similar to: Samba 4.12 network share issue

Hi list, I'm using samba-4.7.6-r0 and attempting to establish a public samba share where any anonymous user can write to the share. I have an issue where the 'guest' (uid 405) account is unable to write to a directory owned by that uid. If the gid or world writable bits are set, I can write to my share, but not as the guest uid. I need assistance troubleshooting why I cannot write as

This is the smbstatus with 4.11.x. No problems on clients. Using LC_ALL=C because have Polish locale set up. [root at arch1 ~]# LC_ALL=C smbstatus Samba version 4.11.3 PID Username Group Machine Protocol Version Encryption Signing

Forgot to add the tcpdump command used: tcpdump -p -s 0 -n -w /root/tcpdump_all.txt Pawel. wt., 5 maj 2020 o 00:01 pavlos <pavlos.audiofreak at gmail.com> napisa?(a): > OK, have repeated the test: > > - samba logs: > http://www.mediafire.com/file/jy4qcyvqg6z39zu/logs.tar.gz/file > - tcpdump log: >

@Andrew, Samba master - what do you mean? A clean compile and install from genuine samba.org sources? As a matter of fact, I was thinking about it.... Let me do the tests now, with tcpdump. Will send some logs and outputs later on. You've asked previously - this is the smbstatus, already on the latest kernel/samba versions. The problem is persistent, no wonder... [root at arch1 /]#

On 13/06/15 16:33, Jonathan Hunter wrote: > Hi buhorojo, > > I *think* I have a stable system for the moment... so thank you :-) > > On 13 June 2015 at 12:50, buhorojo <buhorojo.lcb at gmail.com> wrote: >>> I now set in smb.conf: >>> >>> server services = -dns +winbind -winbindd >>> >>> I stopped samba, then removed

I noticed one of my smbd processes for one particular client (IUSR_JUNIPER) is taking 200MB in memory, far different from all the other smbd processes. Should I be concerned about a memory leak here? I don't think samba would be caching any files, so I can't see why it'd use this much memory. That windows client is a win2k IIS5 server, with well over 60 sites that are hosted off a

On 13/06/15 11:00, Jonathan Hunter wrote: > On 13 June 2015 at 09:34, buhorojo <buhorojo.lcb at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 12 June 2015 at 08:55, Jonathan Hunter <jmhunter1 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> Sadly, even though sssd is now running and I'm no longer reliant on >>> winbind, the rest of samba doesn't seem to be taking notice of these >>>

I recently (a few weeks ago) installed 1.9.18p8 in order to get better performance with an Access Database, which along with adding a TCP_NODELAY in the [global] section has that working like a charm. Thing that's bugging me now is smbstatus. When I run it I see open files listed when I know that they aren't. The following output shows quite a few files open that aren't really. The

hello, can anybody explain or point me to a document that explain the locked files section produced by smbstatus -L (see below). what means denymode ? access ? what means exclusive+batch in the oplock section ? can anybody point me to a document explaining the way file locking works ? regards # smbstatus -L Locked files: Pid DenyMode Access R/W Oplock Name

After having migrated my machines and user to Samba 4.3.11 on Ubuntu 16.04.1 (no domain upgrade, new provision, all accounts new defined) and old data copied over to the new machines, I have now a broader testbed and notice issues I didn't see prior to that. Having roaming profiles (defined in the user object in LDB)... Seemingly at random smbd keeps locks on NTUSER.DAT and ntuser.ini for a

Hello! It is possible to have a WSUS with Samba 4? Thanks

I'm running a samba pdc on my gentoo box in a mixed environment with a couple of Windows XP clients and only a few MacOSX clients. The users told me, the file locking across the platforms does not work properly sometimes. I tried to google my problem, but without luck. I switched all the flags related the lock mechanism of samba on and off, but the problem seems to be solved yet. The only

> > > > >Please remove the SO_RCVBUF and SO_SNDBUF entries. > > >Oh, that's ancient. Do you have any possibility to move to > > >"security=user"? > > The smb.conf file was inherited from HP-UX system. Ok, > > I'll remove them > > > > >Did you try "posix locking = no"? That is mostly criticial

I am setting up a OpenLdap PDC with file and print services on Ubuntu Jaunty. Jaunty ships with samba 3.3.2. I configured samba to just use the registry back in which I think is pretty cool! What happend when I use the Add print wizard to add my Windows XP drivers I get the famous "unable to install driver access denied" message. I can ssh into the box with my user id and create files in

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: File Locking and Permissions Issue Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:10:28 -0700 From: Jack Lauman <jlauman@nwcascades.com> Organization: nwcascades.com To: mailto:samba@lists.samba.org I'm trying to get Lacerte 2007 Tax Accounting software working on a Samba v3.0.28a based server. When one user is logged in it works fine. When two or more users

Thanks buhorojo. The sssd list came up trumps here. When changing ID mappings, the sssd database must be manually removed (rm /var/lib/sss/db/*). I now have sssd working again :) I shall keep an eye on the mappings during the day today.. On 12 June 2015 at 07:36, buhorojo <buhorojo.lcb at gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/06/15 01:34, Jonathan Hunter wrote: >> >> On 11 June 2015 at

Hello, I have manually mounted the SYSVOL share, sync it with samba and run samba-tool ntacl sysvolreset. But I'm not sure if all windows policies are acceptable by samba because of errors logs: 2015/03/18 09:30:52.197934, 0] ../source3/smbd/oplock.c:338(oplock_timeout_handler) Oplock break failed for file myDomain.local/Policies/{31B2F340-016D-11D2-945F-00C04FB984F9}/USER/Registry.pol --

Hello. I just upgrade my kernel, smbd and changed my smb.conf. (4.14.12-1-Arch" to "4.14.19-1-lts") "samba 4.7.4-1" But now, "reload smbd" and "close-share" can not drop connected users to share. Because of that I have to restart smbd service for destroy a share right now. But it was working previous version and I don't know what is wrong right

Hi there, is it possible and when, how - to change the filelocking-status of an opened file from EXCLUSIVE+BATCH to another status ? We have to open an file to write at the same time from different pc's into this file. For example the following smbstatus -u USER output: Pid DenyMode Access R/W Oplock Name DENY_DOS 0x1 RDONLY EXCLUSIVE+BATCH

Hi, in the following scenario I've got the Problem of "STATUS_SHARE_VIOLATION". Client A (with User 1) copies a file to share X. (with: DENY_NONE 0x120196 WRONLY NONE) Client B (with User 1) reads this file from share X (with: DENY_NONE 0x120089 RDONLY NONE) Now Client C (with User 1) wants also to read this file from share X and gets the STATUS_SHARE_VIOLATION.