CentOS - Jun 2018 - EXTERNAL: Samba issues with Win 10 (one last followup)

Wells, Roger K. wrote:
> On 06/28/2018 10:35 AM, mark wrote:
>>
>> Just ran into a problem: someone with a new laptop, running Win 10,
>> version 1709, tried to map their home directory (served from a CentOS
6.9
>> box, and it fails, with Windows complaining that it no longer supports
>> SMBv1, and if you go to their site, you can install support
>> for that manually....
>>
>> The server running samba can *not* be updated to 7 - we have a lot of
>> stuff based off it, and most of our users use it, one way or another,
so
>> it's a major thing when we do finally upgrade (or, more likely,
replace
>> the server).
>>
>> Has anyone run into this, and if so, any workarounds on the Linux end?
>>
> I ran into this  as well.
> There is a procedure that a W10 administrator can enable SMBv1.
> I did it and it worked.
> I believe that I started from this link:
> https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/en-US/8160d62b-0f5d-48
> a3-9fe9-5cd319837917/how-te-reenable-smb1-in-windows1o?forum=win10itproge
> neral HTH
>
Yeah. I'm not sure why my original problem statement wasn't clear, and
I've done some online research since then, but what I was looking for was
a CentOS 6 solution, where we just modified the C6 samba server, rather
than have to put a ticket in for each and every user that's stuck with Win
10.

And, since this is an office in a US federal gov't agency (civilian
sector, so budgets suck), there could be a dozen or two people, and I
understand we're getting in new laptops & desktops for a number of folks
with older systems, we're going to see more of this, and it's a big
issue,
since the server that serves samba also does a lot else, and that will
affect almost everyone.

That's why a C6 solution would have been far better.

But I see that the cifs.ko with the C6 kernel doesn't support smbv2, so
that's what we'll have to do. (And, since the samba server is now out of
warranty, it's time to start thinking about a replacement).

     mark

On 06/28/2018 12:50 PM, mark wrote:
> Wells, Roger K. wrote:
>> On 06/28/2018 10:35 AM, mark wrote:
>>> Just ran into a problem: someone with a new laptop, running Win 10,
>>> version 1709, tried to map their home directory (served from a
CentOS 6.9
>>> box, and it fails, with Windows complaining that it no longer
supports
>>> SMBv1, and if you go to their site, you can install support
>>> for that manually....
>>>
>>> The server running samba can *not* be updated to 7 - we have a lot
of
>>> stuff based off it, and most of our users use it, one way or
another, so
>>> it's a major thing when we do finally upgrade (or, more likely,
replace
>>> the server).
>>>
>>> Has anyone run into this, and if so, any workarounds on the Linux
end?
>>>
>> I ran into this  as well.
>> There is a procedure that a W10 administrator can enable SMBv1.
>> I did it and it worked.
>> I believe that I started from this link:
>>
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/en-US/8160d62b-0f5d-48
>>
a3-9fe9-5cd319837917/how-te-reenable-smb1-in-windows1o?forum=win10itproge
>> neral HTH
>>
> Yeah. I'm not sure why my original problem statement wasn't clear,
and
> I've done some online research since then, but what I was looking for
was
> a CentOS 6 solution, where we just modified the C6 samba server, rather
> than have to put a ticket in for each and every user that's stuck with
Win
> 10.
>
> And, since this is an office in a US federal gov't agency (civilian
> sector, so budgets suck), there could be a dozen or two people, and I
> understand we're getting in new laptops & desktops for a number of
folks
> with older systems, we're going to see more of this, and it's a big
issue,
> since the server that serves samba also does a lot else, and that will
> affect almost everyone.
>
> That's why a C6 solution would have been far better.
>
> But I see that the cifs.ko with the C6 kernel doesn't support smbv2, so
> that's what we'll have to do. (And, since the samba server is now
out of
> warranty, it's time to start thinking about a replacement).
>
>      mark
Yeah, I thought that might be the case, sorry.
Here we are planning to upgrade the our server to CentOS 7.5
shortly
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
-- 
Roger Wells, P.E.
leidos
221 Third St
Newport, RI 02840
401-847-4210 (voice)
401-849-1585 (fax)
roger.k.wells at leidos.com

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:50:06PM -0400, mark wrote:
> Wells, Roger K. wrote:
> > On 06/28/2018 10:35 AM, mark wrote:
> >>
> >> Just ran into a problem: someone with a new laptop, running Win
10,
> >> version 1709, tried to map their home directory (served from a
CentOS 6.9
> >> box, and it fails, with Windows complaining that it no longer
supports
> >> SMBv1, and if you go to their site, you can install support
> >> for that manually....
> >>
> >> The server running samba can *not* be updated to 7 - we have a lot
of
> >> stuff based off it, and most of our users use it, one way or
another, so
> >> it's a major thing when we do finally upgrade (or, more
likely, replace
> >> the server).
> >>
> >> Has anyone run into this, and if so, any workarounds on the Linux
end?
> >>
> > I ran into this  as well.
> > There is a procedure that a W10 administrator can enable SMBv1.
> > I did it and it worked.
> > I believe that I started from this link:
> >
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/en-US/8160d62b-0f5d-48
> >
a3-9fe9-5cd319837917/how-te-reenable-smb1-in-windows1o?forum=win10itproge
> > neral HTH
> >
> 
> Yeah. I'm not sure why my original problem statement wasn't clear,
and
> I've done some online research since then, but what I was looking for
was
> a CentOS 6 solution, where we just modified the C6 samba server, rather
> than have to put a ticket in for each and every user that's stuck with
Win
> 10.
Trouble is that smb v1 is horribly insecure. Even Microsoft tells
people not to use it.
> 
> And, since this is an office in a US federal gov't agency (civilian
> sector, so budgets suck), there could be a dozen or two people, and I
> understand we're getting in new laptops & desktops for a number of
folks
> with older systems, we're going to see more of this, and it's a big
issue,
> since the server that serves samba also does a lot else, and that will
> affect almost everyone.  
I'd think the feds would have figured out that smb v1 is a bad 
protocol to  use and outlawed it.
> 
> That's why a C6 solution would have been far better.
> 
> But I see that the cifs.ko with the C6 kernel doesn
> that's what we'll have to do. (And, since the samba server is now
out of
> warranty, it's time to start thinking about a replacement).
At home, while I do  not have win10 talking directly to samba on my
LInux desktop, I also have a Synology Disk Station and have configured
it to use only smb v3, and in the mount command on Linux I specify
smb v3, and it works fine.

'course, that's the samba client, not the server. I haven't really
investigated why I can't directly access win10 from linux and vice-
versa, so it may be a v1 vs v3 issue. However, at work I had no trouble
accessing my home filesystem on linux from win10. haven't, so far,
figured out what the difference is.

Fred

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anything offered to me as
    the result of an unsolicited e-mail message. Nor will I forward chain
    letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warnings to large numbers
    of others. This is my contribution to the survival of the online
    community.
 --Roger Ebert, December, 1996
----------------------------- The Boulder Pledge -----------------------------

Fred Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:50:06PM -0400, mark wrote:
>> Wells, Roger K. wrote:
>>> On 06/28/2018 10:35 AM, mark wrote:
>>>> Just ran into a problem: someone with a new laptop, running Win
10,
>>>>  version 1709, tried to map their home directory (served from a
>>>> CentOS 6.9
>>>> box, and it fails, with Windows complaining that it no longer
>>>> supports SMBv1, and if you go to their site, you can install
support
>>>>  for that manually....
>>>>
> Trouble is that smb v1 is horribly insecure. Even Microsoft tells
> people not to use it.
>>
>> And, since this is an office in a US federal gov't agency (civilian
>> sector, so budgets suck), there could be a dozen or two people, and I
>> understand we're getting in new laptops & desktops for a number
of
>> folks with older systems, we're going to see more of this, and
it's a
>> big issue, since the server that serves samba also does a lot else, and
>> that will affect almost everyone.
>
> I'd think the feds would have figured out that smb v1 is a bad
> protocol to  use and outlawed it.
<snip>

ROTFLMAO!

I know that there are folks who are running Windows XP... but those are
*not* on the open network, and have to have an internal firewall... but
they run software controlling machines that cost many millions of dollars,
and are still doing very good and useful work.

We're just slowly rolling out C7 (AND we have to encrypt it all, as we
do). But there's no budget to disrupt all the work everyone's doing.
Hell,
staffing here is down about a third or more in the almost nine years I've
been here. But then, who needs to spend money on science, I mean, really?


   mark