similar to: Help needed - One question is about samba group policy and another is about samba and openchange install.

Hi guys, I am so thrilled by samba 4 it makes me go to bed smiling J Here is my setup. Server ************ Centos 6.5 Samba 4.1.4 Clients ************* Windows XP, 7 & 8 Question: Is account lockout supported with samba4 ? I cannot seem to get the users accounts to lock when they type their passwords incorrectly. The rest of my GPO's work. Folder redirects work

Hi Guys, I had no luck so far getting openchange installed onto samba 4.1.4 and wondered if I am on the right track here regarding emails for users. I will appriciate it if anyone can share their setups with me so I can estimate what will be the best way forward. The plan so far. Run Samba4 as a file server. (this is working in a test enviroment) Run Samba4 as a DC with Active Directory

Hi all, after the news that samba 4 is now supporting user lockouts after bad password attempts we need to plan our roadmap on migrating from Samba 3 to samba 4. We currently have Samba version 3.0.7-1.3E.1 installed with (passwd) database as a backend. I would appreciate if anyone can guide me on the migration process. Our old server Centos 4.4 Samba 3.0.7 (Master browser)

Hi all, another question on my roadmap to samba 4. I must admit that I am a bit scared of doing the migration from samba 3 to samba 4 and wondered if there is a simplified process that can be followed instead of the wiki... What happens if I selected (NO) in my samba3 config file ( local master = No ) and I Installed and booted a second server with samba4 on it... Will they be able to run

On 04/12/2019 16:36, Marco Gaiarin via samba wrote: > Mandi! Rowland penny via samba > In chel di` si favelave... > >> If you go here: http://www.selfadsi.org/extended-ad/user-unlock.htm >> It says: > So, seems to me that 'Lockout-Duration' is an 'unused option'... > From my understanding, it is supposed to work in the way you think it does, the

On 04/29/2016 04:38 PM, CpServiceSpb wrote: > I strongly and completely disagree with statement that is "IMHO the > need for openchange is disappearing. " > > It is the only and one project/soft providing Exchange functionality > on Linux platform. > FIRST OF ALL, this is the Samba mailing list, and a long discussion of OpenChange is not appropriate. And, if you

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0612 Critical Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0612.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: ac09b0d9d4fbc08ab158a76f396655e3697d7429628b74a2a327983aafb3b055 openchange-1.0-7.el6_7.i686.rpm

On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 12:22 +0000, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 06/12/2019 11:47, Marco Gaiarin via samba wrote: > > Mandi! Rowland penny via samba > > In chel di` si favelave... > > > > > You cannot create an ldap filter using the above, you would have > > > to filter > > > the result of the ldap search. > > > > I can

CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2016:0612 Critical Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0612.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: 2d654136b2b57bfc3228774721db99a56efb299e1d501f11de20fdc9c3b6fa29 openchange-2.0-10.el7_2.i686.rpm

I strongly and completely disagree with statement that is "IMHO the need for openchange is disappearing. " It is the only and one project/soft providing Exchange functionality on Linux platform. 21.04.2016 17:24, Neil Price пишет: > On 21/04/2016 09:53, Mueller wrote: >> Hallo to all, >> >> does anyone know about the status of openchange ? >> It sems to

Hallo to all, does anyone know about the status of openchange ? It sems to me as if the effort and the developping towards greater versions than samba 4.1 has stopped or ended . What about merging openchange code to samba4? Greetings Daniel EDV Daniel Müller Leitung EDV Tropenklinik Paul-Lechler-Krankenhaus Paul-Lechler-Str. 24 72076 Tübingen Tel.: 07071/206-463, Fax: 07071/206-499

Hello, ? I have recently set up a system to test the relatively new ability of Kerberos to track failed password attempts and lock out users for a given period of time if they exceed a threshold.? My system is Centos 6.2 running the krb5-server-1.9-22.el6_2.1.x86_64 RPM.? I have created a testuser in the Kerberos domain, and applied the policy as shown below.? If I then attempt to log on to the

Hi all I installed Sogo + OpenChange following the user guides (http://www.sogo.nu/downloads/documentation.html), on a CentOS6. The only difference from the official way is I have a 4.1.7 Samba I built using Sogo specfile, where I added the "--enable-debug" "./configure" option: http://pastebin.com/P129yhu2 All but the samba4 RPM is from the Sogo repository. Using it

On 15/06/15 14:01, L.P.H. van Belle wrote: > and just a comment.. > > when i look at : > http://inverse.ca/ubuntu-nightly/dists/trusty/trusty/binary-amd64/Packages > /search for : 2:4.1.18+dfsg-3~inverse1 > Replaces: libpam-winbind (<< 2:3.6.5-2), samba (<= 2.2.3-2), winbind (<< 2:3.5.11~dfsg-3), winbind4 > => winbind4.. > > this all is build agains the

Hi, I have a Debian stable (woody aka 3.0) machine. I am moving my existing samba 2.x installation (that has users stored in smbpasswd) to samba 3.0.4 with LDAP as the backend. I am able to move the users to LDAP just fine. However, the password policy of bad lockout attempt does not seem to work. I installed the samba deb file from the samab.org site. I also have OpenLDAP slapd

Ok Steve, to be sure.. run : apt-key adv --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-key 0x810273C4 if not done yet. add to /etc/apt/source.list.d/openchange.list deb http://inverse.ca/ubuntu trusty trusty or deb http://inverse.ca/ubuntu-nightly trusty trusty to force the needed packages. __COPY_PAST_START cat << EOF >> /etc/apt/preferences.d/preferences-ubuntu-trusty Package: * Pin:

Mandi! Rowland penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > If you go here: http://www.selfadsi.org/extended-ad/user-unlock.htm > It says: So, seems to me that 'Lockout-Duration' is an 'unused option'... -- dott. Marco Gaiarin GNUPG Key ID: 240A3D66 Associazione ``La Nostra Famiglia'' http://www.lanostrafamiglia.it/ Polo FVG - Via

Release Announcements --------------------- Samba 4.1.6, 4.0.16 and 3.6.23 have been issued as security releases in order to address CVE-2013-4496 (Password lockout not enforced for SAMR password changes) and CVE-2013-6442 (smbcacls can remove a file or directory ACL by mistake). Please note that Samba 3.6.23 is not affected by CVE-2013-6442. o CVE-2013-4496: Samba versions 3.4.0 and above

Release Announcements --------------------- Samba 4.1.6, 4.0.16 and 3.6.23 have been issued as security releases in order to address CVE-2013-4496 (Password lockout not enforced for SAMR password changes) and CVE-2013-6442 (smbcacls can remove a file or directory ACL by mistake). Please note that Samba 3.6.23 is not affected by CVE-2013-6442. o CVE-2013-4496: Samba versions 3.4.0 and above

Mandi! Rowland penny via samba In chel di` si favelave... > As I said, if 'lockoutTime' isn't set or it is set to '0', then the user > isn't locked out, anything else and it is, but I do not believe that you can > set it to anything else but '0' manually, only the system can do this. > This is where 'lockoutDuration' comes in, the account