similar to: Samba share not appearing in Windows version 1709

I suggest reading this: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4034314/smbv1-is-not-installed-by-default-in-windows Imo, the longer you wait with samba AD the harder it gets to get things running. You could better spend you time on settting up and migrating to AD the keep putting time in a dying product. But thats my optinion. Greetz, Louis > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- >

On 04/14/2018 01:04 AM, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 22:31:23 -0700 > ToddAndMargo via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> Fedora 276, x64 >> >> I just put a Widows Nein, oops Windows Ten computer on >> a samba based network. >> >> Problem: the W-Nein computer can not see any of the other

I update centos's samba to 4.8.3-6. My windows 10 is professional, whose version is 1803. I still can't access samba. Do I need update my windows 10 to 1903? andrew At 2019-09-12 17:45:10, "anax" <anax at ayni.com> wrote: > > >On 12/09/2019 11.09, qw wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> I can access centos's samba via windows 7, but fail

Walter H. wrote: > On 28.06.2018 16:30, mark wrote: > >> Just ran into a problem: someone with a new laptop, running Win 10, >> version 1709, tried to map their home directory (served from a CentOS 6.9 >> box, and it fails, with Windows complaining that it no longer supports >> SMBv1, and if you go to their site, you can install support >> for that manually....

Hi, folks, Just ran into a problem: someone with a new laptop, running Win 10, version 1709, tried to map their home directory (served from a CentOS 6.9 box, and it fails, with Windows complaining that it no longer supports SMBv1, and if you go to their site, you can install support for that manually.... The server running samba can *not* be updated to 7 - we have a lot of stuff based off

The issue does not seem to be connected to SMB1. It can be installed and it still won't authenticate. Something has been changed to force authentication to AD/DNS either solely or as a first step. The translation of the netbios name never happens even if the computer can resolve the name. Given that the authentication thru netbios resolution seems to get grandfathered in provided the domain

Wells, Roger K. wrote: > On 06/28/2018 10:35 AM, mark wrote: >> >> Just ran into a problem: someone with a new laptop, running Win 10, >> version 1709, tried to map their home directory (served from a CentOS 6.9 >> box, and it fails, with Windows complaining that it no longer supports >> SMBv1, and if you go to their site, you can install support >> for that

I have an old setup that serves my purposes, but which I'll move over to a more modern Samba4 setup at some point. I know it's old, deprecated etc. In any case, at the moment I'm having a problem with two Windows 10 machines connecting to the domain I set up. The network is a mix of XP, Windows 7 and Windows 10 machines. Four (4) windows 10 machines connect to the domain after the

Hai, Yes, i get it, thats the same everywhere. And i know that problem also, but then i really suggest get people in to helpout. Believe me, you will be running into problems and get even less time the longer you wait. Base on this : > specified domain does not exist or could not be contacted error". Try \\ip it that works wait 5-15 min then try the nbtstat again. Not working,

me at tdiehl.org wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jun 2018, mark wrote: >> Walter H. wrote: >>> On 28.06.2018 16:30, mark wrote: >>> >>>> Just ran into a problem: someone with a new laptop, running Win 10, >>>> version 1709, tried to map their home directory (served from a >>>> CentOS 6.9 >>>> box, and it fails, with Windows

FWIW; I connected to the domain on the rolled back 1703 machine. It wasn't connecting due to spelling errors on my end when setting the various keys (Damn those post 40 eye/vision things - don't get older kiddies). Base on my experiences then, if you're connected to the NT4 style domain prior to the 1803 update, then you'll stay connected. On all my 1803 machines, the domain

On 05/04/2020 12:08, fredbezies via samba wrote: [access blocked on old smbv1 only hardware] >> >> I tweaked my /etc/samba/smb.conf to add this in [global] section. >> >> "server min protocol = CORE >> client min protocol = CORE" >> >Try doing a similar thing, but replace 'min' with 'max' and 'CORE' with >'NT1',

hai,   Please keep it mailing to the list, this way is shows up of others also. A workaround for disabling SMBv1, you can make your server less secure but thats not what i would do. Setting these to enable NTLM v1 again. lanman auth = yes ntlm auth = yes raw NTLMv2 auth = yes I think also this is more a question for the free raduis list, but i would to for a ldap(s) setup. just dont mixup

Louis, Last lines in /etc/default/ufw: IPT_MODULES="nf_conntrack_ftp nf_nat_ftp nf_conntrack_irc nf_nat_irc nf_conntrack_netbios_ns" Looks like nf_contrack_netbios_ns is already loaded. iptables -S requires more arguments. Suggestions? Marty

On 22/05/2020 06:38, Lorenzo Milesi via samba wrote: >> Verify dig -x $(hostname -i) >> Then dig A $(hostname -f) >> >> As long as these match any CNAME should work. > These works, but why these should match a CNAME? hostname returns the "main" host... > > Anyway to make a test I configured a new CNAME > > #?dig server.wdc.mydomain.it > ;; ANSWER

On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 09:44:35 +0200 Arnaud Bougeard via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Why do you tell me I am using SMBv1? I can't see any parameter to set > it ? I never said you were using SMBv1, I said running an NT4-style domain requires SMBv1. > > For idmapping, I'm afraid of side effects in the long term, my server > being in AD, should I ignore

Hi, In the past (2 months ago) : I have two AD Domain under Samba 4.1 : A and B. I war able to  connect a share in A from B. Now (after upgrade) : I have a W2016 domain (B) and a Samba 4.6 domain (A) but I can't connect a share in A from B. The user from B which try to connect the share in A has the same login in the two domains. So since the upgrade I don't have the same behavior

On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 14:38:51 +0200 Anders ?stling via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > I have a customer with a couple of industrial robots running Linux > 2.6.34 and Samba 3.4.7 (smbclient -V). They are able to connect to > SMB shares on Windows servers IF I "allow unsafe connections?, ie > lower the SMB minimum level. The servers are on Windows 2019, and >

Rowland penny via samba ha scritto il 27/08/20 alle 15:49: > On 27/08/2020 14:19, Piviul via samba wrote: >> >>> >>> Microsoft is enforcing more securitybut it's Microsoft that develop >>> NetBIOS and LLMNR and if it's enforcing >> security should enforce these protocols or remove them from their OS >> isn't it? > > Microsoft

Am 14.11.2019 um 16:23 schrieb Christopher Wensink: > We have the same setup and have had no problems with clients mapping shares. > > Some simple tips: > > double check spelling of all usernames and that passwords on the clients > match that of the samba shares > > try setting up a user that can connect on their pc with a login on one > that cannot, see if the