search for: somegroup

...-20190224 -rw------- 1 root root 7237640 Mar 1 12:59 maillog-20190228 -rw------- 1 root root 1297508 Mar 3 04:21 maillog-20190303 -rw------- 1 root root 1319371 Mar 10 08:17 maillog-20190310 What I would like - ls -l maillog* -rw------- 1 root root 3105240 Mar 13 22:04 maillog -rw-r----- 1 root somegroup 1079031 Feb 24 04:39 maillog-20190224 -rw-r----- 1 root somegroup 7237640 Mar 1 12:59 maillog-20190228 -rw-r----- 1 root somegroup 1297508 Mar 3 04:21 maillog-20190303 -rw-r----- 1 root somegroup 1319371 Mar 10 08:17 maillog-20190310 That way a user in somegroup could run a script that analyzes...

...he trivial ability to force the group owernship of the destination files to a specific group. A read through the manpage and various searches on the web do not turn up any helpful hints in this regard. What I would really like is something like: rsync --other-options-here --owner=someuser --group=somegroup source/ dest/ Regardless of the source/ ownership and group, files copied to dest/ are created with owner 'someuser' and group 'somegroup'. Similar to the normal --owner and --group behavior, this would require --super behavior. Presumably, if the inspected files in dest/ had diff...

Hi, I'm running Samba Version 3.0.25c on Solaris 10 8/07 on X86 hardware. It's successfully joined to AD. But, and there always is a but, if : * A user is a member of SomeGroup * and the share alllows SomeGroup to access it * and SomeGroup is NOT what the user has set as their Primary Group in Active Directory then * Samba will recognize that the user can access the share * but, vfs_ChDir will fail Consider a user, "vanhoudn", whose primary group is &qu...

...ckground: samba 3.0.4 Linux as Domain Member Active Directory, not in Native Mode Compiler opions: --with-winbind --with-pam --with-smbmount The goal is to authenticate via the Windows Domain and allow access via Windows groups. The syntax in my smb.conf looks like this: valid users = DOMAIN\SOMEGROUP However, it doesn't work no matter what. I can authenticate individual users thusly: valid users = DOMAIN\SOMEUSER I've read about the "@" "+" and "&" syntax, but they only seem to represent Unix & Nis groups. Is there another way to represent W...

Hello, I have a strange problem with Samba and LDAP backend with the statement valid users = @group. The valid users = @username works great, but the @group oder +group statement does not work. But the users in the @group does never get access to the shares! I'm using Samba 3.2.5-4 on Debian Lenny the LDAP server is located at an Debian Etch system. But this ldap server works quite good.

...ve now found that (on my current DCs, running 4.18.5), ldbsearch *does* seem to return the expected result, but the same query via ldapsearch does not. dc2$ sudo ldbsearch -H /usr/local/samba/private/sam.ldb "(&(objectCategory=Person)(sAMAccountName=*)(memberOf:1.2.840.113556.1.4.1941:=CN=somegroup,OU= someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org))" samAccountName # Record 1 [...] # record 39 dn: CN=A User,OU=Users,OU=someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org sAMAccountName: auser # Referral [...] # returned 42 records # 39 entries # 3 referrals whereas no results are returned for the same query run via ldapsearch, eve...

...-20190224 -rw------- 1 root root 7237640 Mar 1 12:59 maillog-20190228 -rw------- 1 root root 1297508 Mar 3 04:21 maillog-20190303 -rw------- 1 root root 1319371 Mar 10 08:17 maillog-20190310 What I would like - ls -l maillog* -rw------- 1 root root 3105240 Mar 13 22:04 maillog -rw-r----- 1 root somegroup 1079031 Feb 24 04:39 maillog-20190224 -rw-r----- 1 root somegroup 7237640 Mar 1 12:59 maillog-20190228 -rw-r----- 1 root somegroup 1297508 Mar 3 04:21 maillog-20190303 -rw-r----- 1 root somegroup 1319371 Mar 10 08:17 maillog-20190310 That way a user in somegroup could run a script that analyzes...

> Normally a group cannot 'own' files etc, Unix uses ugo permissions and > when you chown a file you would use something like this: > > chown foo:somegroup somefile > > this would make 'foo' the owner of the file and possibly allow > 'somegroup' access to it, this would depend on whatever permissions you > set with 'chmod' > > So, as far as Unix is concerned, you shouldn't be able to chown a file >...

...a chmod command after copying the data so that the copied file ends up with the original permissions. For example if I have mounted /samba_share which masks new file permissions with 440 on the machine remote_machine: $ touch testfile1 testfile2 $ chmod u-w testfile2 $ ls -l -rw-r--r-- 1 someuser somegroup 0 Jul 6 18:04 testfile1 -r--r--r-- 1 someuser somegroup 0 Jul 6 18:04 testfile2 $ scp testfile* remote_machine:/samba_share $ ssh remote_machine 'ls -l /samba_share' -r--r----- 1 someuser somegroup 0 Jul 6 18:10 testfile1 -r--r--r-- 1 someuser somegroup 0 Jul 6 18:10 testfile2 It seems lik...

...list (i wish people would make a habit of this - it would help reduce the volume on this list and make searching for answers easier). samba server running samba-2.0.6 windows nt 4 + sp6 running ms word 97 i have a share on the samba server defined as: [sharename] path = /some/path valid users = @somegroup write list = @somegroup force group = somegroup create mask = 0770 directory mask = 0770 people in group somegroup are writing shared word documents in this share. ownerships and permissions seems to be working fine. new documents can be created. however, some of the users regularly experience p...

Dear Friends, Is It Possible to Make a *Share* Visible to a List of Users *Only* ? e.g. If have shares Likes Account, Sales, Support Then I would Like make respective *share* visible *only* to persons in respective dept. Thanks and Best Regards.

...current DCs, running > 4.18.5), ldbsearch *does* seem to return the expected result, but the > same query via ldapsearch does not. > > dc2$ sudo ldbsearch -H /usr/local/samba/private/sam.ldb > "(&(objectCategory=Person)(sAMAccountName=*)(memberOf:1.2.840.113556.1.4.1941:=CN=somegroup,OU= > someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org))" samAccountName > # Record 1 > [...] > # record 39 > dn: CN=A User,OU=Users,OU=someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org > sAMAccountName: auser > > # Referral > [...] > # returned 42 records > # 39 entries > # 3 referrals > > > wh...

...jump.. Yes, I should have upgraded much earlier.. Yes, I know 4.19.x is out now as well) Here's a search that now returns nothing after my DC upgrades; this exact search used to work just fine: (& (objectCategory=Person) (sAMAccountName=*) (memberOf:1.2.840.113556.1.4.1941:=CN=somegroup,OU=someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org) ) But if I remove the matching rule specifier, it does return a number of results: (& (objectCategory=Person) (sAMAccountName=*) (memberOf=CN=somegroup,OU=someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org) ) The data in my AD hasn't changed; I am guessing that LDAP_MATCH...

...arlier.. Yes, I know 4.19.x is out > now as well) > > Here's a search that now returns nothing after my DC upgrades; this > exact search used to work just fine: > (& > (objectCategory=Person) > (sAMAccountName=*) > (memberOf:1.2.840.113556.1.4.1941:=CN=somegroup,OU=someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org) > ) > > But if I remove the matching rule specifier, it does return a number of results: > (& > (objectCategory=Person) > (sAMAccountName=*) > (memberOf=CN=somegroup,OU=someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org) > ) > > The data in my A...

...ht in thinking that the objects I need to look at are > - the group itself > - all (some?) members of the group > - any others? The full chain. > Are permissions checked in a hiearchical fashion, i.e. if OU=myou > does > not allow a particular user to read it, then would > CN=somegroup,OU=myou still be denied regardless of the explicit > permissions on the CN=somegroup,OU=myou object? That is what I am getting at. The full chain must be checked. > And I believe I'm > correct in thinking that a user can be a member of a group, even > though that user might not...

...enticates against is running fedora core 4 with samba-3.0.14a-2. Anyway, this setup worked just fine for a couple of weeks, but today I yum updated many packages including pam, glibc and kernel on the fedora 5 server and now, anytime I access a share that includes a setting like valid users = @someGroup or admin users = @someOtherGroup I get an smbd core dump. If I comment out the line above and restart smb, then all is well. Any ideas much appreciated. Thanks, Mark

Hi guys, any CUPS / Samba experts out there? The CUPS printing guide is a horrendous maze of options. I've got nearly there but I've got one thing wrong and I don't know where to look. I set up our two printers (HP K5400s) using the GUI printer tool. Both print the test page just fine. I set up the [printers] and [print$] shares and can browse to the printers from Windows (XP for me)

...dapsearch does not. > > What if you try to use starttls instead of ldaps? > > ldapseach -H ldap://dc2.mydomain.org-ZZ -x -W -D Administrator at mydomain > -b "dc=mydomain,dc=org" > "(&(objectCategory=Person)(sAMAccountName=*)(memberOf:1.2.840.113556.1.4.1941:=CN=somegroup,OU=someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org))" Good thinking. Unfortunately, identical results with ldap:// and -ZZ, the search still doesn't return any results :( I'll figure out a way to script restoration of the domain into different samba versions via docker, and use git bisect to track down wh...

...earlier.. Yes, I know 4.19.x is out > now as well) > > Here's a search that now returns nothing after my DC upgrades; this > exact search used to work just fine: > (& > (objectCategory=Person) > (sAMAccountName=*) > (memberOf:1.2.840.113556.1.4.1941:=CN=somegroup,OU=someou,DC=mydo > main,DC=org) > ) > > But if I remove the matching rule specifier, it does return a number > of results: > (& > (objectCategory=Person) > (sAMAccountName=*) > (memberOf=CN=somegroup,OU=someou,DC=mydomain,DC=org) > ) > > The da...

On 2/17/2016 9:43 AM, Rowland penny wrote: > On 17/02/16 17:27, Ian wrote: >> >> On 2/17/2016 5:00 AM, Rowland penny wrote: >>> On 17/02/16 00:03, Ian wrote: >>>> I've recently attempted to migrate some windows server files over to >>>> samba 4 hosted on a FreeNAS server. >>>> >>>> Using robocopy with the /copyall switch,