similar to: Hide Unreadable and user ACLs

Hi guys, we are using samba 3.0.4 as domain member server (security=ADS) in our Active Directory Domain. In order not to compromise social peace, we use POSIX ACLs in conjunction with the hide unreadable option to hide folders/files from users. I'll show you an example to explain the problem: I'm the user "SCHARRNET+M006U122" (SCHARRNET=domain suffix). I'm connecting to

Hi, we've got a worse problem with our s.3.0.4 file server. The server is configured as a domain member server and is running in security=ADS mode. We use the hide unreadable parameter in conjunction with posix ACLs to ensure, that our users only see those folders, on which they have been authorized. With s.2.2.8a everything worked fine. Yesterday we migrated to s.3.0.4 and have now the

I'm running Samba 3.0.4 on Red Hat Enterprise ES v3 (Update 2), utilizing ACLs on ext3. Yesterday I discovered that my backup application (Galaxy 5.0) doesn't back up ACLs and won't until the next release (sometime this fall). I figured that I'd do a "poor man's backup" of the ACLs by running "getfacl -R --absolute-names /shares > /root/acls" on a daily

Hello We have a Samba 3.0.11 Fileserver running on Solaris and joined to an Active Directory. I have shares, with many directories, and I want to hide the directories, people are not allowed to access anyway. So I engaged the "hide unreadable files" option. This basically works. The Problem arises, when the user is logged on locally (not authenticated to the Domain) and mounts the

The "hide unreadable = yes" option gives strange results with samba 3.x. Everything works fine when the server runs as a domain controller. Users see the directories they are supposed to (unix group permission) in the share. Turning off domain control and setting "security = DOMAIN", however, hides every directory in the share unless you are an admin user. I can cd to the

Hello everyone I am trying to use "hide unreadable = yes" in my [global] section and having some problems - I make a share and then add "valid users = @MYDOMAIN+group" - this works to protect access, but it is still visible to non-priveleged users (even though they cant get in) - is there something I need to do to make these shares hidden? Thanks, Hamish

Hello, I'm new to this list, so please excuse, if my problem as already be solved or is "handmade". My Question: We set up Samba 2.2.5 with ACLs and everything works fine. We want to use a very flat hirarchie, so we have one share for the users and one share for the groups. To prevent our people from feeling uncomfortable, we want to hide the directories to which they don't

Hello, ? i am using samba 4.1 ? i have an folder on a samba share with 3000 files, created with the following script: for i in {1..3000}; do dd if=/dev/urandom of=test$i bs=512k count=1; done ? When i save a file with word2010/2013 to this folder, everything works. But when i enable "hide unreadable=yes" on this share, File saving with word needs about 10seconds! ? The user can

Hi all. I thying settings the option "hide unreadable" but not work. I tested in global section and share section, follow my settings now. after various tests. # Global parameters [global] workgroup = BATLAB realm = BATLAB.CORP netbios name = GAUSS server role = active directory domain controller server services = s3fs, rpc, nbt, wrepl,

On 16-04-2024 16:21, Konrad Jacobi via samba wrote: > hi, > on a samba domain member file server i'm using dfs root shares with > multiple msdfs symlinks pointing to other shares (on the same server), > which works fine. These linked shares have different access rights, > therefore a user might have access to one linked share but not to > another. > Another option is

Hi all! I have a problem with the "hide unreadable = yes" option. In windows xp professional sp2 with explorer, or ssh or smbclient, either directories and files does not hide. I'm using debian 4.0 with XFS file system, ACL, kernel 2.6.18-5-amd64, and samba 3.0.24. Any idea? It is a bug? Thanks! -- Diego _________________________________________________________________

hi, on a samba domain member file server i'm using dfs root shares with multiple msdfs symlinks pointing to other shares (on the same server), which works fine. These linked shares have different access rights, therefore a user might have access to one linked share but not to another. Is there any option to hide msdfs-symlinks to shares that a user cannot read? (the same as 'hide

Hello, I am using samba 3.6.6 I would like to use the option "hide unreadable = yes" but only for directories because the actual option slow down the access to directories with a large number of files and I don't need to hide these files. Is it possible and how can I do this ? And, will it improve directory access ? Thanks -- David

Potential fix for https://bugzila.redhat.com/559962 Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones New in Fedora 11: Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 70 libraries supprt'd http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW http://www.annexia.org/fedora_mingw -------------- next part --------------

Hello, I'm testing a simple delphi application that have 3 forms. >From FORM1 (the main form) I press a button to show FORM2, then from FORM2 I press a button to show FORM3, when I close FORM3, FORM1 becomes focused instead of FORM2. Every time you close a form or a dialog the application main form becomes the active one. This only happend in KDE, allowing windows manager to control the

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 9:04 AM Nux! <nux at li.nux.ro> wrote: > There was a recent thread about Redhat's removal of drivers from LSI > SAS2, it's probably the problem you are facing. > It can be worked around with the help of Elrepo repo. > > > https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2019-October/173682.html > > >

This avoids an error where the appliance cannot start up because this dbus helper script (which is never used) is unreadable by non-root. Why do we have unreadable binaries in Fedora at all? You may wonder: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-October/msg00987.html Maintaining a blacklist like this is generally a bad thing. We should change this code so it automatically

> On 30. Jul 2020, at 19.33, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at open-xchange.com> wrote: > >> >> On 30/07/2020 19:29 Justin Coleman <jmcoleman at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Hi folks, >> I have an old server running qmail with several years of mails in maildir format I want to migrate to a new server, without requiring fresh client download of

Move the removal of the files which don't exist or cannot be read, doing it after the filtering with excludefiles and hostfiles files. This avoid stat'ing files which will be excluded later anyway, hence reducing the I/O during a supermin build phase. --- src/build.ml | 32 ++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/build.ml

Hello, I need to expand the membership of a custom system user depending on the availability of some group on the target system i.e. user { "logger": name => "logger", ensure => "present", groups => ["adm", "wheel", "this _group_ if it exists"], shell => "/bin/bash"; } The