similar to: odd issue with permisions

On 10/27/2020 12:50 PM, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 27/10/2020 18:35, Dan Egli via samba wrote: >> I'm really confused about something. It seems like on my samba server >> the user AND GROUP permissions must match for me to access any files in >> my home directory. Here's an example of what I mean: ($ = at unix shell, >>> = in smbclient) >> $

Hm, samba 4.11.2-13 is running on CentOS? 8. Im not really into CentOS/RH im more Debian/Ubuntu.. But I suggest you try this. Remove [homes] ( or keep it but add a new one. ) Setup [users] Path = /home browseable = yes read only = no Test again against that new share, but not with smbclient alone, setup a cifs mount and test and/or use a windows client pc. Preffered W10 or

On 10/28/2020 3:31 AM, Marco Gaiarin via samba wrote: > Mandi! Dan Egli via samba > In chel di` si favelave... > >> Why on earth would samba even CARE about group permissions when user >> permissions are perfectly fine? Help me fix this? > Consider that, if POSIX ACL are enabled on this FS, the group > permission are considered as a 'mask' for all ACL, with

On 10/28/2020 4:14 AM, Marco Gaiarin via samba wrote: > >> Next idea? :) > No one. But plain 'POSIX' access (eg, ssh) works? Eg if you try to redo > the operation that does not work with samba using plain ssh access > (with the same user), they works? > Yes, ssh works just fine.? Here's an example of it: [dan at jupiter2 ~]$ mkdir test3 [dan at jupiter2 ~]$ cd

On 28/10/2020 08:00, Dan Egli via samba wrote: > It's been over 24 hours and no one has even touched this. I could really > use a bit of help. Yes, it works when I create the files/dirs in samba > because of the masks I set, but that's just a kludge. It shouldn't > matter that the GROUP permissions are if the USER permissions allow > access and the file is owned by the

On 28/10/2020 10:24, L.P.H. van Belle via samba wrote: > Hm, samba 4.11.2-13 is running on CentOS? 8. > Im not really into CentOS/RH im more Debian/Ubuntu.. > > But I suggest you try this. > > Remove [homes] ( or keep it but add a new one. ) > > Setup > [users] > Path = /home > browseable = yes > read only = no > > Test again against that

On 10/27/2020 1:08 PM, Dan Egli via samba wrote: > >> What version of Samba ? >> >> Please post your smb.conf >> >> Rowland >> >> > Sorry, Samba? version 4.11.2-13 is running on CentOS? 8.? My smb.conf is > shown below, sans comments: > > > [global] > > ??????? workgroup = EgliFamily > ??????? server string = Samba Server Version

On 10/28/2020 2:49 AM, Rowland penny via samba wrote: > On 28/10/2020 08:00, Dan Egli via samba wrote: >> It's been over 24 hours and no one has even touched this. I could really >> use a bit of help. Yes, it works when I create the files/dirs in samba >> because of the masks I set, but that's just a kludge. It shouldn't >> matter that the GROUP permissions

Hi, I appreciate any help that can be given. For the life of me, I cannot create a writeable share on a specific box - a fairly new install of Fedora Core 5. I have posted on several forums over the past 2 weeks, but haven't gotten anywhere with the advice given, so I'm turning to this list as my last hope. This box runs as an NIS client, but I have had no problems with NIS. The problem

I am experiencing a weird issue with samba when I am trying to configure it as a Domain Controller. I'm using Gentoo Linux, and after finally figuring that kdb5_util was looking for the krb5.conf file where Gentoo didn't put it, I was able to initialize the realm with kdb5_util create. But now when I try to start samba (the actual Samba process, not smb) it pulls kerberos and kerberos

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens Dan > Egli via samba > Verzonden: woensdag 28 oktober 2020 9:01 > Aan: samba at lists.samba.org > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] odd issue with permisions > > On 10/27/2020 1:08 PM, Dan Egli via samba wrote: > > > >> What version of Samba ? > >> > >>

Mandi! Dan Egli via samba In chel di` si favelave... > I posted the getfacl output a minute or two ago. I've had missed that. > Next idea? :) No one. But plain 'POSIX' access (eg, ssh) works? Eg if you try to redo the operation that does not work with samba using plain ssh access (with the same user), they works? -- dott. Marco Gaiarin GNUPG Key ID: 240A3D66

Hi, I'm having trouble getting ACLs and samba to work on solaris. In a unix shell I can set and get the ACLs with setfacl and getfacl just fine. Connecting with a window machine (w2000/w2003) to samba lets me list the ACLs and even modify them. The problem is creating new ACLs. In the logs I get 20031029/local2.error:Oct 29 16:30:11 test1 smbd[5417]: [ID 702911 local2.error]

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

Hi I have been working all week with samba 3.4.7 in Centos 5.5 PDC(3.4.7) with LDAP backend+Centos 5.5(3.4.7) BDC with LDAP slave. I already have 5 clients join. 1 Windows XP 1 Windows 7 UE 1 Centos 5.5 Desktop 1 Ubuntu 9.x 1 Centos 5.5 I can browse inside windows and see my clients, access some shares. I want to create private shares inside my PDC, I use: force group valid users write list

Hi, I got samba 2.0.30b running on a Sparc machine with Solaris 10. I installed Kerberos 1.4.2 Openldap stable version 20051018 To compile Samba 2.0.30b with ADS Looks like Kerberos works kinit Administrator@MYDOMAIN.COM <mailto:Administrator@MYDOMAIN.COM> ==> works klist ==> shows ticket I added the server to the domain net join -U Administrator Joined

Rowland, The 'guest' user exists in /etc/passwd, and there are no users defined in tdb backend. 1. /etc/passwd: guest:x:405:100:guest:/dev/null:/sbin/nologin 2. pdbedit -L -v: ^$ EOL 3. smb.conf updated as suggested - smbclient -U% //share/public -c 'put test1.txt foobar' NT_STATUS_ACCESS_DENIED opening remote file \foobar Modifying the settings as suggested made no impact,

Hello I'm running Debian Etch with distro kernel & Samba package (2.6.18-5-686 & 3.0.24-6etch9). In my smb.conf I have : inherit owner = yes inherit permissions = yes inherit acls = yes I start with a dir test1 with no rights for group smb-Users, rx for group smb-Inf, and rwx for group smb-Bme-Fr : root@samba1:/mnt/temp # ll total 28 drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 2008-01-04

Hello, I am trying to migrate an NT domain from an NT PDC to a samba3.0 PDC without disrupting users or requiring them to change passwords, etc. The complication is that there are NT fileservers in the domain already, so it's important that the users be transferred to the samba machine with SID's and RID's intact (so they can access these shares with the same permissions).

Is behavior of ACLs under Samba 3.3.0 (Sernet) completely different from that under version 3.2.7? The release notes only talks about some "fixes". I installed version 3.3.0 and got completely different result with the same filesystem and the exact same samba configuration. The ACLs behaved strangely and appeared very different under Windows ACL editor. Users were now unable to