search for: xenhideout

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Xen <list at xenhideout.nl> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I was wondering if I could ask this question here. > > Initially when I was thinking up how to do this I was expecting block > encryption to stay consistent from one 'encryption run' to the next, but I > found out later that most schemes r...

Why are you encrypting the files and not the filesystem and the channel? On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Xen <list at xenhideout.nl> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > I was wondering if I could ask this question here. > > Initially when I was thinking up how to do this I was expecting block > encryption to stay consistent from one 'encryption run' to the next, but I > found out later that most schemes ra...

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Xen <list at xenhideout.nl> wrote: > > As I said before, just rsyncing the lower layer (encrypted) of an eCryptfs >> volume may work well -- no multiple decryption-encryption cycles and what >> not.. Say you have an eCryptfs folder named ~/Private, then just keep your >> images in ~/Private and...

Hi Folks, I was wondering if I could ask this question here. Initially when I was thinking up how to do this I was expecting block encryption to stay consistent from one 'encryption run' to the next, but I found out later that most schemes randomize the result by injecting a random block or seed at the beginning and basing all other encrypted data on that. In order to prevent

...e able to connect on system(s). If I'm right, that sounds possible and not too complex to achieve, with a minimum knowledge of UNIX systems. We can discuss about that once I know if my understanding of your request was good enough ;) Cheers, mathias 2016-07-12 2:10 GMT+02:00 Xen <list at xenhideout.nl>: > I want to ask what is the most common approach, and most functional > smallest-subset-technology approach to achieving the following. > > > - a samba server is using different users for its clients and these users > are general unix users, owning files and whatnot on th...

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 01:19:37AM +0200, Xen wrote: > Jeremy Allison schreef op 12-07-2016 0:58: > >On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:41:24PM +0200, Xen wrote: > >>I wrote here how my filenames are getting mangled when getting sent > >>or received to the server. > >> > >>Server: current Ubuntu lookalike. > >> > >>Client: Older Synology

...ess.conf) - users are valid only as long as their shares are existing -> some script to activate / deactivate them from AD when share is removed would do. Whatever is the way you chose to deactivate them. That was just morning's idea, back to read. 2016-07-13 1:05 GMT+02:00 Xen <list at xenhideout.nl>: > mathias dufresne schreef op 12-07-2016 13:39: > >> Hi, >> >> Let me try to re-formulate, please tell me if I'm wrong. >> >> You have a bunch of users declared locally in /etc/passwd or something >> like that on one system. >> >> N...

I'm using samba to mount a share from a linux device onto a linux computer. Obviously, for some reason, I can *see* the symbolic links as links, however I cannot delete or create them. But the only Linux/Unix alternative seems to be NFS, which is not really suited for what I want (annoyance with users having to map, etc.) Is there any sort of commonsensical approach to this that can

Xen schreef op 02-07-2016 17:01: > The most annoying thing about samba (and applies to NFS as well) as a > client, is that when there is some network error; the entire system > may hang as all reads of the root filesystem (or the / directory) can > block until that network mount thing is resolved, practically > rendering your entire system frozen. > > Is there not a solution

Jeremy Allison schreef op 12-07-2016 0:58: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:41:24PM +0200, Xen wrote: >> I wrote here how my filenames are getting mangled when getting sent >> or received to the server. >> >> Server: current Ubuntu lookalike. >> >> Client: Older Synology diskstation with probably a modified >> mount.cifs. >> >> When I send

I want to ask what is the most common approach, and most functional smallest-subset-technology approach to achieving the following. - a samba server is using different users for its clients and these users are general unix users, owning files and whatnot on the fs. - a linux system as client now wants to "import" the users from the server without making them /fixed/ unix/passwd

Hi, I know this is not a samba _server_ issue but it is still an issue with my cifs.ko apparently... I have mounted over smb/cifs an older Freecom network drive. The mount is done on an older device as well, a Synology DiskStation running kernel 2.6.32 and using mount.cifs version 6.5 that I compiled myself. I am writing files to this mount, and while writing (using dd) the copy will just

Achim Gottinger schreef op 17-07-2016 4:47: > On my servers the uid is assigned to root in /etc/passwd and to > Administrator in samba. > With nscd getent passwd 0 resolves to Administrator and causes strage > behavior for for example ssh logins. With unscd it resolves to root > like it does without caching. Amazing. I will do so. Thanks.

I have a very peculiar issue. On my Synology NAS I have a bunch of LDAP users and SMB is configured by Synology to accept LDAP logins. So far so good. I log in through an LDAP user by specifying my "base dn" as the domain name, which is "ds" in my case, nice and short. I have 2 users. One user is present on my system with the same name, the other isn't. When I mount

Hi, I have some weird issue I don't know how to tackle. When I share a folder from a Unix (Linux) machine using a current version of Samba (smbd) and I mount it on an older Synology (2.6.32) the reading of files goes fine. However all files I create get the chacacters #EF80AF affixed to the filename, which is a Unicode code point for private extensions, or something of the kind.

Jeremy Allison schreef op 12-07-2016 23:26: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 02:10:41AM +0200, Xen wrote: >> I want to ask what is the most common approach, and most functional >> smallest-subset-technology approach to achieving the following. >> >> >> - a samba server is using different users for its clients and these >> users are general unix users, owning files

Hi, i have a rather weird and also problematic use case. My NAS provides permissions but I don't know how. The share is mounted using unix extensions and I am seeing user IDs. However my /local/ filesystem refuses me to allow to do anything unless I am root or set the noperms flag (ostensibly). This means that locally write access is denied but not remotely. The local user is UID 1000.

Rowland penny schreef op 14-07-2016 14:50: > If you have any users in /etc/passwd that are also in AD i.e if you > have user 'fred' in /etc/passwd and there is also a user 'ABC+fred' in > AD, then sorry, but one of them will have to go, they would be treated > as the same user. Are you entirely sure this is true? I don't yet know how ID mapping works in Samba.

Jeremy Allison schreef op 30-04-2016 1:06: >> Copying a file to my mounted samba share did not work, the files are >> created by they remain at 0 size. Then apparently smbd blocks in IO >> and never continues, never recovers. I cannot kill the process, I >> will have to reboot the NAS but it won't unmount filesystems so I >> need a hard reset. > > That

Rowland penny schreef op 16-07-2016 20:25: > On 16/07/16 14:08, Xen wrote: >> Rowland penny schreef op 14-07-2016 14:50: >> >>> If you have any users in /etc/passwd that are also in AD i.e if you >>> have user 'fred' in /etc/passwd and there is also a user 'ABC+fred' >>> in >>> AD, then sorry, but one of them will have to go,