Weave Code
Weaver
Helps Laravel developers discover, compare, and choose open-source packages. See popularity, security, maintainers, and scores at a glance to make better decisions.
Feedback
Share your thoughts, report bugs, or suggest improvements.
Subject
Message

Ldap User Provider Bundle Laravel Package

wiser/ldap-user-provider-bundle

A Symfony bundle that supplies an LDAP user provider so applications can authenticate against directory servers and load user records from LDAP. It reduces custom integration code by wiring user lookup into Symfony's security layer with minimal configuration.

View on GitHub
Deep Wiki
Context7

Product Decisions This Supports

  • Enterprise authentication roadmap. LDAP/AD login is a recurring enterprise procurement gate. This bundle supports the decision of whether to offer directory-based sign-in for on-prem or regulated customers, and what the integration surface looks like (user provider bound to a directory, credentials validated against the directory rather than a local password table).
  • Build vs. buy vs. borrow for auth. It represents the "borrow" option: an Apache-2.0 reference implementation that shows what a Symfony-native LDAP user provider costs in code. That is genuinely useful input to a build/buy comparison against a hosted IdP (Entra ID, Okta, Keycloak) or a maintained library.
  • Framework-alignment check — flag this first. Despite the brief, this is a Symfony 6.4 bundle, not a Laravel package. If the product runs on Laravel, this package does not support any decision directly; it at best informs requirements for a Laravel equivalent (e.g., LdapRecord-Laravel) or argues for delegating to an OIDC/SAML IdP instead of speaking LDAP.
  • Scope decisions on identity. Whether LDAP is the only directory protocol we support, or one connector behind an abstraction. A single-provider bundle nudges toward the former; that is a product decision worth making explicitly rather than inheriting.
  • Not supported: pricing, packaging, or go-to-market decisions. With 2 stars, 0 dependents, and a 0.04 score, there is no adoption signal to justify treating this as an ecosystem bet.

When to Consider This Package

Consider it when:

  • The stack is genuinely Symfony 6.4 and the requirement is narrow: authenticate users against a corporate AD/OpenLDAP directory and map directory entries to app users.
  • The deployment is internal or single-tenant enterprise, where the directory is stable, the user population is known, and login is not a growth lever.
  • You have Symfony engineers who can read and fork the bundle. At this maturity level, adoption means vendoring, not depending.
  • You want a time-boxed spike to estimate the build cost of LDAP auth before committing to a hosted IdP.

Look elsewhere when:

  • You are on Laravel. Hard incompatibility — Symfony bundle architecture (DI container config, security bundle wiring) does not port. Use a Laravel-native LDAP package or an IdP.
  • You need SAML/OIDC, MFA, SCIM provisioning, or multi-tenant directory support. LDAP-only is the wrong abstraction for those; go to an IdP and treat LDAP as one upstream connector.
  • You need a security response commitment. Zero dependents and minimal activity means no downstream triage, no CVE history to reason about, and a bus factor that is effectively one. Auth code is exactly where you cannot absorb that risk silently.
  • You need group-to-role mapping, connection pooling, failover across domain controllers, or multi-directory routing. Expect to build these yourself; budget accordingly.
  • A supported alternative exists in-stack. Symfony's own LDAP component plus the security bundle covers much of this without a third-party dependency.

Adoption preconditions if pursued: a named internal owner, a pinned commit or fork, a documented upgrade path off Symfony 6.4, and a tested fallback to local auth or an IdP if the bundle is abandoned.

How to Pitch It (Stakeholders)

To executives (one line): LDAP login is a checkbox enterprise buyers ask for; this package is a free, permissively licensed reference implementation that tells us what that checkbox costs — it is an input to the build/buy decision, not a dependency we would ship on.

The honest read: maturity is very low — 2 stars, no downstream dependents, and the package targets Symfony 6.4 rather than our stated Laravel/PHP framing. That makes it unsuitable as a production dependency but valuable as a scoped evaluation artifact: a few days of engineering to answer "do we build directory auth, buy an IdP, or defer the requirement?"

To engineering: Apache-2.0, so forking is clean. Treat it as a design reference for the user-provider pattern and a spike target. Do not add it to the dependency manifest without an owner, a fork strategy, and a plan for the Symfony 6.4 end-of-life horizon.

Recommended ask: approve a time-boxed spike (≤5 engineer-days) that (1) confirms whether the enterprise LDAP requirement is real and how often it appears in deals, (2) produces a build/buy recommendation weighted toward a hosted IdP for anything beyond single-directory internal auth, and (3) if we proceed, specifies a Laravel-native or IdP-based implementation rather than this bundle.

Weaver

How can I help you explore Laravel packages today?

Conversation history is not saved when not logged in.
Prompt
Add packages to context
No packages found.
snowsoft/faker
meditationsteps/blogetc
animalyoung/laravel-influxdb
onix-solutions/sms-telera
lonely-lights/prosetta
oxygen/data
oxygen/core
jengo/base
xiloryx/log-collector
a21ns1g4ts/filament-stripe
la-php/laravel-admin
artisan-build/community-prompts
vleroy/smart
ayles-software/laravel-australian-public-holidays
cboxdk/laravel-id-spatie
cboxdk/laravel-id-billing
cboxdk/laravel-id-billing-bridge
simple-as-fuck/php-performance-log
hsluv/hsluv
seampact/codegen