similar to: [Announce] Samba 3.2.5 Available for Download

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Release Announcements ===================== This is a security release in order to address CVE-2008-4314 ("Potential leak of arbitrary memory contents"). o CVE-2008-4314 Samba 3.0.29 to 3.2.4 can potentially leak arbitrary memory contents to malicious clients. The original security announcement for this and past

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Release Announcements ===================== This is a security release in order to address CVE-2008-4314 ("Potential leak of arbitrary memory contents"). o CVE-2008-4314 Samba 3.0.29 to 3.2.4 can potentially leak arbitrary memory contents to malicious clients. The original security announcement for this and past

What is this error ? is this harmful ? *CLI>*CLI> dahdi restart [Mar 23 14:01:06] WARNING[4314]: chan_dahdi.c:17422 process_dahdi: Ignoring any changes to 'userbase' (on reload) at line 23. [Mar 23 14:01:06] WARNING[4314]: chan_dahdi.c:17422 process_dahdi: Ignoring any changes to 'vmsecret' (on reload) at line 31. [Mar 23 14:01:06] WARNING[4314]: chan_dahdi.c:17422

I''m testing how xen and grub2 can work together. I''m using xen 3.4.2 and grub2 1.97+20091115-1 from debian sid. After many failed attempts I''ve discovered that on my system the first argument that grub2 should pass to the linux kernel is lost. This is my working grub2 configuration: menuentry "Xen 3.4.0 / Debian GNU/Linux, Linux 2.6.31-1-xen-amd64" {

I''m testing how xen and grub2 can work together. I''m using xen 3.4.2 and grub2 1.97+20091115-1 from debian sid. After many failed attempts I''ve discovered that on my system the first argument that grub2 should pass to the linux kernel is lost. This is my working grub2 configuration: menuentry "Xen 3.4.0 / Debian GNU/Linux, Linux 2.6.31-1-xen-amd64" {

Does unix password sync still work in Samba 4.1.6? I'm trying to debug setting passwords on a system... I have this in smb.conf passdb backend = samba_dsdb passwd program = /usr/local/sbin/passtest.sh %u passwd chat = *password* %n\n passwd chat debug = Yes unix password sync = Yes My passtest.sh script is very simple... #!/bin/bash set -e user=$1

Server Specifics: #uname -a Linux denali 2.0.35 #1 Thu Jul 23 14:01:04 EDT 1998 i686 unknown #rpm -q samba samba-2.0.3-19990228 using encrypted passwords... Problem Client Specifics: Windows 95 OSR2 Symptoms: There is a long (several second) hesitation when I try to open share on the samba server. Example: Drive U: is mapped to the user shares. If I double-click drive U: under My

I have a large installation >20k users. We're using samba4 for AD Authentication, and also email address validation. I'm trying to edit the @INDEXLIST in sam.ldb to add an index on otherMailbox to speed up searches (0.05 sec for indexed, vs 2.5 sec for non-indexed searches) I'm finding that when I use ldbedit to do this, it appears to add the additional @IDXATTR. However, when I

When I try to manage samba shares from windows, I cannot reliably get the Security Tab to show up. I have tried many reprovisions, sometimes it works, sometimes not. I cannot figure out what I'm doing wrong. How the domain is provisioned... samba-tool domain provision \ --domain=avails \ --host-name=fs.avails.com \ --host-ip=10.2.2.1 \ --adminpass='not2forget!' \

Hey all...for whatever reason my caller id doesn't appear to be working. My setup is simple (Wildcard FXO and thats it) and I'm just expecting the Caller ID to show up on the console. I'm seeing this: *CLI> -- Starting simple switch on 'Zap/1-1' NOTICE[262161]: File callerid.c, Line 238 (callerid_feed): Caller*ID failed checksum NOTICE[262161]: File chan_zap.c, Line

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Boris wrote: > On Thursday 20 February 2014 20:45:32 Boris wrote: >> Dovecot 2.2.9-1 accepts SETACL commands that share mailboxes to non-existent >> mailboxes. There is no error message. Is this intended behavior? There is a "false friend" here. A "mailbox" in the tongue of many English

In a mailbox that has ACL restrictions on both DELETE and EXPUNGE (i.e. no 'e' or 't' rights), I see the following: 3 UID STORE 3173 (UNCHANGEDSINCE 353) +FLAGS \deleted 3 OK Store completed. (UID 3173 is not flagged \deleted) [...] 6 UID EXPUNGE 1:* 6 OK Expunge completed. (At least 1 UID is flagged \deleted in mailbox) Shouldn't these commands be returning

Hello everybody, Here again with a Xenbr0 bridge problem I''m a Gentoo user, xen-sources-2.6.34 and I always used the bridge from eth0 to xenbr0. Here''s what I get at boot time: * Bringing up interface eth0 * null [...] * Starting Xen control daemon ... And the bridge doesn''t come up. The normal behaviour should be that the Xenbr0 bridge comes up automatically, but

Hello, I have a dual-GPU card GeForce 7950 GX2 (PCI ID 10de:0294). Unfortunately, I cannot make a dump using renouveau, because the program crashes. The backtrace looks like this: Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x00000000004153af in read_fb_ramin (instanceMem=4, offset=2) at objects.c:4089 4089 return fb[((fb_size - (ramin_block*512*1024) + ramin_inst)/4) +

[This email is either empty or too large to be displayed at this time]

Hi, I'm using squid+samba/winbindd to do proxy authentication for a AD domain. Using samba 3.0.29 this was working fine. This week I saw 3.2 was released stable, so I decided to upgrade. The compile (using solaris 8, 64bit, gcc 3.4.6) went well and I copied the secrets.tdb to the new version, so I wouldn't need to rejoin the domain. After this starting samba also succeeded, "wbinfo

Hello list! Just wanted to confirm whether this CVE affects the 3.0.4 version of Samba.. The samba.org website claims "This security advisory is applicable to all Samba 3.0.x releases to date" Yet the actual CVE [1] has "Versions: Samba 3.0.0 - 3.0.29 (inclusive)" The CVE suggests that the version 3.0.4 would not be affected, my confused! Thanks in advance, Derek [1]

Greetings list, I just upgraded my main file server, and copied over a dump of my LDAP database, samba conf files, tdbs, etc. Everything fired up OK and runs, except: -Some users (perhaps 5 or 6 out of 125) can't log in, getting the "domain unavailable" message -I can't rejoin them to the domain - the process appears to succeed, but doesn't -One of the machine accounts

Hi Timo, Hi *, I just recognized that the new imap-acl plugin in dovecot 1.2 does not know the obsolete rights 'd' and 'c' when setting. According to RFC 4314 section 2.1.1.: If a client includes the "d" right in a rights list, then it MUST be treated as if the client had included every member of the "delete" right. and If a client includes

Jerry, The patch for 3.0.29 to 3.0.30 is broken; can you fix? James -- Patch Results -- Patch #10 (patch-3.0.29-3.0.30.diffs.gz): + /usr/bin/gzip -d + patch -p1 -s 146 out of 146 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file docs/Samba3-ByExample.pdf.rej 8 out of 8 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file docs/Samba3-Developers-Guide.pdf.rej 194 out of 194 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file