search for: nfsnobody

The following manifest is causing an error/warning and permissions are not set. i do not understanding why: file { "/diskless/swaps": ensure => directory, owner => nfsnobody, group => nfsnobody, mode => 1777; } The error is: Fri Sep 21 14:53:05 EST 2007 //default/remote1/boot-server/File[/diskless/swaps]/owner (:warning): current state is silly: 4294967294 Fri Sep 21 14:53:05 EST 2007 //default/remote1/boot-server/Fil...

Please tell me about maillog Error. I get the following error in maillog? ??? dovecot: doveadm(nfsnobody): Error: sync: User init failed dovecot: doveadm(nfsnobody): Error: User initialization failed: Namespace '': mkdir(/var/lib/nfs/Maildir) failed: Permission denied (euid=65534(nfsnobody) egid=65534(nfsnobody) missing +w perm: /var/lib/nfs, dir owned by 0:0 mode=0755) ??? I am using Dsync a...

...datacenter I use provides mountable nfs shares that are provided through a subnet, the only person having access to the nfs share is me. If I do this: mount -t nfs 192.168.53.21:/USERNAME /mnt/share/ then I get the share: [root at hostname /mnt/share] #>ls -la total 12 drwxrwxrwx 2 nfsnobody nfsnobody 4096 Oct 9 18:04 . drwxr-xr-x 7 root root 4096 Oct 9 17:55 .. -rw-r--r-- 1 nfsnobody nfsnobody 0 Oct 9 18:01 test I want to use this as a snapshot backup drive, so I need to have the permission on the backup the same as on the source, e.g. rsync -avH /bin /mnt/shar...

Hi, I just had a couple of questions about nfsnobody. We run a very large NFS infrastructure based off of a NetApp, and we're been discussing whether or not it is necessary to have 64 bit nfsnobody as 4294967294. I understand the reasoning behind this (2^32 - 2 gives you a max UID), but we're having issues since we run multiple architect...

...ngs in syslog.conf, but just don't know the magic word for samba logs. 2) I'm getting lots of "couldn't find service" errors. I had: [data] path = /data read only = no public = yes browseable = yes writeable = yes force user = nfsnobody force group = nfsnobody guest ok = yes The netbios name is stb-data, and it was complaining about "couldn't find service stb-data". I changed the stanza to: [stb-data] path = /data comment = STB Group file server read only = no public...

...ad security modules in to the kernel #SECURE_NFS_MODS="noload" # # Don't load sunrpc module. #RPCMTAB="noload" # [root at inf1 /]# cat /etc/idmapd.conf [General] Verbosity = 9 Pipefs-Directory = /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs Domain = scms.waikato.ac.nz [Mapping] Nobody-User = nfsnobody Nobody-Group = nfsnobody [Translation] Method = nsswitch [root at inf1 /]# mount -l | grep bind /export on /nfs4exports/share type none (rw,bind) And an ls of /nfs4exports/share on NFS Server works from /etc/fstab /export /nfs4exports/share none bind 0 0 {The Client} [root at silver...

...m." This happens with any ftp client that I have tried. There are no firewalls on Linux box or the XP machines. I have uninstalled SAMBA & then reinstalled SAMBA but that did not help. Here is a copy of the syntax that I'm using in my fstab. //hal9000/movies /mnt/Movies cifs password=nfsnobody,username=nfsnobody 0 0 On the XP machine HAL9000, there is a local user names nfsnobody with a password nfsnobody. Nfsnobody has full control on the share movies. I also went to the directory security and add nfsnobody with full control. Nobody seems to have an answer for this one as I'm clu...

I am still in the familiarisation and testing phase of my puppet implementation, and have a question for the enlightened: Is there an upper limit to the numeric user ID that puppet recognises? Here is what I have so far: System is RHEL4, puppet 0.23.1 All users are defined in LDAP rather than in /etc/password, and their numeric user IDs are sourced from LDAP as well. These numeric IDs

...t/control, inbox= Elstat(/imap/mailboxes/jira-support/cur) failed: Permission denied [FAILED] there's a strange dump-capability mailbox created: [root at redback root]# ls -la /imap/mailboxes/dump-capability/ total 20 drwxrwx--- 5 nfsnobody nfsnobody 4096 Aug 4 19:59 . drwxr-xrwx 28 root mail 4096 Aug 4 19:59 .. drwxrwx--- 2 nfsnobody nfsnobody 4096 Aug 4 19:59 cur drwxrwx--- 2 nfsnobody nfsnobody 4096 Aug 4 19:59 new drwxrwx--- 2 nfsnobody nfsnobody 4096 Aug 4 19:59 tmp [root at redback roo...

Sorry for being such a newbie when it comes to scripting. Created a directory for the backups on the network mounted volume. Changed the appropriate path and am getting this: dsync(root): Error: user nfsnobody: Initialization failed: Namespace 'INBOX.': mkdir(/mnt/maelstrombackups/vmailbackup/nfsnobody) failed: Permission denied (euid=5000(vmail) egid=5000(vmail) missing +w perm: /mnt/maelstrombackups/vmailbackup, euid is not dir owner) dsync(root): Fatal: User init failed Backup done for user: n...

...makes sense given your error message about canonical path and the need for eXecute permissions... I think I started wondering about that first, but then jumped into the NFS pool because that's what my reference point is for root-squash. Since root squash essentially sends root requests as "nfsnobody" (IOW: others not the user or group), then the "o+x" approach is the solution if you're going directly at the file. John

...bother if an acceptable workaround was already debated on the list. I was getting trouble with a 'grep something /var/log*' which caused the "Memory exhausted" message. With some deeper search I found the lastlog file in /var/log/ to be 1.2T sized. This seems to come from the nfsnobody's uid to be 4294967294 on x86_64 system (and -1 on i386) and the pre-allocation space for every uid (so from 0 to ...4294967294...hum..) from lastlog. Since I do not use NFS at all, can I just erase the nfsnobody from /etc/passwd and start with a blank lastlog file (this looks like a great...

...ur error message about canonical path and the need for > eXecute permissions... I think I started wondering about that first, but > then jumped into the NFS pool because that's what my reference point is > for root-squash. Since root squash essentially sends root requests as > "nfsnobody" (IOW: others not the user or group), then the "o+x" approach > is the solution if you're going directly at the file. > > John Yes, appears the o+x is the only way right now. It definitely tries to access the share as root though, on CentOS 7 since I also tried to add...

...: off Description: Map requests from uid/gid 0 to the anonymous uid/gid. Note that this does not apply to any other uids or gids that might be equally sensitive, such as user bin or group staff. Option: server.anonuid Default Value: 65534 Description: value of the uid used for the anonymous user/nfsnobody when root-squash is enabled. Option: server.anongid Default Value: 65534 Description: value of the gid used for the anonymous user/nfsnobody when root-squash is enabled. Thanks, Soumya > > --- > > An simple hack that I found is to add custom uid/gid fields in clients' >...

.... If the directory /mnt/nfs/repository doesn''t exist, the mount{} declaration fails as expected. If /mnt/nfs/repository doesn''t exist, it gets created by the file{} declaration. Howevery, if /mnt/nfs/repository exists and the remote volume is mounted (in this case having ownership nfsnobody:nfsnobody and permissions 0666 instead of root:root 0777) puppet gets crabby trying to fix permissions and ownership. The ''require => File[]'' argument doesn''t seem to help; I''m missing how to tell puppet to not try to create the mountpoint or tweak its permiss...

...gt;> root, it should go 'root ? who is that ?' >> >> So, when you log into a Unix domain member, what isn't working ? > > Rowland, > > In the NFS world, by default, "root" on the NFS client is actually > mapped to user "nobody" or "nfsnobody" on the NFS share for security.? > Try it.? Go into the NFS share, and touch a file as root. ?? With a > sec=sys mount (no Kerberos security), you can allow root on the NFS > client to access the NFS filesystem as root only if you export the > share with the no_root_squash opti...

On 12/11/2020 13:27, Jason Keltz via samba wrote: > > On 11/12/2020 8:17 AM, Rowland penny via samba wrote: >> On 11/11/2020 10:54, Jason Keltz via samba wrote: >>> Hi Louis, >>> I've looked into that and I'm not sure how this would be done? >>> By the way, even with your NFS translation fix (which doesn't work >>> for me because

Hi All, I would like to use glusterfs in an environment where storage servers are managed by an IT service - myself :) - and several users in the organization can mount the distributed fs. The users are root on their machines. As far as I know about glusterfs, a root client user may impersonate any uid/gid since it provides its uid/gid itself when it talks to the bricks (like nfsv3). The thing

...s domain member, then try to use > root, it should go 'root ? who is that ?' > > So, when you log into a Unix domain member, what isn't working ? Rowland, In the NFS world, by default, "root" on the NFS client is actually mapped to user "nobody" or "nfsnobody" on the NFS share for security.? Try it.? Go into the NFS share, and touch a file as root. ?? With a sec=sys mount (no Kerberos security), you can allow root on the NFS client to access the NFS filesystem as root only if you export the share with the no_root_squash option (which is not the...

...8 create mode = 644 dns proxy = no protocol = NT1 force group = smbusers socket options = TCP_NODELAY SO_SNDBUF=8192 SO_RCVBUF=8192 bind interfaces only = yes invalid users = adm,amanda,apache,bin,daemon,ftp,games,gdm,gopher,halt,ident,junkbust,ldap,lp,mail,mailman,mailnull,mysql,named,news,nfsnobody,nobody,nscd,ntp,operator,pcap,postgres,pvm,radvd,root,rpc,rpcuser,rpm,shutdown,squid,sync,uucp,xfs,@adm,@apache,@bin,@daemon,@dip,@disk,@floppy,@ftp,@games,@gdm,@gopher,@ident,@junkbust,@kmem,@ldap,@lock,@lp,@mail,@mailman,@mailnull,@man,@mem,@mysql,@named,@news,@nfsnobody,@nobody,@nscd,@ntp,@pcap,...