From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F08AD618E8
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon,  7 Sep 2020 11:29:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E49A9966B
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon,  7 Sep 2020 11:29:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id DF53C9660
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon,  7 Sep 2020 11:29:50 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AD63C44A3C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon,  7 Sep 2020 11:29:50 +0200 (CEST)
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Wolfgang Link <w.link@proxmox.com>, Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
References: <20200903083620.66529-1-w.link@proxmox.com>
 <9f102575-138a-d839-94d4-4ef98482decf@proxmox.com>
 <2106163366.840.1599468174228@webmail.proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <99c0d2d7-2840-35b0-1ccd-bb627a417d57@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 11:29:49 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:81.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/81.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2106163366.840.1599468174228@webmail.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 1.187 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A            -2.69 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED        -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 medium trust
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [Patch v2 access-control] fix #2947 login name for
 the LDAP/AD realm can be case-insensitive
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2020 09:29:52 -0000

On 07.09.20 10:42, Wolfgang Link wrote:
> No I missed your mail.
> Will fix it and resend it.


Please also include my proposed change from then:

On 28.08.20 14:39, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> And we then actually want to use this method also in the API call for a=
dding
> new users, to ensure an admin do not accidentally adds the case-sensiti=
ve same
> user multiple times.


Also, "lookup_username" does not seem to fit the API module much, I'd rat=
her
put it in the more general PVE::AccessControl module.