samba - Apr 2020 - Follow symlinks vs bind-mount

A while back I got some good advice about using bind-mount on my Linux server to
include directories outside my Samba shares.  It had been years since I set up a
server and forgot about "follow symlinks" and stumbled on that
yesterday.

Is there a reason for using one of these over the other one?



Hal

Am 22.04.20 um 15:43 schrieb Hal Vaughan via samba:
> A while back I got some good advice about using bind-mount on my Linux
server to include directories outside my Samba shares.  It had been years since
I set up a server and forgot about "follow symlinks" and stumbled on
that yesterday.
> 
> Is there a reason for using one of these over the other one?
"follow symlinks" and friends have a long history of security issues
for
all sort of services, not only samba

On 22/04/2020 15:38, Reindl Harald via samba wrote:
>
> Am 22.04.20 um 15:43 schrieb Hal Vaughan via samba:
>> A while back I got some good advice about using bind-mount on my Linux
server to include directories outside my Samba shares.  It had been years since
I set up a server and forgot about "follow symlinks" and stumbled on
that yesterday.
>>
>> Is there a reason for using one of these over the other one?
> "follow symlinks" and friends have a long history of security
issues for
> all sort of services, not only samba
>
Seeing as the default for 'follow symlinks' is 'yes', the OP
could have
used at anytime, but this (if the symlink is outside the share) will 
entail setting 'wide links = yes', something that is not recommended.

A bind-mount is were a directory is mounted somewhere else, in effect, 
it is a type of symlink, but the admin has more control.

Rowland