Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

LDAP Integration Error with Report Portal #427

Open
assiakhateeb opened this issue Oct 13, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

LDAP Integration Error with Report Portal #427

assiakhateeb opened this issue Oct 13, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@assiakhateeb
Copy link

I'm encountering an error when trying to configure LDAP integration with Report Portal. Here's the error message:

An error occurred while connecting to server: You do not have enough permissions. simple bind failed: d-fend.local:636; nested exception is javax.naming.CommunicationException: simple bind failed: d-fend.local:636 [Root exception is javax.net.ssl.SSLHandshakeException: PKIX path building failed: sun.security.provider.certpath.SunCertPathBuilderException: unable to find valid certification path to requested target]

It seems that the Report Portal LDAP integration configuration does not have an option for TLS configuration, such as "Trust all certificates," or a place to add certificates.

Question:

How can I configure LDAP integration for Report Portal using secure port 636 (LDAPS)?

Current Setup:

  • Report Portal version: 23.2
  • Helm chart version: 5.10.0
  • Running on: Kubernetes k3s, version v1.24.6+k3s1

Report Portal LDAP Configuration:

Parameter Value
URL ldaps://my-company:636
Base DN <Base DN>
Manager DN <Manager DN>
Manager password *****
User search filter (&(objectClass=user)(sAMAccountName={0}))
Group search filter (objectClass=group)
Password encoder type NO
Email attribute mail
Full name attribute displayName
@Pink-Bumblebee
Copy link

@assiakhateeb
Copy link
Author

Hi @Pink-Bumblebee, I have Report Portal installed on Kubernetes using the Helm package manager, so I’m not using Docker as described in the article. Additionally, I see that approach more as a workaround rather than a proper solution. Thanks anyway!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants