similar to: NTLMv1 v. NTLMv2 ; more than one "identity" on a TCP connection

Good evening, On the bottom of page 53, section 4.1.2.2 in the SNIA spec (http://www.snia.org/tech_activities/CIFS/CIFS-TR-1p00_FINAL.pdf), it states if the dialect is NT LM 0.12 and extended security is off (I.e., use "traditional" NTLMv2/NTLMv2 authentication w/o SecurityBlobs), the SessionSetupAndX response is as shown in section 4.1.2.2 with a word count = 4. However, what I have

Hello, i set up a squid proxy that should authenticate users against a samba PDC using winbind. It works fine as long i allow ntlmv1: on the PDC: ntlm auth = yes lanman auth = no client ntlmv2 auth = yes If i restrict the domains authentication method to ntlmv2 - that's what i want - with these settings: ntlm auth = no lanman auth = no client

Rowland said: >> Is there a set of settings to restore the mapping of AD users to pre-existing Unix Users? >No >> >> Does the official Samba distributed project source continue to support AD Users mapping to pre-existing Unix Users? >I do not think it ever did. I found this reference quickly from google describing the previous behavior. Winbind was always optional

Folks, Our campus AD team has decided that they ... >Need to disable LM/NTLMv1 authentication support to provide greater >security and be consistent with the CITES authentication roadmap. Noble thoughts, but there hasn't been much thought of the ramifications for other, interoperable systems like Samba. I can see that modern Samba versions support NTLMv1 and NTLMv2 methods.

I know NTLMv1 isn't secure and NTLMv2 is better. But I need to test a client's NTMLv1 compatibility when the server does not support NTLMv2 and to do that I need samba (current version 3.0.33 via CentOS 4) to not try to negotiate NTMLv2. All the searches I've done tell me how to enable NTLMv2, but specifying: [global] encrypt passwords = yes ntlm auth = yes

There is a samba compiled without winbind support, with the following options configured: workgroup = MYDOMAIN security = domain allow trusted domains = yes add user script = /usr/sbin/pw useradd %u -m -Y -M 755 When a Windows user MYDOMAIN\john connects to the samba server, he is mapped to the Unix user john. If there is no Unix user "john", it is created by the add user script. How

Hello, everyone, I'm trying to mount a CIFS share served by Samba using mount.cifs with NTLMv2 authentication. According to 'man mount.cifs' the option "sec=ntlmv2" should be supported, but it keeps giving me "mount error(22): Invalid argument". The Samba server enforces the use of NTLMv2. When allowing for NTLMv1 on both sides everything works just fine. The

Hi: I have Samba 3.0.2a running on Fedora Core 1. This server is set to be Domain PDC and I am looking to have clients attach to it NTLMv2 only. After looking over the man page for smb.conf, I have set the two options that I thought would accomplish: [Global] lanman auth = no ntlm auth = no On the workstation side, I have set HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa\lmcompatibilitylevel

Hi folks, I've been testing out Windows Vista Enterprise today. It defaults to only using NTLMV2 authentication. I'm testing with Samba 3.0.23d running on Sparc/Solaris 8. Samba is configured with security = domain The password server is a Windows Server 2003 domain controller. I've joined Samba to the domain. I simply can't get Vista to connect unless I change its security

Hi all. Just looking for some guidance as to what works, and what doesn't. Recently I've noticed that no matter what I do, I can't seem to get NTLMv2 to negotiate using Windows Vista, Windows 7 or Mac OS X 10.6.x against Solaris 10 Samba 3.0.37. If I 'tune' the client OS that it only negotiates with NTLMv1, all is well. In my global block, on the Solaris Samba server, I

While building Samba 3 for SuSE linux 9.0 I have a problem with the AFS component (it builds fine if I omit the --with-afs and --with-fake-kaserver options). During configure I did get a warning: checking whether to use AFS clear-text auth... yes checking whether to use AFS fake-kaserver... yes checking for /usr/include/afs... yes checking afs.h usability... no checking afs.h presence... no

Hello, We have samba 3.0.23 installed. We are using free radius to take authentication requests from a nortel vpn server and using ntlm_auth trying to authenticate users against AD. This setup works fine when on the AD side ntlmv1 and ntlmv2 are enabled. (IE. Users can authenticate). However, when only ntlmv2 is enabled users are unable to authenticate. I have searched various places and while

Hi Thanks in advance. I know my question below is not really related with samba but I'm really confused, and you guys are expert on windows authentication, I really hope you have patience to read this and I'll appreciate any of your help. I learned a lot from this post http://lists.samba.org/archive/jcifs/2008-October/008227.html. I know that a "man in the middle" technique,

On 21/04/19 17:12, Rowland Penny wrote: > On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 08:59:01 +0930 > Stephen Davies via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> I have been a bit divorced from Samba for a while and am stumped by a >> recently seen issue. >> >> My Samba server (V4.8.3) is Centos 7 and the remote clients are >> windoze boxes at the other end of a VPN

smbtorture NEGNOWAIT causes a core dump with a message "Abnormal server exit: multiple negprot's are not permitted". Is that truely by design?? I am running Samba 3.0.23d as AD member server and have smbtorture running on the same machine. Kind regards, Jens Appended: The final second of the smbd... [2007/01/30 16:48:38, 3] smbd/oplock_linux.c:linux_init_kernel_oplocks(260)

hi there, is there a way to have sambas internal ldap server reject plaintext connections? something similar to the ssf-settings in openldap's acls? i was already thinking about instructing iptables to drop all connections to port 389 - but that would effectively rule out starttls and force the clients to use ldaps, which has been deprectated a long time ago. thank you & with kind

Hai, Im wondering here.. If the client is a windows 10 pc connecting, > ../source3/smbd/negprot.c:419(reply_nt1) using SPNEGO > ../source3/smbd/negprot.c:761(reply_negprot) Selected protocol NT LM 0.12 > ../source3/smbd/process.c:554(receive_smb_talloc) > receive_smb_raw_talloc failed for client > ipv4:10.55.66.82:59271 read error = NT_STATUS_CONNECTION_RESET. And i

I'm running Centos 4.3 and Samba 3.0.24. I have an OpenLDAP backend. I have successfully got a Windows Domain to work, Windows XP -> Samba -> OpenLDAP. I can add machines to the domain and I can login and change passwords. The trouble is that I'm using NTLM and have been told that I must upgrade to NTLMv2, but I'm having great difficulty doing so. I have existing NTLM users. I

I have Samba AD-domain with two fileservers and two Samba DS-servers. Most people can authenticate OK, but one user always gets "wrong password". I tried changing this user's password, and was able to connect by using smbclient, and I was also able to map this drive using the user's username and password on my own windows 10 workstation. Also; # wbinfo -a username Enter

Hello experts, I?ll try and keep this brief but detailed (if that?s possible.). I?m sure I don?t understand the technologies sufficiently but I believe I?m seeing counter-intuitive behavior with my Samba 3 setup. What I want is nice, tight Win 2K3 security. What I?ve got is ADS integration, including domain user authentication using winbind, but I can?t get the security level right. Problem