similar to: Plugins: virtuals vs acls

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3845 Summary: Add --remove-source-files Product: rsync Version: 2.6.9 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: hashproduct+rsync@gmail.com

I upgraded 2.1 -> 2.2 something like a week ago because I needed INDEXPVT. Not sure if this crash started immediately or not, noticed it today looking at journalctl. Backtrace http://bpaste.net/raw/181944/ and pasted below. This seems to crash on every IMAP connection made, so any ideas for a possible client-level workaround are quite welcome until dovecot code improves here. root at

Hello, After researching the subject on the internet I concluded that Samba should take into account Unix file acls. During my tests I found the opposite. Only Unix file mode bits are respected, and file acls are ignored. If my initial assumption is correct and Samba do respect Unix file acls, then I am doing something wrong. Please see the setup below and point to what I am doing wrong.

I'm looking for info on using posix acls in samba. I'd like them to look and feel like nt acls. I'd like to use the windows client to set the acls on the samba server. I've got the official samba 3 howto book, but can't seem to figure things out from there. specifically, in the past I've used a force group entry in combined with create modes to keep shared files access to

I try to set up a Samba4-based Fileserver in an Samba3-DC enviroment. Filesystem is ext4, CIFS + NFS4 should be provided. The same ACLs should be used over both protocols. With Samba 3 this was possible (using POSIX 1003.1e DRAFT 17 ACLs only) . How can I do the same with Samba 4 ? Posix-ACLs set on the server with setfacl are recogniced on a windows-client. But every change I do on a

Mandi! Rowland penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > > And my Windows client works happily! > If you only had Unix clients, then you could stick with this way of doing > things, but you have Windows clients, so you need to work the Windows way > and make your Unix clients work the same way. No. In these years i've worked with 'POSIX ACLs', setting up scripts

Background: I am wanting to create shared folders (public namespace) with access control lists on the sub directories. Our implementation of dovecot (v1.0b7) uses many virtual users and domains and 1 actual user (vmail), all using maildir. So far I have successfully created the public namespace (Public_Folders) which every user can access but I'm having difficulty restricting access using

This might be more inclusive if I said, Linux Permissions vs POSIX ACLs vs vfs_xattr. I have recently begun to discover the power and flexibility of using POSIX ACLs (by mounting my EXT3/4 filesystems with the acl option). This solved alot of security permissions issues between Samba and Linux groups of users. As I have delved into this deeper and begun using the VFS object, vfs_xattr, things

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 07:27:00PM +0200, Reindl Harald via samba wrote: > > > Am 12.08.2016 um 18:57 schrieb Jeremy Allison via samba: > >On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:20:47AM -0500, Sergei Gerasenko via samba wrote: > >>It looks like this is a long known issue: > >> > >>https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10792 > > > >If by long known

To all: I was wondering if there was any talk regarding the possible inclusion into either kernel 2.4.x or 2.5.x of a general and standard ACL interface for file system security. I've used the ACL patch from acl.bestbits.at on ext3 & love it dearly except for the quota issues. Despite those issues I absolutely could not live without ACL's on large file servers with a few hundred or

Hi @all, with ZFS its recommended to create a new filesystem, for example for each user to give them a home directory. So far, so good. The homes should be under tank/export/home/staff and my intention is to restrict the ACL rights so only the user self can access his own home directory. I study the ZFS Admin Guide and found the aclmode and aclinherit options, IMHO for my intention the

[This is fairly far from the topic of the mailing-list: we may want to take further discussion to email or the tech list] Jeremy writes: > it violates the principle of > least suprises for the nfs user. ie. They may get access > denied when the UNIX perms say they should be granted access. Paul replies: > But wouldn't it also be a "surprise" when an NFS user finds

Am 03.01.19 um 15:29 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 15:08:46 +0100 > "Stefan G. Weichinger via samba" <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> >> We are in the process of switching over shares from the old way of >> doing this to Windows ACLs: >> >> disable "valid users" "write list" etc >>

Hello list, We are using virtual plugin for to provide users two additional folders: Company/all - it contains all messages in user's mailbox Company/favorites - here is flagged messages. Here is namespace part of config file: namespace private { prefix = Company/ separator = / location = virtual:/var/mail/virtual:INDEX=MEMORY:LAYOUT=maildir++ subscriptions = no }

On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 12:47:51PM -0500, Rufe Glick wrote: > Hello, > > After researching the subject on the internet I concluded that Samba should take into account Unix file acls. During my tests I found the opposite. Only Unix file mode bits are respected, and file acls are ignored. If my initial assumption is correct and Samba do respect Unix file acls, then I am doing something

Hello Jeremy, Friday, December 19, 2014, 3:48:51 PM, you wrote: > On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 12:47:51PM -0500, Rufe Glick wrote: >> Hello, >> After researching the subject on the internet I concluded that Samba should take into account Unix file acls. During my tests I found the opposite. Only Unix file mode bits are respected, and file acls are ignored. If my initial assumption is

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:20:47AM -0500, Sergei Gerasenko via samba wrote: > It looks like this is a long known issue: > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10792 If by long known you mean "as designed". As Samba supports ACL setting on files/directories we don't restrict what happens to them after creation. For creation you can set "create mask" and

Hi, Following the wiki page Setting_up_a_Share_Using_Windows_ACLs windows shows me this error after clicking on Shares: Disk Management could not start the Virtual Disk Service (VDS) on 'COMPUTER'. This can happen if the remote computer does not support VDS, or if a connection cannot be established because it was blocked by Windows Firewall. Tested on a new provisioned AD-DC server.

Mandi! Rowland penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > Do you have ANY Windows clients ? Sure! Most of my clients are windows. > If the answer is yes, then you need to follow the 'Setting up a share using > windows ACLs' page and make your Linux clients work with this. > If the answer is no, then you can follow the POSIX ACLs page. > Do not try to mix the two.

We are running a fileserver (Samba version 3.0.10-1.4E.9) on CentOS 4.4. No AD, clients are Windows XP and OS X. Linux acl's are used for access to directories and files. Each top-level folder belongs to a primary group with mode 2770. The acl's restrict access to lower level directories. We need to pass the acl's down the directory tree or else users may have unexpected access to