:*:667000009:667000009:e mail2:/home/email2:/bin/sh
[root@clietn ~]# getent passwd email1
[root@clietn ~]# # NOTHING IS RETURNED HERE, let's check the logs
```
you are using wrong example here. I should be "user123" and
"benutzer123"
```
(Fri Nov 3 15:52:42 2017) [sssd[nss]] [sysdb_getpwnam] (0x0020): Search for
[email1(a)ipadomain.test] returned multiple results. It can be an email address shared among
multiple users or an email address of a user that conflicts with another user's fully
qualified name. SSSD will not be able to handle those users properly.
```
The problem here is that "email1(a)ipadomain.test" is not an email but
internal fqname. So this message will not be useful if domain
and real email is totally different e.g.
User1
----------
login: user123
internal fq name: user123(a)ipadomain.test
email: lorem.impusun(a)jmail.com
User2:
----------
login: benutzer123
internal fq name: benutzer123(a)ipadomain.test
email: LOREM.IPSUM(a)jmail.com
So.. what do you suggest to change in the debug message again?
The messages need to contain sufficient information to find
above problematic entries among 10000 users in sssd cache.
"""
See the full comment at
https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/432#issuecomment-341745085