LDAP (openldap) authorization with DAP (dymamic access policy)

Hello,
We have a asa 5520 and we try to make a ldap (openLdap) authorization with DAP (Dynamic Access Policy). We have problem with logical expression. We need more example of logical expression and we need to know how debug logical expression. We try to use de Debug dap trace and debug dap error but we need more debug informations.

Hi
I guess you are using an ldap attribute map, to map the ad group to a group policy. This does not work as you may expect when the user is part of multiple groups, I.e. the user will always be mapped to the same group (first or last in the list, not sure).
Possible solution : remove the ldap attribute map, and configure dap rules that check the ldap.memberOf attribute instead
Hth
Herbert
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App - sorry for the brief explanation, if you need more details let me know.

Similar Messages

E1200 V2 with no "internet access policy" in built-in web-based setup

I just bought a factory refurbished E1200. The label on the bottom says it is a Version 2 model. When I purchased it, it was loaded with 2.0.02 firmware but I upgraded the firmware to 2.0.04
My problem is that I'm trying to setup MAC address-based restrictions thru the manual/web-based setup and when I click on the "Access Restrictions" tab, I only have simple "Parental Controls" and not the advanced "Internet Access Policy".
Is it possible that I have a mislabeled V1 device? If that is the case, how is it that I was able to upgrade the firmware using firmware from the V2 downloads section.
Do V! and V2 units use the same firmware but more importantly, how do I upgrade the built-in software so that I have the advanced "Internet Access Policy" controls?
Thanks!
Eric
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Very strange indeed then! My subtab only has "Parental Controls" listed.
I've compared it to the one shown here ( http://ui.linksys.com/files/E1200/2.0.00/inter_access.htm ) - and mine does not look like this at all!
I think i have a mislabeled V1 model or at least V1 software loaded,
Does anyone know if it is possible to download and reload the software that is built in to the router or do I need to return it and get a (hopefully) new one?
Thanks!
Eric

AAA Authorization with DAP

When forcing a tunnel-group to authorize users against an AAA server-group with a corresponding ldap attribute-map in that AAA group, does that mapping of usergroup->group-policy get passed up to the DAP process?

The document Common Problems in Debugging RADIUS, PAP and CHAP has more information on the debug outputs.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk59/technologies_tech_note09186a0080093f4b.shtml#radnpap

Create Access Policy with OIM API: can't fill child form

Hi!
I'm having a problem with creating OIM Access Policy with API. I'm doing the following:
1. Create a new access policy via AccessPolicyIntf
2. Add a resource object which will be provisioned to all users who are within policy scope
3. Get Resource Object (Parent) Form Definition via FormDefinitionIntf
4. Add data to parent form (AccessPolicyIntf setFormData(FormDefinitionKey))
5. Now I want to add data to the child form, for that purpose I need to know child form definition key, but I can' get one, because there's no method like 'getChildFormDefinitionKey' in FormDefinitionIntf interface.
Please, help me to get child form definition key, knowing parent form definition key and version

See if this code helps:
public String addChildTableValue(long userKey, String group, String objectName, String fieldName tcDataProvider ioDatabase) {
log.debug("addChildTableValue() Parameter Variables passed are:" +
"userKey=[" + userKey + "]" +
"group=[" + group + "]" +
"fieldName=[" + fieldName + "]" +
"objectName=[" + objectName + "]");
try{
tcUserOperationsIntf userIntf = (tcUserOperationsIntf)tcUtilityFactory.getUtility(ioDatabase, "Thor.API.Operations.tcUserOperationsIntf");
tcFormInstanceOperationsIntf formIntf = (tcFormInstanceOperationsIntf)tcUtilityFactory.getUtility(ioDatabase, "Thor.API.Operations.tcFormInstanceOperationsIntf");
boolean roleExists = false;
//Result set of all Object for user
tcResultSet obResultSet = userIntf.getObjects(userKey);
if (obResultSet.isEmpty()){
log.error("User has no provisioned objects");
return "NO_OBJECTS_EXIST";
}else{
for (int ii=0; ii<obResultSet.getRowCount(); ii++){
obResultSet.goToRow(ii);
if ((obResultSet.getStringValue("Objects.Name").equals(objectName)) &&
(!(obResultSet.getStringValue("Objects.Object Status.Status").equals("Revoked")) &&
!(obResultSet.getStringValue("Objects.Object Status.Status").equals("Provisioning")))){
log.debug("Resource object found: " + objectName);
//Process Instance Key of the object
long plProcessInstanceKey = obResultSet.getLongValue("Process Instance.Key");
log.debug("Process instance key: " + plProcessInstanceKey);
//Process Key for the parent for
long plParentFormDefinitionKey = obResultSet.getLongValue("Process.Process Definition.Process Form Key");
log.debug("Parent form definition key: " + plParentFormDefinitionKey);
//Form version of the parent form
int pnParentFormVersion = formIntf.getProcessFormVersion(plProcessInstanceKey);
log.debug("Parent form version: " + pnParentFormVersion);
//Result set of Child Form information
tcResultSet childFormResultSet = formIntf.getChildFormDefinition(plParentFormDefinitionKey, pnParentFormVersion);
//Child form definition key
long plChildFormDefinitionKey = childFormResultSet.getLongValue("Structure Utility.Child Tables.Child Key");
String plChildTableName = childFormResultSet.getStringValue("Structure Utility.Table Name");
log.debug("Child form definition key: " + plChildFormDefinitionKey);
log.debug("Child table name: " + plChildTableName);
tcResultSet childFormData = formIntf.getProcessFormChildData(plChildFormDefinitionKey, plProcessInstanceKey);
if (!(childFormData.isEmpty())){
log.debug("Searching child table current values");
for (int iii=0; iii<childFormData.getRowCount();iii++){
childFormData.goToRow(iii);
String fieldValue = childFormData.getStringValue(fieldName);
log.debug("Child table entry: " + iii + " | value: " + fieldValue);
if (fieldValue.equals(group)){
roleExists = true;
log.debug("Value already exists in child table");
return "DUPLICATE_VALUE";
log.debug("Value not found in child table");
if (!roleExists){
Hashtable childFormHash = new Hashtable();
childFormHash.put(fieldName, group);
formIntf.addProcessFormChildData(plChildFormDefinitionKey, plProcessInstanceKey, childFormHash);
log.debug("Value successfully added to table");
return "VALUE_ADDED";
log.debug("Provisioned resource " + objectName + " object not found");
return "OBJECT_NOT_FOUND";
catch(Exception ex){
ex.printStackTrace();
return "ERROR";

OIM access policy not evaluating a boolean

I have a test for a boolean in Access Policy
booleanvariable == true
but it does not evaluate
I tried booleanvariable == 1
and this does not work either.
If I have a string field instead of a boolean, then it works
stringvariable == TRUE
this works.
Is there something wrong with booleans in Access Policy?

I'm currently using Boolean with access policies, though maybe a little different.
In the OIM Design Console, I've created a rule (Resource Management -> Rule Designer) named TestRule
Add Element:
- Attribute: booleanvariable
- Operation: ==
- Attribute Value: 1
I have groups that mirror access policies, so let's say that we've also created a group (User Groups->Create via OIM AU Console - Web)
- Under 'Membership Rules' in the dropdown box for group details, assign the rule you just created
- Then under 'Access Policies' add the policy you created under Access Policies -> Manage
Then when a user is in OIM with booleanvariable checked, the Access Policy is applied to that user.

ACS 5.3 Authorization problem with using Identity Groups in Access Policy Rule

Hello guys, I am found a problem which I can't solve regarding authorization with using Identity Groups in Access Policy rule.
ACS version: 5.3.0.40.6 (internal build B.839)
I have very simple RADIUS Authorization rule which authorize user on behalf of right Identity Group.
Requested Identity Group exist
Testing user is created in Internal Users and has assigned requested Identity Group
Radius Access Policy:
Authentication against Identity Store Sequence, where authorization server is external RSA SecurID device and additional attributes retrieval is configured from Internal Users.
Authorization is very simple – One Rule with only one Condition which is: Identity Group - in - Requested_Testing_Rule. Then Default rule is set to Deny.
When I will try login with my testing user then authentication against RSA SecurID is OK, but authorization will be denied by Default rule – It looks like my Rule with Identity Group is totally omitted.
I am managing several other ACS servers (version 5.3 but with older patches) where similar rules are working without problem.
What I am tested:
Remove testing user and create his account again.
Rename Identity Group
Use another Identity Group
Remove Access Policy rule and create it again
Use Compound Condition: System:Identity Group
Use Compound Condition: System:UserID instead of Identity Group in Rule (it is working without problem)
Do you have any idea where problem can be?

OK guys, it started working yesterday without any configuration change. Maybe it was some database inconsistence wich was solved by ACS itself.

Issue with UAG/TMG communication to published SharePoint application is blocked by access policy settings

We have a UAG/TMG server set up with SharePoint published. The UAG is also doing load balancing for the SharePoint farm. We have an MDM application that is trying to connect to our SharePoint but our SharePoint is routed through the UAG. The MDM application
does not need to be published neither is there any component that can be accessed directly by end users. It is more of a proxy to relay content to mobile devices. It is using 443 and two other secondary ports.
On the TMG logs, we can see requests hitting the TMG over port 443 from the MDM application server. We can also see that it is trying to be routed to our SharePoint but we get the following error in the TMG log:
“Filter information: A request from source IP address xx.xx.xx.xx, user to trunk portal; Secure=1 for application SharePoint of type SharePoint15 failed. The endpoint device does not comply with access policy settings ([%PolicyId%]) for session [%SessionId]”
The source IP is the internal IP of the host running the MDM application. In the UAG side, under the SharePoint publishing rule, for Access Policy Settings we have tried selecting the 'Always' option but that had no effect. It appears like there is a policy
blocking communication to SharePoint. Does anyone have a suggestion on which policy or where the policy that is controlling this is located so that we can try to resolve this issue? Thanks.

Looking at the UAG Web Monitor, it says that the access policy is 'Hybrid_Default_Session_Access' and the URL is /_vti_bin/Webs.asmx.
We can't find a 'Hybrid Default Session Access' policy. In the Endpoint Policy Settings tab, we tried using 'Always' for the Access Policy for the published SharePoint application but that did not make any difference.

Disable AD account with access policy

Hi all,
how can I disable AD account with access policy (or create AD account in disabled state)
Regards,
Vladimir

Dewan.Rajiv wrote:
Access Polcies are just for triggering provisioning. You can custom AD connector or write your own to create user in disabled state using JNDI.Hi Dewan,
I have to create a simple demo system, and I need a solution which is not too weird (that means use as little of disparate technologies as possible).
I have two connected systems:
1. HR system, which is a trusted source for user and organizational data.
2. AD system, which is my provision destination.
I want to comply to the following requirements:
1. When a user is created in HR system, a new OIM account shall be created, and a new AD account shall or shall not (depending on HR data) be created in AD in disabled state
2. When a user is marked as dismissed in HR system, the AD account if exists, shall be disabled and moved to some special place in AD tree.
3. Same rules shall apply if the OIM account is created or marked as "Dismissed" manually by OIM administrator.
I use OIM reconciliation to get source data and it is no problem for me to create any reconciliation event I need.
I was considering creating Group->Access Policy->Resource chains, but Access Policy allows only to manage AD attributes, not account enable status.
Or should I add some unmapped pseudo-attribute to AD connector and a task which will enable/disable AD account based on the value of this attribute?
What other options do I have?
Regards,
Vladimir

ITunes is making me authorize my computer to access music purchased with an old email address (never used as Apple ID).

iTunes is making me authorize my computer to access music purchased with an old email address (never used as Apple ID). How do I delete this old email address from my account if it doesn't even show up in my profile?

Same thing here. I am getting the authorization message with iPad, 2 iPods and 3 iPhones. I'm furious about this. I reviewed my itunes account info and everything looks accurate. I downloaded a movie this morning and I can't sync it to iPad. Let's see what explanation is offered.

Role getting revoked with Access Policy

Hi,
I have a Access Policy which will provision to a Resource Object with only one special role. Whenever a user belongs to the group according to a rule called USR_UDF_GLOBALSTATUS == Active, automatically user is getting provisioned to the Resource object with that Role as per the access policy.In this access policy, "Revoke if no longer applies" option is disabled for that Resource Object.
Whenever for that user, USR_UDF_GLOBALSTATUS == Active is changed as USR_UDF_GLOBALSTATUS == InActive from reconciliation, the user is removed from that Group. Till here everything is fine. But the Special Role assigned to that user is also getting revoked. I haven't enabled "Revoke if no longer applies" option. But how come the role is getting revoked?
According to my requirement, that special role should still stay even if the user is removed from the group. Please help...
- Pavan

Enable all logging. Check and see if the user was a member of more groups than just the one. There might be more than one access policy for the user, one that gives the resource with a base set of values for the parent form, and then another access policy that has a lower priority that provides the role. Also look at the Xellerate User object and check for any tasks that might be triggered on this change in value as well as other values. Your best bet is to look at the user and all their groups and resources. Then perform your change, and look on their resource profiles both in targets, and on the xellerate user object, and see what all tasks were inserted.
-Kevin

Provisioing with Access Policy

Hi All
I have made one Access policy for Full-Time employees.
I want that if admin creates a user who is Full-Time employee, it shouls automatically get provisioined with AD.
I have made that Access Policy. But If Admin craetes one user who is Full-Time Employee then provisioing status goes into *"READY"* State.
It stucks in Resource form.
And in my resource form only one lookup field is there. And i have put Value already in that lookup.
Could any one please tell me the solution for this.
Thanks a lot!

Hi
I made access policy Without Approval.
That extra field i.e. AD SERVER, I have already filled with ADITResource.
Actually i have made one resource form, i'm giving value of AD Server from there & it is prepopulation in process form.
But When user gp for provisioning then it stuck in Resource Form not in Process form. It shows status Ready.
Is it possible to remove that Resource form from access policy, I think it may remove my problem ?
But i don know how to remove resource form from Access Policy region.
Please suggest.
Thanks for these replies.

Problem with Access Policy

Hi All!
OIM 11g:
1. I have installed DBUM 9.1.0.4
2. I have configured IT Resurce, and RO for granting user MS SQL User and database role (for example in HRData db)
3. I have created Role named: "HRData DB User" and Access Policy named: "HR Data DB User" wchich grants correct RO.
4. When role is granted by xelsysadm for specific oim user everything is OK.
Problem:
when user request for role: "HRData DB User" from Self-Service portal, and request is approved by xelsysadm, role is granted but RO is not granted. I have following error:
+<Nov 19, 2010 1:12:46 PM CET> <Error> <XELLERATE.SERVER> <BEA-000000> <Class/Method+
+: tcDataObj/eventPreInsert Error :Insert permission is denied>+
+<Nov 19, 2010 1:12:46 PM CET> <Error> <oracle.iam.accesspolicy.impl.handlers.provis+
ioning> <IAM-4030308> <An error occurred in oracle.iam.accesspolicy.impl.handlers.p
rovisioning.ProvisionAccountActionHandler while provisioning resource 161 to user 4
+3 and the cause of error is DOBJ.INSERT_PERMISSION_DENIED: H: You do not have permi+
ssion to insert this object..>
+<Nov 19, 2010 1:12:46 PM CET> <Warning> <oracle.iam.callbacks.common> <IAM-2030081>+
+<[CALLBACKMSG] Inside completion plugin for request 68.>+
+<Nov 19, 2010 1:12:46 PM CET> <Warning> <oracle.iam.callbacks.common> <IAM-2030082>+
+<[CALLBACKMSG] Inside completion plugin for request 68, target tye is Role and ope+
ration is SELFASSIGNROLES.>
+<Nov 19, 2010 1:12:46 PM CET> <Warning> <oracle.iam.callbacks.common> <IAM-2030082>+
+<[CALLBACKMSG] Inside completion plugin for request 68, target tye is RoleUser and+
operation is CREATE.>
Any suggestions?
best
mp

Hi Rajiv,
So, there is no way we can implement this?
My requirement is same as this,
OIM: Question about "Auto Save" option on Resource Object
I have a Resource Object that needs to be provisioned at least two ways:
1) thru an access policy by group membership
2) thru user self-request, who is not already in that group membership
The problem is if I don't check the "Auto Save" check box the automatic assignment thru access policy is not completing and If I do check the check box then user request is not letting the user to enter values into the resource form. Instead it is directly going to submit request. Looks like these are mutually exclusive.
Is there a way to make both work on the same Resource Object?
Thanks
SK

Problem with Access policy Provisioning on AD

Hi,
I have created an access policy, which will trigger the provisioning the user to AD when the user is added to group 'abc'.
Its without approval.
We have object form and process form. Process form is autosave.
But, the problem is, as soon as the user is added to the group 'abc'.
It triggers the provisioning flow. But the provisioning will be in ready state only.
When we go and save the resource form only the provisioning flow triggers.
If we make the object as auto save, it will work. But in our case we cannot make the object autosave as it has a resource form to be filled by user in other flow.
Is there any approach to solve the issue?
Regards,
SK

Hi Rajiv,
So, there is no way we can implement this?
My requirement is same as this,
OIM: Question about "Auto Save" option on Resource Object
I have a Resource Object that needs to be provisioned at least two ways:
1) thru an access policy by group membership
2) thru user self-request, who is not already in that group membership
The problem is if I don't check the "Auto Save" check box the automatic assignment thru access policy is not completing and If I do check the check box then user request is not letting the user to enter values into the resource form. Instead it is directly going to submit request. Looks like these are mutually exclusive.
Is there a way to make both work on the same Resource Object?
Thanks
SK

Help Required With Access Policy Trigger On Enable User In Oim 11gR2

My scenario is:
We have a created a access policy for the user.
Scenario1:
As soon as the role is added to user, the account is provisioned. -Working
Scenario 2:
As the user is disabled, the account gets revoked-Working
Scenario 3:
As the user is enabled, the new instance of the account should get provisioned.(It was earlier working in 11G r1)
"Evaluate User Policies " is running every ten minutes.Manually also triggered it. but the account doesn't get provisioned after the user is enabled.
Any inputs?
Please help

Your Scenario 2:
As the user is disabled, the account gets revoked-Working ----> ITS WRONG if you are using OOTB feature of OIM
-> When the user gets disabled, the accounts should get disabled. The result which u are getting above is not OOTB. Have you made any customization to any logic?
Just for your info, there is one system property which is used to enable disabled resources when the user is enabled:
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E27559_01/admin.1112/e27149/system_props.htm#OMADM884
Enable disabled resource instances when a user is enabled
If the value is TRUE, then the disabled resource instances are enabled when a user is enabled.
XL.EnableDisabledResources
TRUE

Not able to get the AD organizations list while creating access policy

Hi All,
Had created IT Resource for AD server, and was able to successfully connect to it. And Now when I try to create a access policy, where I am not able to view any organization from AD.
Can someone please let me know how to resolve this.
Thanks in advance.....
Regards
Arun

Please check the error log which I am getting when I ran the schedule job
======= Start Stack Trace =======================>
<Aug 3, 2012 2:30:55 PM GMT+05:30> <Error> <OIMCP.ADCS> <BEA-000000> <com.thortech.xl.schedule.tasks.ADLookupReconTask : performReconciliation>
<Aug 3, 2012 2:30:55 PM GMT+05:30> <Error> <OIMCP.ADCS> <BEA-000000> <[LDAP: error code 49 - 80090308: LdapErr: DSID-0C090334, comment: AcceptSecurityContext error, data 52e, vece ]>
<Aug 3, 2012 2:30:55 PM GMT+05:30> <Error> <OIMCP.ADCS> <BEA-000000> <Description : [LDAP: error code 49 - 80090308: LdapErr: DSID-0C090334, comment: AcceptSecu
rityContext error, data 52e, vece ]>
<Aug 3, 2012 2:30:55 PM GMT+05:30> <Error> <OIMCP.ADCS> <BEA-000000> <com.thortech.xl.exception.ConnectionException: [LDAP: error code 49 - 80090308: LdapErr: D
SID-0C090334, comment: AcceptSecurityContext error, data 52e, vece ]
at com.thortech.xl.integration.ActiveDirectory.tcADUtilLDAPController.searchResultPageEnum(Unknown Source)
at com.thortech.xl.schedule.tasks.ADLookupReconTask.performReconciliation(Unknown Source)
at com.thortech.xl.schedule.tasks.ADLookupReconTask.execute(Unknown Source)
at com.thortech.xl.scheduler.tasks.SchedulerBaseTask.execute(SchedulerBaseTask.java:384)
at oracle.iam.scheduler.vo.TaskSupport.executeJob(TaskSupport.java:145)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)
at oracle.iam.scheduler.impl.quartz.QuartzJob.execute(QuartzJob.java:196)
at org.quartz.core.JobRunShell.run(JobRunShell.java:202)
at org.quartz.simpl.SimpleThreadPool$WorkerThread.run(SimpleThreadPool.java:529)
>
<Aug 3, 2012 2:30:55 PM GMT+05:30> <Error> <OIMCP.ADCS> <BEA-000000> <================= End Stack Trace =======================>
Based on which I had checked the credentials I provided, and they are correct. I am able to connect to AD with same credentials when I create new IT Resource.
Not sure what went wrong
Regards
Arun

LDAP (openldap) authorization with DAP (dymamic access policy)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for