similar to: hosts allow / hosts deny (CIDRs?)

In message <ca330312-5343-b7e5-328a-d2b554330081 at thelounge.net>, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote: >Am 17.10.2017 um 04:24 schrieb Ronald F. Guilmette via samba: >> Just a trivial question... >> >> Do the hosts allow and hosts deny clauses (i.e. within smb.conf) support >> the use of IPv4 CIDR notation (e.g. A.B.C.D/maskbits) ? >>

Hi, Where can i find up to date samba4 related smb.conf settings? Is this for samba4 too: http://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch06.html Thanks, Robert

Matthias, Sorry I should have wrote more details. I agree with your message and I understand that template12 is not meant to be a share. What I tried to say is: when I have this configuration: [template12] writable = yes browsable = yes valid users = alex [alex] path = /home/alex copy = template12 I can see this error in /var/log/samba/log/smbd [2016/04/25 16:44:14.719192,

Hello, Is the example for 'copy' ( https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch06.html ) valid? [template] writable = yes browsable = yes valid users = andy, dave, jay When I'm trying a similar configuration, I can't log in and I have this message in log.smbd: WARNING: No path in service template - making it unavailable! It seems I need to add a path: [template]

I have a few settings that change based on the network that a system is in, and I have a heterogeneous collection of networks (a few /24s, some /25s, a /29 and a couple /27s, and hey look a /16 in rfc1918 space and...). So I can''t do simple regex matches on dotted-quad IP notation and expect to get a complete story. What I''d like is something like, I dunno... $nameserver =

Thank you for your message. I was not sure if the example (from here https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch06.html) was incorrect or if I was missing something. Alexandre Klein Tanuki Software, Ltd. 6-18-10-4F Nishi-Kasai, Edogawa-ku Tokyo 134-0088 Japan Tel: +81-3-3878-3211 Fax: +81-3-3878-0313 http://www.tanukisoftware.com On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Rowland penny <rpenny

We're using Samba 3.0.21a-1 on a CentOS 4.2 server (kernel 2.6.9-22.0.2.ELsmp); everything works more or less fine, it's functioning as the PDC with an OpenLDAP back end (setup essentially straight from the Idealx.org playbook), etc. We're trying to mount Windows shares to back them up, and getting "permission denied" errors when trying to read certain files from those

Maybe I finally figured it out. I found that sentence "For example, the [test] and [homes] sections are unique disk shares; they contain options that map to specific directories on the Samba server." here: https://www.samba.org/samba/docs/using_samba/ch06.html Does that mean that this "preexec" in the [homes] section is not invoked if the user is accessing his or her home

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3544 Bug ID: 3544 Summary: Support CIDR notation for host pattern matching Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 9.1p1 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: Miscellaneous Assignee:

Folks, Is there a limit on the quantity of IP''s you can ban in the blacklist file? Thanks, -MikeD

Dear openssh-unix-dev list, in OpenSSH 5.1 you introduced CIDR address/masklen matching for "Match address" blocks in sshd_config as well as supporting CIDR matching in ~/.ssh/authorized_keys from="..." restrictions in sshd. I wonder whether CIDR address/masklen matching will be implemented for permitopen="host:port" restrictions in sshd as well, that would be quite

On 1/9/20 2:08 AM, Pete Biggs wrote: >> Has anyone created a fail2ban filter for this type of attack? As of >> right now, I have manually banned a range of IP addresses but would >> like to automate it for the future. >> > As far as I can see fail2ban only deals with hosts and not networks - I > suspect the issue is what is a "network": It may be obvious to

Hi all, after installing samba 2.2.5 (on Solaris8 running NIS+) it is not possible to create user entries in smbpasswd. I generated the smbpasswd file by # cat /dev/null | /samba/samba-2.2.5/source/script/mksmbpasswd.sh > /usr/local/samba/private/smbpasswd ----- then tried to create user entry "dummy" in smbpasswd by (user "dummy" exists under NIS+) # smbpasswd -a dummy

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5851 Summary: Name lookup failures and CIDR regression Product: rsync Version: 3.0.4 Platform: All OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy:

I am being attacked by an entire subnet where the first two parts of the IP address remain identical but the last two parts vary sufficiently that it is not caught by fail2ban since the attempts do not meet the cut-off of a certain number of attempts within the given time. Has anyone created a fail2ban filter for this type of attack? As of right now, I have manually banned a range of IP addresses

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=840 Summary: Specifying CIDR when adding to a hash:ip entry is silently ignored Product: ipset Version: unspecified Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P5 Component: default AssignedTo:

I found a command-line program that did this once before, used it for a while and then forgot about it until right now and I'll be damned if I can find it again. A command line IP calculator that takes an address range and give it back in cidr format. I found an online one that does this here: http://www.ipaddresslocation.org/subnet-mask-calculator.php But I would prefer to have the

Hello On my network there is no domain master browser, and my nmbd is spamming my /var/log/messages file with messages that it cound not find one. Can I configure nmbd not to look for the domain master browser ? Thank you, Timothy Madden

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1513 Summary: CIDR address/masklen matching support for permitopen= Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 5.1p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: sshd AssignedTo: unassigned-bugs at mindrot.org

> > > Morning Louis, Unless I totally misread this, the OP only > wants the DC > to query itself, no clients. > > I could understand it if they only wanted domain members to > query the DC. > > Stop and think about this, a client wants to know where > another domain > member is, or worse still, where the DC is, who does it ask ? It asks > its