I have an annoying problem with my new (and first) SAMBA PDC deployment.
Valid users are being connected to the root directory "/" of my server
as nobody. The only way you can discover the user is to troll the log
file.
Here is my config file as pertains to users:
[global] - encrypt passwords=yes ; wins support=yes ; security=user ;
domain logons=yes ; oplocks=no ; level2oplocks=no ; logon
path=\\%L\profiles\%u\%m ; logon script=logon.bat ; logon drive=S: ;
logon home=\\%L\%u\.win_profile\%m ; invalid users = nobody root bin
daemon adm sync shutdown ; add user script=/usr/sbin/useradd -d
/dev/nu.. -g 100 -s /bin/false -M %u ; log file /etc/samba/smblog-%m.txt ; log
level=2
[netlogon] - path=/usr/local/samba/lib/netlogon ; writable=no ;
browsable=no
[profiles] - path=/ovs/samba-ntprof ; writable=yes ; browsable=no ;
create mask = 0600 ; directory mask = 0700
[homes] - read only=no ; browsable=no ; guest ok=no ; map archive = yes
Here is my logon.bat:
net use s: /home ; net time \\cap <file:///\\cap> /set /yes
Here is a slice of the log when the user gets mapped to nobody:
[2003/10/14 14:22:34, 2] smbd/reply.c:reply_sesssetup_and_X(1007)
Defaulting to Lanman password for lgroos
[2003/10/14 14:22:34, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection(636)
a18 (192.168.1.48) connect to service netlogon as user
lgroos (uid=517, gid=700) (pid 3331)
------
then there is the common exchange between the logon.bat file - 5 groups
of open_file(246) and close_normal_file(229) groupings
every thing is fine at this point and then, for no reason I understand
(being a SAMBA newbie) I get this:
------
[2003/10/14 14:22:35, 1] smbd/service.c:make_connection(636)
a18 (192.168.1.48) connect to service nobody as user lgroos
(uid=517, gid=700) (pid 3331)
and the logon.bat file gets opened and closed.
I've dug around and can not find out what is going on. I have just added
"nobody" to my invalid users list as a final attempt to stop this
behavior. To my knowledge the clients are not logging out to cause this
to happen. These are all Win98 clients. I have yet to implement
policies, but the computers had policies at one point. They do not now.
