similar to: nested groups not working with sudo and winbind

On 2015-10-29 12:23, Rowland Penny wrote: > On 29/10/15 09:47, Davor Vusir wrote: >> On 2015-10-29 09:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >>> On 29/10/15 08:34, Davor Vusir wrote: >>>> Hi all! >>>> >>>> We have got many delegations in our AD. To add a certain >>>> administrator group to the local Administrators group you can use

mathias dufresne skrev den 2015-10-29 14:31: > I'm thick :D > I don't really understand more :( > No. I'm having trouble explaining. Maybe these threads are more enlightning: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2015-April/191020.html and http://www.spinics.net/lists/samba/msg123646.html. > Samba can share file, printers and when samba hosts a domain samba is also

On 2015-10-29 21:32, Rowland Penny wrote: > On 29/10/15 19:38, Davor Vusir wrote: >> >> >> mathias dufresne skrev den 2015-10-29 14:31: >>> I'm thick :D >>> I don't really understand more :( >>> >> >> No. I'm having trouble explaining. Maybe these threads are more >> enlightning: >>

Hello folks, Been beating my head with an winbind and pam just behaving oddly. I have following various HOW-TO's, wiki's, and docs, and just can't seem to get past a wall. Here a some of the issues: - the 1st attempt at ssh'ing to a server gives me a 'Wrong Password' in the logs. Here's an exact snippet: Aug 6 18:45:40 mia21654bcu001 sshd[5371]: pam_winbind(sshd):

I''m trying to use ssh_authorized_key to manage my user''s ssh keys. I basically have this (across a couple of files): class user::virtual { @user { "seph": ensure => "present", uid => "2001", comment => "seph", home => "/home/seph", shell =>

Hello, I''m a puppet newbie and I''m having trouble getting my virtual user setup to work. Can someone please tell me what''s wrong with this setup? # virtual.pp # class virtual_users::virtual { @group { "users": gid => "100", ensure => present } @user { "lmoore": password =>

thanks for suggestion, in other words you use only ACLs for users denying all for groups, unfortunately we had many group such as domain users, secretary, finance, etc belonging to users for which we need to apply at least 770 in order to gain a simplified permission management using groups the actual dirty workaround I applied was to track new files/dir by tailing with follow ( tail -f ) a

Howdy folks, I'm having a weird issue here. I have winbind running on several other servers on our domain, and they are working fine. From what I can tell the configuration is identical, as I custom rolled my own RPM that set's all the config parameters. What's happening is when I try to ssh to this one specific server, it seems looking at the logs it's trying to continuously

The following function is based on code I found here in an earlier thread. define sudoer() { augeas { "sudo${name}": context => "/files/etc/sudoers", changes => [ "set spec[last() + 1]/user ${name}", "set spec[last()]/host_group/host ALL", "set spec[last()]/host_group/command NOPASSWD: ALL", "set

I'm thick :D I don't really understand more :( Samba can share file, printers and when samba hosts a domain samba is also acting as a users database. All that can be managed from Windows side or Linux side. Delegation on Windows is quiet well documented I expect by Microsoft itself and in the Samba Wiki. According to that I expect your question is about how to delegate Samba management

On 29/10/15 19:38, Davor Vusir wrote: > > > mathias dufresne skrev den 2015-10-29 14:31: >> I'm thick :D >> I don't really understand more :( >> > > No. I'm having trouble explaining. Maybe these threads are more > enlightning: > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2015-April/191020.html and >

On 2015-10-29 09:52, Rowland Penny wrote: > On 29/10/15 08:34, Davor Vusir wrote: >> Hi all! >> >> We have got many delegations in our AD. To add a certain >> administrator group to the local Administrators group you can use GPO >> for Windowsservers. As Samba does not understand GPO I have initially >> used the "username map" feature to add a

On 2015-10-30 09:07, Davor Vusir wrote: > On 2015-10-29 21:32, Rowland Penny wrote: >> On 29/10/15 19:38, Davor Vusir wrote: >>> >>> >>> mathias dufresne skrev den 2015-10-29 14:31: >>>> I'm thick :D >>>> I don't really understand more :( >>>> >>> >>> No. I'm having trouble explaining. Maybe these

On 29/10/15 09:47, Davor Vusir wrote: > On 2015-10-29 09:52, Rowland Penny wrote: >> On 29/10/15 08:34, Davor Vusir wrote: >>> Hi all! >>> >>> We have got many delegations in our AD. To add a certain >>> administrator group to the local Administrators group you can use >>> GPO for Windowsservers. As Samba does not understand GPO I have

I've checked the samba code (sessetup) and found out that samba always send spnego packet when Extended Security capability is ON. (This can't be turned off/on ie. "use spnego = false") Does it mean I can "never" connect to smb server that doesn't support spnego if Extended Security is supported by server? Is my understanding correct?

Hi Vincent, have you found a solution that makes "force directory mode = 2770" able to apply to new created folders ? I have a similar problem: if I set by hand (eg. chmod 2770) the folder A and then I try to create an X element into that folder through samba I get the result needed ( group of X become overriden from parent folder A ) but the problem is that the new element X not

Hi Lorenzo and Dale, My setup is like Lorenzo's completely based on setgid being propagated. The filesystem should determine the group used starting at a certain directory. Different "root" directories have different groups, and security is based on groups, not users. I tried all sorts of settings combinations, alseo "force directory mode = 2770", but none propagates

For some time I had been running samba 3.0.10 from RHEL4. I have a samba -> cups -> pdf printer set up which uses the user supplied job name for the output file. The job name was formatted like this "smbprn.00001020 Microsoft Word - Test.doc". Since then, RHEL have updated to samba 3.0.25. The job name supplied to cups is now a random string of characters like

Hi there I've just upgraded to 3.2.2 and it still looks like nested group support isn't finished? e.g. if I have "domain1/user1" in group "domain2/group1" and that in turn is in "domain3/group2" (i.e. domain1/user1 is in domain3/group2), then "getent group domain3/group2" should return domain1/user1 - and yet it doesn't. "winbind enum

Hi, i visited wiki.samba.org and read the "Release Planning for Samba 3.2" information and the "Release Planning for Samba 3.3" information. So my question is: Is samba 3.2 development stopped and all concentration given to Samba 3.3 ? Because there isnt any further release note available for 3.2, but instead there are some notes for 3.3 ? Bye and thanks for your