samba - May 2021 - Hoping someone can shed some light on this issue

On 10/05/2021 19:10, Rowland penny via samba wrote:
> On 10/05/2021 19:00, Todd Ruffing wrote:
>> It's a no-go on the configuration changes.? I backed up the
original
>> config file and modified the old config file to resemble what you 
>> had.? I restarted the server (I know I could have forced samba to 
>> pick up the config changes, just thought it would be best to restart 
>> it.).? I tried the mapping from windows 2016 to samba, and got the 
>> same result.? Windows 2008 still works after the changes.? Why 
>> doesn't windows 2016 work.? Did Microsoft change something in 2016
to
>> prevent it from working?
>
>
> Who are you connecting as ? A Windows user that is unknown to the 
> Samba standalone server, or a user that is known to the standalone 
> server ? If the latter, are you using the correct password ?
>
> Rowland
>
>
>
No, don't bother, its Microsoft trying to stop you doing something that 
has been a part of Samba since Adam was a lad ?

see here: 
https://techjourney.net/cannot-connect-to-cifs-smb-samba-network-shares-shared-folders-in-windows-10/

Rowland

Microsoft continues to confuse 'secured smb communication' with 
'Microsoft smb only compatible communication' again and again via 
various tweaks, if not code design.? Thus, Microsoft considers every 
implementation of smb, but their own, even their original variants of 
smb, to be insecure and risky by policy, versus actual vulnerabilities 
applicable.? Every time Microsoft tweaks smb directly or indirectly, 
they ignore any impact to any smb implementation but to their own code 
base.? If 'smb' was a closed protocol, that would be one thing, but it 
is not a closed protocol.

Which is sad if not funny... because Microsoft only gained market share 
again Novell, by using the Novell v1.0 API for years, which Novell 
improved but good old Windows NT only talked Novell v1.0 API ever, i.e 
NCP 1.0.

Microsoft tries to state that their 'only' motive is protecting their 
users, and it just happens to explicitly break compatibility with other 
smb implementations routinely, right, sure.? If you believe that I have 
bridge in Moscow, that you can purchase free and clear... cheap.

-DD

On 5/10/2021 11:17, Rowland penny via samba wrote:
> On 10/05/2021 19:10, Rowland penny via samba wrote:
>> On 10/05/2021 19:00, Todd Ruffing wrote:
>>> It's a no-go on the configuration changes.? I backed up the
original
>>> config file and modified the old config file to resemble what you 
>>> had.? I restarted the server (I know I could have forced samba to 
>>> pick up the config changes, just thought it would be best to
restart
>>> it.).? I tried the mapping from windows 2016 to samba, and got the 
>>> same result.? Windows 2008 still works after the changes.? Why 
>>> doesn't windows 2016 work.? Did Microsoft change something in
2016
>>> to prevent it from working?
>>
>>
>> Who are you connecting as ? A Windows user that is unknown to the 
>> Samba standalone server, or a user that is known to the standalone 
>> server ? If the latter, are you using the correct password ?
>>
>> Rowland
>>
>>
>>
> No, don't bother, its Microsoft trying to stop you doing something 
> that has been a part of Samba since Adam was a lad ?
>
> see here: 
>
https://techjourney.net/cannot-connect-to-cifs-smb-samba-network-shares-shared-folders-in-windows-10/
>
> Rowland
>
>
>

On Mon, 2021-05-10 at 19:17 +0100, Rowland penny via samba
wrote:
> On 10/05/2021 19:10, Rowland penny via samba wrote:
> > On 10/05/2021 19:00, Todd Ruffing wrote:
> > > It's a no-go on the configuration changes.  I backed up the
> > > original 
> > > config file and modified the old config file to resemble what
> > > you 
> > > had.  I restarted the server (I know I could have forced samba
> > > to 
> > > pick up the config changes, just thought it would be best to
> > > restart 
> > > it.).  I tried the mapping from windows 2016 to samba, and got
> > > the 
> > > same result.  Windows 2008 still works after the changes.  Why 
> > > doesn't windows 2016 work.  Did Microsoft change something in
> > > 2016 to 
> > > prevent it from working?
> > 
> > Who are you connecting as ? A Windows user that is unknown to the 
> > Samba standalone server, or a user that is known to the standalone 
> > server ? If the latter, are you using the correct password ?
> > 
> > Rowland
> > 
> > 
> > 
> No, don't bother, its Microsoft trying to stop you doing something
> that 
> has been a part of Samba since Adam was a lad ?
> 
> see here: 
>
https://techjourney.net/cannot-connect-to-cifs-smb-samba-network-shares-shared-folders-in-windows-10/
I'm really glad they did that, but I'm surprised we haven't heard
more
about it.  We need to update our documentation to make it clear that
'guest ok' and 'map to guest = bad user' isn't a practical
option any
more.

The crux of the issue is that because we don't give out (eg) an SSL
certificate there is no way, absent a password, to validate the
server. 

So the password is what sets up the full chain of protection on the
connection.

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett (he/him)       https://samba.org/~abartlet/
Samba Team Member (since 2001) https://samba.org
Samba Team Lead, Catalyst IT   https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

Samba Development and Support, Catalyst IT - Expert Open Source
Solutions