samba - Mar 2016 - The sad state of samba 4 adaption for home/small business routers.

El 12/03/16 a les 12:37, Rowland penny ha escrit:
> Well yes, but these are usually a mass market product and will no doubt,
> in the fullness of time, get to use a version of Samba 4 seeing as how
> 3.6 has been EOL since March 2015.
You'd be surprised to see what old shi^H^H^H "carefully crafted with 
backported fixes packages" router vendors put in their products.
In a sense I'm glad they do, since due to a samba misconfiguration on 
their part I could unlock a heavily locked router ;-)

Bye
-- 
Luca Olivetti
Wetron Automation Technology http://www.wetron.es/
Tel. +34 93 5883004 (Ext.3010)  Fax +34 93 5883007

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Luca Olivetti
wrote:
> El 12/03/16 a les 12:37, Rowland penny ha escrit:
> 
> >Well yes, but these are usually a mass market product and will no
doubt,
> >in the fullness of time, get to use a version of Samba 4 seeing as how
> >3.6 has been EOL since March 2015.
> 
> You'd be surprised to see what old shi^H^H^H "carefully crafted
with
> backported fixes packages" router vendors put in their products.
> In a sense I'm glad they do, since due to a samba misconfiguration on
their
> part I could unlock a heavily locked router ;-)
You shouldn't have to depend on samba misconfigurations,
GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba
on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no
DRM.

If you find a Samba device using any Samba 3.2 or
newer that doesn't allow you to replace it, please
let us know so we can start the compliance process.

Cheers,

	Jeremy.

On 12/03/16 16:08, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Luca Olivetti wrote:
>> El 12/03/16 a les 12:37, Rowland penny ha escrit:
>>
>>> Well yes, but these are usually a mass market product and will no
doubt,
>>> in the fullness of time, get to use a version of Samba 4 seeing as
how
>>> 3.6 has been EOL since March 2015.
>> You'd be surprised to see what old shi^H^H^H "carefully
crafted with
>> backported fixes packages" router vendors put in their products.
>> In a sense I'm glad they do, since due to a samba misconfiguration
on their
>> part I could unlock a heavily locked router ;-)
> You shouldn't have to depend on samba misconfigurations,
> GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba
> on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no
> DRM.
>
> If you find a Samba device using any Samba 3.2 or
> newer that doesn't allow you to replace it, please
> let us know so we can start the compliance process.
>
> Cheers,
>
> 	Jeremy.
>
Hi Jeremy, what about something using 3.0.37 ?

That is what is running on my BT homehub 5.0B

Rowland

El 12/03/16 a les 17:08, Jeremy Allison ha escrit:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Luca Olivetti wrote:
>> El 12/03/16 a les 12:37, Rowland penny ha escrit:
>>
>>> Well yes, but these are usually a mass market product and will no
doubt,
>>> in the fullness of time, get to use a version of Samba 4 seeing as
how
>>> 3.6 has been EOL since March 2015.
>>
>> You'd be surprised to see what old shi^H^H^H "carefully
crafted with
>> backported fixes packages" router vendors put in their products.
>> In a sense I'm glad they do, since due to a samba misconfiguration
on their
>> part I could unlock a heavily locked router ;-)
>
> You shouldn't have to depend on samba misconfigurations,
> GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba
> on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no
> DRM.
Yes, I know, but it's very difficult with a telco provided router 
sourced by a chinese manufacturer. In this case it is a zte f680 
supplied by jazztel (now orange) in Spain to ftth customers.

In fact it's not samba that's locked but the whole router (i.e. it has a
restricted shell, but thanks to samba I could access a full shell).
>
> If you find a Samba device using any Samba 3.2 or
> newer that doesn't allow you to replace it, please
> let us know so we can start the compliance process.
Unfortunately it seems it is using a really old version of samba

$ telnet x.x.x.x
Trying x.x.x.x...
Connected to x.x.x.x.
Escape character is '^]'.
F680
Login: root
Password:

BusyBox v1.01 (2015.04.27-11:59+0000) Built-in shell (ash)
Enter 'help' for a list of built-in commands.

/ # uname -a
/bin/sh: uname: not found
/ # /mnt/usb1_1_1/busybox uname -a
Linux F680 3.4.69 #366 SMP Mon Apr 27 20:21:47 CST 2015 armv7l GNU/Linux
/ # smbd -v
smbd: invalid option -- v
Usage: smbd [-D] [-p port] [-d debuglevel] [-l log basename] [-s 
services file]
Version 1.9.16p10
         -D                    become a daemon
         -p port               listen on the specified port
         -d debuglevel         set the debuglevel
         -l log basename.      Basename for log/debug files
         -s services file.     Filename of services file
         -P                    passive only
         -a                    overwrite log file, don't append

/ #

Bye
-- 
Luca Olivetti
Wetron Automation Technology http://www.wetron.es/
Tel. +34 93 5883004 (Ext.3010)  Fax +34 93 5883007

On Sat, 12 Mar 2016, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> GPLv3 should guarentee that you can replace the Samba
> on *any* device. That's the whole point of GPLv3 - no
> DRM.
>
> If you find a Samba device using any Samba 3.2 or
> newer that doesn't allow you to replace it, please
> let us know so we can start the compliance process.
I wonder how that will play out with the new US FCC rules causing some 
manufacturers to disallow installing 3rd party firmware:

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/tp-link-blocks-open-source-router-firmware-to-comply-with-new-fcc-rule/

Maybe they will just not include samba, or other GPLv3 software?