similar to: Samba4: error in schema?

Am 17.07.19 um 11:10 schrieb Rowland penny via samba: >> > I thought Samba always used schema version 47, so you should have the > objectclass & attributes in AD, this is the ldif for the objectclass: > > cn: ms-FVE-RecoveryInformation > ldapDisplayName: msFVE-RecoveryInformation > governsId: 1.2.840.113556.1.5.253 > objectClassCategory: 1 > rdnAttId: cn >

Hi, I am trying to implement bitlocker key management in samba4 ad. This has been posted a view times before: https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2015-December/196771.html https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2018-July/217168.html According to Andrew and this: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/orphan-topics/ws.10/cc722309(v=ws.10) the Schema should be ready for this.

On 17/07/2019 09:50, Christian Naumer via samba wrote: > Hi, > I am trying to implement bitlocker key management in samba4 ad. This has > been posted a view times before: > > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2015-December/196771.html > > https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2018-July/217168.html > > According to Andrew and this: > >

Hello The situation is the following : I've successfully created an auxiliary class with an attribute by following this method : http://semifershome.free.fr/semifer/index.php?2008/02/12/42-etendre-le-schema-active-directory-classes-attributs-et-display-specifiers The auxiliary class is "allowedService" and the attribute is "allowedServiceAttribute". The

HOn Tue, 26 Mar 2019 09:29:41 +0000 Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 05:18:20 +0100 > Franta Hanzlík <franta at hanzlici.cz> wrote: > > > Hi Tim and Rowland, thanks for Your support! > > I was thinking about e.g. Python 2.7.15 compatibility (as newer Samba > > versions require Python3), but You are right, here

Hello Samba Dancers, I tried to do function level upgrade on my testing instalation of samba. Finished upgrade from 4.18 to 4.20. I put ad dc functional level = 2016 line to smb.conf, restarted samba. But command samba-tool domain schemaupgrade --schema=2019 ends with error. Could I ask you check my progress or find solution? samba-tool domain schemaupgrade --schema=2019 Temporarily overriding

To get the automount schema to work with the git checkout of samba 4 I had to modify the automount schema files and separate the attributes from the classes. I also discovered that it's required to have the ntSecurityDescriptor , instanceType, and objectCategory attributes. Without these it will crash whenever you try to browse... I did alot of stopping samba, tarring of /usr/local/samba and

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 05:18:20 +0100 Franta Hanzlík <franta at hanzlici.cz> wrote: > Hi Tim and Rowland, thanks for Your support! > I was thinking about e.g. Python 2.7.15 compatibility (as newer Samba > versions require Python3), but You are right, here in DB can be > problem > - first Samba AD DC was created by migrating Samba3 NT4 domain to > Samba4 AD cca week ago

Hi Tim and Rowland, thanks for Your support! I was thinking about e.g. Python 2.7.15 compatibility (as newer Samba versions require Python3), but You are right, here in DB can be problem - first Samba AD DC was created by migrating Samba3 NT4 domain to Samba4 AD cca week ago (using 'samba-tool domain classicupgrade ...', according to Samba Wiki): On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:14:02 +1300 Tim

On 04/01/16 01:43, Jonathan Hunter wrote: > Hi, > > A while ago I successfully set permissions on a section of my LDAP / AD > tree, using either ADUC or ADSIEDIT (I forget which). These permissions > allowed my own user to access this section of the tree; I removed > permissions for 'Domain Admins' etc. to ensure that others would not be > able to view or change the

Hi, guys, I'm trying to create a PDC using Samba with an LDAP backend. According to all the guides I read, this should be fairly easy really, but I've done nothing else for the last week and it still doesn't work the way the manual says it should! As far as I can see, everything is set up and working correctly right up to the point when I try and join a machine to the domain.

Mandi! Rowland Penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > S-1-5-21-160080369-3601385002-3131615632-1314 Bingo! Exactly the 'Restricted' group that own the users i use for generico LDAP access! I really think that we have found the trouble! Now... how can i fix it? ;-) And... why that vaule get not propagated?! Thanks. -- dott. Marco Gaiarin GNUPG Key ID: 240A3D66

Hi, I have setup samba 3.0.7 with LDAP and NetApps Filers as our file store. We are going to lots of departmental shares, firstly we want only people from their own dept to have access to their department share, but users from other departments may need access to other dept shares, i would like to set up permissions on each dept share so a group is applied, then every user is added to the

Mandi! Rowland Penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > You need to explicitly ask for it, for instance: Oh, cool! Seems effectivaly different: root at vdcsv1:~# ldbsearch -H /var/lib/samba/private/sam.ldb -b "DC=ad,DC=fvg,DC=lnf,DC=it" "(cn=prova123)" nTSecurityDescriptor # record 1 dn: CN=prova123,CN=Aliases,OU=FVG,DC=ad,DC=fvg,DC=lnf,DC=it nTSecurityDescriptor:

Hello I will try give you best answer what I can. - alma linux 9, fresh installation, for testing only in virtualbox - packages from Sernet, installad via YUM from oficial repo - installed version 4.18 (same on original linux) - moved backup from original server, /var/lib/samba + /etc/krb, /etc/default/samba, /etc/samba - original domain created if I remember on 4.15 or 4.16, then schema

Hi, A while ago I successfully set permissions on a section of my LDAP / AD tree, using either ADUC or ADSIEDIT (I forget which). These permissions allowed my own user to access this section of the tree; I removed permissions for 'Domain Admins' etc. to ensure that others would not be able to view or change the data - this has worked great for many months. I have just tried to add a new

Mandi! Rowland Penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > Whilst there are attributes that do not get replicated between DC's, > the majority are, so each DC should allow the same access. > Do you have access to the DC ? > Can you run the search locally ? Sure! As just stated, local access (via ldbsearch against the local SAM) works as expected: root at vdcpp1:~# ldbsearch

Thanks for getting back to me. Sadly I've not had the time today to attempt the reproduction. Can you, just to save me time, double-check if this happens on a server with the Samba 4.20 being a just from-our-tarball Samba and show the logs that gives? Thanks, Andrew Bartlett On Wed, 2024-04-10 at 10:04 +0000, Tom?? Havl?n via samba wrote: > HelloI will try give you best answer what I can.

Hello, please check my progress I did it on the same virtual Centos 9 to avoid posibilities of differencies between original and new installed linux - backup /var/lib/samba storage - uninstalled sernet-samba - installed samba 4.20.0 from tar source code - location default /usr/local/samba - replaced files from /var/lib/samba to /usr/local/samba (to right location) - started samba - done -

I have been trying to figure out what this error is: Jan 29 18:23:07 dc2 smbd[20729]: [2004/01/29 18:23:07, 0] rpc_server/srv_util.c:get_domain_user_groups(371) Jan 29 18:23:07 dc2 smbd[20729]: get_domain_user_groups: primary gid of user [barbara] is not a Domain group ! Jan 29 18:23:07 dc2 smbd[20729]: get_domain_user_groups: You should fix it, NT doesn't like that Jan 29 18:23:08 dc2