similar to: vfs_acl_xattr - moving files/folders

On 8/18/23 09:55, Sebastian Neustein via samba wrote: > With the default settings of vfs_acl_xattr samba takes posix acls into > account when delivering data - how can I activate > "acl_xattr:ignore system acls = yes" > without loosing the information saved in posix acls? Background: our > future file system won't be able to support acls. Sorry, but this is

Hi Ralph > On 8/18/23 09:55, Sebastian Neustein via samba wrote: >> With the default settings of vfs_acl_xattr samba takes posix acls >> into account when delivering data - how can I activate >> "acl_xattr:ignore system acls = yes" >> without loosing the information saved in posix acls? Background: our >> future file system won't be able to support

Sebastian Neustein wrote: > I have to migrate our data from one old samba server to a new one. Due > to various reasons we had to change some settings. Now I struggle to > get the acls right. > ?Previously the acls were stored via posix and extended attributes, > now they are stored only in extended attributes With the default settings of vfs_acl_xattr samba takes posix acls

On 8/21/23 18:20, Sebastian Neustein wrote: > The storage has come a long way with various changes of the smb.conf. It > is possible that at the time of creation of a file/directory > vfs_acl_xattr was not active. This could mean that the directory does > not have any extended attributes written to it and ACLs are only defined > with POSIX ACLs. In this case I would need a

I noticed that vfs_acl_xattr doesn't work unless all the inherit and map inherit acl parameters are set to yes. Which is fine but if I turn off inherit owner it completely breaks inheritance and security.NTACL never gets set for the file/directory that's created by the user. I want the uid of the user who's connected to be written and not the owner of the parent directory. Is there

>From samba 3.3.0 release notes, it seems like samba 3.3.x is at least experimenting using xattr to store NT ACL, which can eventually provide better NT ACL support. I tried similar features with samba 4.0.0 alpha6, which works very nice. Is there any plan to provide same level of NT ACL support with samba 3.3.x? If there is such plan, any targeted date for that? Thanks, Ying

On 16/06/2023 16:20, Tam?s N?meth via samba wrote: > Dear Rowland, > > I'm trying to write a single email answering all the question of your > recent emails: > > >> Hi Tamas, I have been reviewing you numerous posts on this list about >> this project, are you aware that you have been posting for 6 months ? > > Well, not exactly :-) Only 5 months and 5

Dear Rowland, I'm trying to write a single email answering all the question of your recent emails: > Hi Tamas, I have been reviewing you numerous posts on this list about > this project, are you aware that you have been posting for 6 months ? Well, not exactly :-) Only 5 months and 5 days :-) However, this specific thread is only 9 days old. I had a few mails in january, february,

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens > Rowland Penny via samba > Verzonden: vrijdag 21 september 2018 10:11 > Aan: samba at lists.samba.org > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] [SOLVED] Samba 4: 'Access denied' > error when accessing user profile during logon > > On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 09:35:13 +0200 >

On 15/06/2023 16:18, Tam?s N?meth via samba wrote: Hi Tamas, I have been reviewing you numerous posts on this list about this project, are you aware that you have been posting for 6 months ? In your last post there was this: [quote] this "piling up" of ACL information doesn't happen either on a native Windows file server or with vfs_acl_xattr [/quote] Does this mean you do not

Dear mailing list members, our Samba server provides several shares, one of them is sometimes (about one time a week) not accessible. The log (level 2) does not provide any hint where the problem could be located, quite contrary to the error message on the mac OS and Windows 10 client side (you have not the required rights), it tells that the authentication is succeeded. Increasing the log level

Hello list, I've got a question from reading Using Samba 3rd, where it puts: ... the final permission is caculated by below filters in the order used by Samba: 1. Apply any DOS attribute mapping options << I take this as either map DOS attributes to execute bits, or store DOS attributes in extended attributes. Correct? 2. Apply the create mask settings 3. Apply the force

On Thu, 06 Jun 2024 13:37:34 -0400 Mark Foley via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > I have no doubt you have said this many times before, but no to me -- > at least not that I can recall. This is new territory for me. This > share started off way-back-when as a Microsoft Sharepoint repository > which was then migrated to a plain Samba share (I presume this is

On Thu Jun 6 14:28:46 2024 Rowland Penny <rpenny at samba.org> wrote; > > On Thu, 06 Jun 2024 13:37:34 -0400 > Mark Foley via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > [snip] > > Basically, the old NT4-style domains relied on setting permissions in > the share part of the smb.conf file, but, by using vfs_acl_xattr, you > can set finer control from

Thank you for the answer. I understand that default (POSIX) ACLs will lead to similar results, but the parent directory of this file had no default ACL, and when opening its properties / security dialog I also don't see any inheritance specified. However I can accept that SaMBa works this way and I can even see that Word did some deliberate ACL manipulation, but this "piling up" of

Since all my Samba AD member servers rely on vfs_acl_xattr to take care of Windows permissions, is there any performance advantage to building samba with a static vfs_acl_xattr module? (./configure --with-static-modules=vfs_acl_xattr) Thank you

Hello everyone, we are running a CTDB cluster and share folders on ocfs2 volumes via samba using the vfs acl_xattr to store acls in extended attributes. It works fine with Ubuntu 16.04 LTS. I'm currently testing 18.04 and have a weird (but reproducable) ACL behaviour: I grant two users a and user b full access on a folder from a windows client. (Share permissions are fullcontrol for

On Tue Jun 4 14:08:30 2024 Rowland Penny <rpenny at samba.org> wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 13:22:49 -0400 > Mark Foley via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > I have a Linux file server that is an AD Domain Member. It shares the > > following (smb.conf): > > > > [public] > > path = /public > > store dos attributes = no >

I missed than one. Very useful hint. Now I can set ACLs again. Thank you. Il 15/02/2018 13:23, Miguel Medalha ha scritto: > Here's what I was looking for. > > On Tue Mar 22 08:19:42 UTC 2016 Uri Simchoni posted the following to > the samba-technical mailing list: > > "Attached patch avoids setting the POSIX ACLs to match the NT ACLs, if > "ignore system

On 18/01/15 15:18, Dr. Harry Knitter wrote: > Rowland Penny <rowlandpenny at googlemail.com> schrieb am 18.01.2015: > > >> Lets deal with the obvious first, your workgroup name, you give it as >> 'mydomain.lan' , now is that the actual workgroup name ? If so, then it >> shouldn't have the dot '.' in it, but > Never had poblems with that. And