similar to: Cannot map to other client shares

Suggested changes applied to smb.conf (and yes, server role is classic PDC): server max protocol = NT1 client signing = auto client ipc signing = auto server signing = auto With no apparent change to the behaviour or resolution to the problem(s). I'm particularly mystified by the logging-in behaviour (that is, if I manage to do it quickly I can log in, but if I

Presumably this is still configured as a classic domain. I recently upgraded my domain controllers from 3.6.25 to 4.4.7. (actually, I tried adding badlock patches to 3.6.25 but had issues.) Samba 4 has a different default max protocol than samba 3. You probably need to add the following to smb.conf server max protocol = NT1 Otherwise the default is SMB3. With a classic

That is really weird. I think what is happening is that if you log in immediately you are using cached credentials. If you wait a little bit then your network connections are up and you are truly doing network authentication. If you were do unplug from the network, reboot, login with cached credentials, and then reconnect network cable I would suspect your access to shares would be OK. I

I've been working for hours with Samba on Ubuntu Server 9.10 (Samba version 3.4.0), trying to get it setup simply as a fileserver that performs authentication to an NT 4 server (yes, I know, old and out of date). After much struggling, I finally realized that my configuration *was* working when the clients connecting (from XP, and Win2k clients, mostly) were actually joined to the domain

Hi, I have the following network: ---------- |Internet| ---------- | -------------------- --------------------- |Wireless Modem |- ))----((- |'admin' on DHCP | | on 10.0.0.* | | --------------------- -------------------- | ---------------------- | -(( |'client1' on DHCP | |wired

Hi everybody, 1) i've successfully installed a samba4 AD with Version 4.1.11 and bind 9.9.4 on centos 7 with bind flatfiles. On the client side i've a windows7 sp1 machine. The only trouble i have is an ddns update denied message in /var/log/messages. But after the denied message is shown, the forward and reverse lookup zone will be aktualized successfully. Could it be that windows 7 first

Hai, ... > > As I said, where is the fault, is it something that Windows 10 is or > isn't doing, or is it Samba ? > > Well, we cannot change Windows, so on that basis, I think you should > make a Samba bug report and let it work through the system. > > Rowland Well, yes, we can change windows, by allowing/disallowing SMB1. Which might help in detecting whats

I have to add noise: Provisioning a DC with sernet 4.1.x called NT1 as max default with me. Am 6. M?rz 2015 18:28:55 MEZ, schrieb James <lingpanda101 at gmail.com>: >OK. Now I'm really confused. I was not aware of two 'testparm' >commands. >Running 'testparm -v' shows correct default values. So whats the >difference? > > >On 3/6/2015 12:20 PM,

Hi all, A - I thought badlock mitigation was about encrypting SMB traffic, at least most part of it. And this encryption of most part of data transfer could (or should) lower performances. It seems I was wrong: smallest part (something like commands) are encrypted but not SMB traffic (ie file transfer). This for SMB protocol prior to SMB3 (which comes with windows 8). B - According to what I

Dne 2017/03/19 v 22:11 Rowland Penny via samba napsal(a): > On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 21:49:28 +0100 > Michal Kavan <michal.kavan at gmail.com> wrote: > >> os is ubuntu 16.04. (i have same behavior also on samba 4.3.11, so i >> think thats linked with change from samba 3.6.x >> to 4.xx) >> yes, guest user (samba_guest) have permision to run (all files are >>

On 06/03/15 17:05, Marc Muehlfeld wrote: > Am 06.03.2015 um 14:56 schrieb Rowland Penny: >>> From 'samba-tool testparm -v' : >>> >>> server max protocol = NT1 >>> >>> BUT 'man smb.conf' says this : >>> >>> Default: server max protocol = SMB3 >>> >>> OK, one of these is wrong, but which ??? > If

I have a Synology NAS array appliance. It is linux based and uses samba for file sharing. Normally the config is done via a gui interface but you can ssh to the array. The domain controllers are running Samba 3.6.x in classic domain mode. I have member servers running 3.6.x and 4.3.8. no problem. I recently updated the Synology "OS." The current version of samba is

On both the synology (samba 4.1.20) and PDC (samba 3.6.25) testparm showed client schannel = Auto server schannel = Auto I don't know if the server even supports schannel. Maybe it doesn't any all the clients successfully negotiated not to use it. On the synology, I set client schannel = no This fixed my domain membership issue. Although

On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:00:59 -0400 Eleuterio Contracampo via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > [2017/04/21 12:47:55.219297, 0] > ../auth/gensec/gensec.c:257(gensec_verify_dcerpc_auth_level) > > Did not manage to negotiate mandetory feature SIGN for dcerpc > auth_level 6 > I think you may be running into an artefact of the badlock patches, for which Win7 will

I cannot connect as guest from Win10 to Samba anymore, since I removed "server max protocol = NT1" net use \\%IP%\testshare /user:"" "" /persistent:no System error 58 has occurred. The specified server cannot perform the requested operation. It works when I supply a userid and password. It works from Win7. It fails only in the combination Win10, SMB3,

Thanks for your attention, Gaiseric. Sorry , but I had a little confused. Did you mean that the problem was something relevant with the DNS? However in my impression, I might not do anything about the DNS. I have some clues that might be helped: 1) First of all, my samba server version set is "max protocol = SMB2", and the final protocol according to the negotiation result is smb2.10.

Hi, I''ve been migrating an existing htb-based traffic shaper from a hideous (I''m allowed to call it that - I wrote the damn atrocity myself) tc shell script into a TCNG configuration file, and after a few false starts I think I managed to get the syntax right. However, during tests it looks like some of the tiers aren''t passing their restrictions on to lower levels.

Using Wireshark I see the protocol used as SMB2. Using a Windows workstation I tested by navigating to files and folders on my member server or to my sysvol folder on a DC. On 3/6/2015 8:56 AM, Rowland Penny wrote: > On 06/03/15 13:36, James wrote: >> Hi Marc, >> >> I'm a little confused. The values I provided for client and server >> max protocol are default

Thanks for your reply, Louis However, I am still blocked by this problem now. !-_- I tried to set the samba server as the DNS server and visit the shared folder by input "\\aaa.bb.com" at windows 7 client. In some cases it works and will not fail. However the similar abnormal phenomenon also occasionally happens (especially at changing the authentication, such as local to ldap): 1) I can

Just a follow-up. Still, no resolution. I've tried different combinations with "client ipc signing" without luck. A traffic dump shows the problem as: i) windows XP client sends a DCE/RPC SAMR command GetDomPwInfo ii) samba DC responds with DCE/RPC Fault nca_proto_error I've also tried fiddling with Local Security Policy registry values at the Win XP machine, but got nothing