Check if .NET LDAP Bind was successfull - c#

Current Issue:
When trying to execute a search on an LDAP Connection in .NET, the server response is that a "successfull bind" has to be made beforehand, which in my prior experience with LDAP Error messages I honestly dont buy.
The code for the search is as follows:
var req = new SearchRequest("dc=test,dc=intern", "(&(sAMAccountName=*test*))", SubTree, new string[1] { "cn" });
uSearchResults = (SearchResponse)uEntry.SendRequest(req).Entries;
dblSearchResultsCount = uSearchResults.Count;
The code for the bind is the following:
try
{
connection = new LdapConnection(new LdapDirectoryIdentifier(LdapHost, LdapPort));
connection.AuthType = 2;
connection.SessionOptions.ProtocolVersion = 2;
connection.Credential = new System.Net.NetworkCredential(strUsername, strPassword);
connection.Bind();
LogEvent("Bind", 0, "Bind most likely successfull, no exception was thrown");
}
catch (Global.System.DirectoryServices.Protocols.DirectoryOperationException ServerEx2)
{
//Logging Code
return false;
}
catch (COMException ex)
{
//Logging Code
return false;
}
catch (LdapException ex)
{
//Logging Code
return false;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
LogEvent("Bind", 0, ex.Message);
return false;
}
As you can see, I am catching every error known to man in the bind process, which as far as I know is the only way to check if the bind worked or not. The credentials, host and port are also verified to be correct.
The connection variable has no properties or functions known to me to check if a bind was successfull. The only measure I can take if the bind worked is to check if any errors occured along the way.
How can I check in the connection variable that is of the type LdapConnection if the bind was actually successfull?

The source code shows that it keeps a _bounded boolean variable, but does not expose it. So you can't check it.
But the code for binding does show that it will throw an exception if anything goes wrong. So if no exception is thrown when you call Bind(), you know the bind was successful.

Related

Exception thrown within try catch

I have a function to check whether an email entered is valid:
bool IsValidEmail(string email)
{
try
{
var addr = new System.Net.Mail.MailAddress(email);
return addr.Address == email;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine(ex.Message);
return false;
}
}
Even though it's within a try/catch I still get an exception when an invalid email is entered stating:
'The specified string is not in the form required for an e-mail address.'
I have used this function in other applications and it works fine. Not sure what's going on with it now.
Edit: Solution was my Exception settings, my VS was ignoring the try/catch
catch (Exception ex)
can't catch all the exceptions. Only managed ones.
You can use catch without type:
catch
{
return false;
}
Not sure if it is a good point. You can't handle something like Environment.FailFast call inside a constructor of MailAddress
Anyway, it looks like your problem is not there.
Please, add a stack trace of your exception if you want more help.

Is multiple try-catch in error sensitive code considered a good practice?

I have a code segment that is responsible for orchestrating the execution of a few modules and it is very sensitive to errors - I want to make sure I log and alert about every exception that occurs.
Right now I have something like this:
try
{
ModuleAResult aResult = ModuleA.DoSomethingA();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
string errorMessage = string.Format("Module A failed doing it's thing. Specific exception: {0}", ex.Message);
// Log exception, send alerts, etc.
}
try
{
ModuleBResult bResult = ModuleB.DoSomethingB();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
string errorMessage = string.Format("Module B failed doing it's thing. Specific exception: {0}", ex.Message);
// Log exception, send alerts, etc.
}
// etc for other modules.
It looks to me that the multiple try-catch is making this segment less readable. Is it indeed the right thing to do?
Yes, it's the right thing.
But you should have the performance in in mind, maybe it's better to put all method calls in one try/catch and add stack trace and error information in the exception in the methiod itself.
public void ModuleA.DoSomethingA()
{
throw new Exception("Error in module A");
}
try
{
ModuleAResult aResult = ModuleA.DoSomethingA();
ModuleBResult bResult = ModuleB.DoSomethingB();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// get information about exception in the error message
}
You did well.
This way, you can process the error after each module. If you want to run it all and then do error handling, consider this alternative:
try
{
ModuleAResult aResult = ModuleA.DoSomethingA();
ModuleBResult bResult = ModuleB.DoSomethingB();
}
catch(ModuleAException ex)
{
// handle specific error
}
catch(ModuleBException ex)
{
// handle other specific error
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// handle all other errors, do logging, etc.
}
i think that depends on the approach that you want to follow.
It seems like you error messsages are different for each module that raises exception so i guess the approach that you followed is right.
you could have put the whole thing in a big try - catch block then in that case you will not know which module caused the exception as a generic excpetion gets printed.
try
{
ModuleAResult aResult = ModuleA.DoSomethingA();
ModuleBResult bResult = ModuleB.DoSomethingB();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
string errorMessage = string.Format("Either Module A or B failed", ex.Message);
// Log exception, send alerts, etc.
}
So if you want your exception handling to not be cleaner use the above code.
Otherwise what you followed is absolutely fine.

C# oracle : catch all exceptions relative to connectivity?

In c#, can I catch all errors about (non) connectivity to an Oracle database?
I don't want to catch error about badly written query but only errors like No listener, connection lost...
If queries are badly written (or table are missing) then this is my fault.
But if Oracle or the network is down then this should be held by another department.
Write your code in which you build the connection in a try catch part:
try
{
BuildConnection(connectionString);
}
catch (OracleException ex)
{
//Connectivity Error
}
Errors between ORA-12150 to ORA-12236 are related to connection errors. A few examples:
ORA-12154: TNS:could not resolve the connect identifier specified
ORA-12152: TNS:unable to send break message
ORA-12157: TNS:internal network communication error
Please refer to https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e17766/net12150.htm
Simple answer for this Type of problem is Use Try Catch Block like
try
{
// your code
}
catch (OracleException ex)
{
}
MSDN HELP
Sure - you can catch specific exception types, or if they're all the same exception type, you can catch it, check to see if it's a specific type, and re-throw ones you don't want to handle. Not having your syntax, here's an example...
try
{
// your Oracle code
}
catch (OracleException ex)
{
if (ex.Message == "Something you don't want caught")
{
throw;
}
else
{
// handle
}
}
errors like No listener, connection lost are still caught in System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException, however, you may inspect ErrorCode and Errors to handle different situations accordingly, say, not listener or connection lost etc.
MSDN does not seem to document all possible errors, however, you may write a few unit tests or integration tests to learn what appear in ErrorCode and Errors, then write error handlers in production codes accordingly.
OracleException contains only ErrorCode not Errors. So you may be using switch(e.ErrorCode) to handle different situations.
I observed that each time a network exception occurs, then a SocketException can be found in inner exceptions.
I also observed that when a network exception occurs, the first inner exception is of type «OracleInternal.Network.NetworkException» but unfortunately, this class is internal...
Based on this observations, I would code something like this:
public void RunQuery()
{
try
{
var con = new OracleConnection("some connection string");
con.Open();
var cmd = con.CreateCommand();
// ...
cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
catch (Exception ex) when (IsNetworkException(ex))
{
// Here, a network exception occurred
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// Here, an other exception occurred
}
}
private static bool IsNetworkException(Exception ex)
{
var exTmp = ex;
while (exTmp != null)
{
if (exTmp is SocketException)
return true;
exTmp = exTmp.InnerException;
}
return false;
}

c# application is crashing when the server is down

I'm using this code, to fetch the latest version of my app in *Form1_Load*:
string result1 = null;
string url1 = "http://site.com/version.html";
WebResponse response1 = null;
StreamReader reader1 = null;
try
{
HttpWebRequest request1 = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create(url1);
request1.Method = "GET";
response1 = request1.GetResponse();
reader1 = new StreamReader(response1.GetResponseStream(), Encoding.UTF8);
result1 = reader1.ReadToEnd();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// show the error if any.
}
finally
{
if (reader1 != null)
reader1.Close();
if (response1 != null)
response1.Close();
}
The problem is that when I shut the server down the whole application is stucking and a window is popping out,saying:
Unable to connect to the remote server
Which seems legit.
Is there a way to bypass this crash (when the server is down) and break out of the version checking?
Add an additional catch block that catches the specific Exception type that you're seeing... the code will look like...
try
{
//*yadda yadda yadda*
}
catch (System.Net.WebException WebEx)
{
//*Correctly set up a situation where the rest of your program will know there was a connection problem to the website.*
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
//*Do the error catching you do now*
}
finally
{
//*yadda yadda*
}
This construction will allow you to handle WebExceptions differently from other kinds of exceptions: note that all Exceptions derive from one base class, Exception, and you can make your own for uses like this.

Continue after try-catch-finally

This might sound like a weird question but I don't get it...
Let's say I have an application which connects to a server to do some stuff. This connect might fail and throw an exception which I can catch.
try {
Client.connect();
} catch (System.Exception ex) {
// Do some exception handling...
} finally {
// Do some cleanup...
}
However, in case that the connect is succcesful the application shall continue...
try {
Client.connect();
} catch (System.Exception ex) {
// Do some exception handling...
} finally {
// Do some cleanup...
}
// Talk to the server...
The "server talking" however is executed in any case. It doesn't matter if the exception occured or not.
How can I make sure that the "server talking" is only executed if the connect was successful? Do I have to move all of the following code inside the trystatement? What is a clean way to program such a behavior?
"Talk to the server" should happen in the try block, right after
Client.connect();
The easiest way is to just set a boolean. But there are many many many ways to deal with this.
bool connectionError = false;
try {
// connect
} catch (...) {
connectionError = true;
} finally {
// whatever
}
if (!connectionError) {
// talk to server.
}
Have another variable like clientConnected and set it to true right after Client.Connect(). Then outside the try-catch check for clientConnected before talking to the server.
Avoid doing everything in a single try-catch. You should use separate try-catch blocks for different actions that might throw exceptions, and catch specific exceptions as much as possible.
Typically you use try...catch statements for those statements which you expect to throw an Exception. Try...Catch defines its own scope, so you should declare any variables outside of the Try...Catch block (at least, those variables that you want to use outside of it).
If you want to know if an exception was thrown, then define the Exception variable above the Try...Catch. You can then examine it to determine if it is Null or not.
System.Exception ex;
try {
Client.connect();
} catch (ex) {
// Do some exception handling...
} finally {
// Do some cleanup...
}
if (ex != null){ ... }
// Talk to the server...
You could log an event and then call some code to either try again or to cancel... or whatever you need to do.
Use some type of flag variable to indicate whether server is connected or not. If your method is returning a boolean variable then also it is ok.
int flag=0;
while(flag==0){
try {
Client.connect();
flag=1;
} catch (System.Exception ex) {
// Do some exception handling...
} finally {
// Do some cleanup...
}
}
//If server connects code

Categories

Resources