similar to: [Announce] Samba 4.15.3 Available for Download

Release Announcements --------------------- This is the latest stable release of the Samba 4.14 release series. Important Notes =============== There have been a few regressions in the security release 4.14.10: o CVE-2020-25717: A user on the domain can become root on domain members. https://www.samba.org/samba/security/CVE-2020-25717.html ????????????????? PLEASE [RE-]READ!

Release Announcements --------------------- This is the latest stable release of the Samba 4.14 release series. Important Notes =============== There have been a few regressions in the security release 4.14.10: o CVE-2020-25717: A user on the domain can become root on domain members. https://www.samba.org/samba/security/CVE-2020-25717.html ????????????????? PLEASE [RE-]READ!

Release Announcements --------------------- This is the latest stable release of the Samba 4.13 release series. Important Notes =============== There have been a few regressions in the security release 4.13.14: o CVE-2020-25717: A user on the domain can become root on domain members. https://www.samba.org/samba/security/CVE-2020-25717.html ????????????????? PLEASE [RE-]READ!

Release Announcements --------------------- This is the latest stable release of the Samba 4.13 release series. Important Notes =============== There have been a few regressions in the security release 4.13.14: o CVE-2020-25717: A user on the domain can become root on domain members. https://www.samba.org/samba/security/CVE-2020-25717.html ????????????????? PLEASE [RE-]READ!

Hi Jeremy, Thanks for your response, but it doesn't work either with exactly the same symptoms: [2007/04/24 09:52:43, 3] smbd/process.c:switch_message(926) switch message SMBrmdir (pid 19730) conn 0x80414a30 [2007/04/24 09:52:43, 4] smbd/uid.c:change_to_user(181) change_to_user: Skipping user change - already user [2007/04/24 09:52:43, 5] smbd/filename.c:unix_convert(147) unix_convert

On 20/10/16 14:10, Amitay Isaacs wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Alex Crow via samba > <samba at lists.samba.org <mailto:samba at lists.samba.org>> wrote: > > Hi list > > We recently upgraded our fileservers from Centos supplied 4.2.10 > to Sernet 4.4.6, and then our DCs from 3.6.x to 4.4.6. > > It seems that since then we've

Hi List, hi Samba-team, Recently I've faced some problem with directories deletion trough Samba and trying to clarify the root cause. The following happens: 1. There is a directory my_dir and symlink to it my_dir_link drwxrwsr-x 48 myuser mygroup 20480 Mar 18 21:53 . drwxr-xr-x 33 root root 0 Feb 28 17:37 .. drwxr-sr-x 2 myuser mygroup 4096 Mar 18 21:47 my_dir lrwxrwxrwx 1

Encountering a strange one... has been occuring since samba 4.15.x and continues to occur even in 4.17.5 and 4.18 Issue does not occur in earlier versions (4.13.x) and have switched back and forth between versions to confirm. Servers are winbind joined, PAM and krb5 auth, all seems to work fine (reading, writing, creating, moving) until trying to delete an empty folder on the share from Windows

On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 04:53:16PM +0000, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > > >On 15/03/2023 16:47, Jeremy Allison via samba wrote: >>On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 11:29:10AM -0400, CaptainTrips28 via samba wrote: >>>Encountering a strange one... has been occuring since samba 4.15.x and >>>continues to occur even in 4.17.5 and 4.18 >>> >>>Issue does not

Release Announcements --------------------- These are security releases in order to address the following defects: o CVE-2016-2124: SMB1 client connections can be downgraded to plaintext authentication. https://www.samba.org/samba/security/CVE-2016-2124.html o CVE-2020-25717: A user on the domain can become root on domain members.

Release Announcements --------------------- These are security releases in order to address the following defects: o CVE-2016-2124: SMB1 client connections can be downgraded to plaintext authentication. https://www.samba.org/samba/security/CVE-2016-2124.html o CVE-2020-25717: A user on the domain can become root on domain members.

So, without doing a fresh install on the system the join succeeded with 4.14.9. What does it mean? In the end I want to end up with a much later version which is still getting security fixes. I went through the readme of CVE-2020-25717 as mentioned but did not really understand how this impacts the join procedure. Up to now I was using DOMAIN\administrator or its kerberos ticket for the join.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 2:52 AM Martin Schwenke <martin at meltin.net> wrote: > Hi Bob, > > On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 06:55:31 -0400, Robert Buck <robert.buck at som.com> > wrote: > > > And so we've been rereading the doc on the public addresses file. So it > may > > be we have gravely misunderstood the *public_addresses* file, we never > read > >

On 12/12/24 06:25, Peter Mittermayer via samba wrote: > In the meantime I also did a lot of testing to find out where exactly the issue starts. This is what I found: > 4.13.13 still works. I can joing a DC running this version without problem. > 4.13.14 show exactly the same error as I also see on 4.21. Good work tracking that down. Do 4.14.9 or 4.15.1 work? If it is something in the

Hi Douglas, Thanks for this suggestion. I'll try that. Additionally, after reading the not on samba.tranquil.it about 'dependencies to sssd' (whatever it means) I will try to use a completely fresh installation of RHEL9. For my testlab I have just used a clone of some VM which was previously joined to domain and was using sssd. I will report back with my findings in a while. Thanks

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 13:11:55 +0000 Peter Mittermayer via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > So, without doing a fresh install on the system the join succeeded > with 4.14.9. What does it mean? > In the end I want to end up with a much later version which is still > getting security fixes. > > I went through the readme of CVE-2020-25717 as mentioned but did not

Just now I again had occasion to want nested describe lists in a documentation file. I found that the bug which I reported on 18 October, 2001 still persists. I checked on the bug report at the R web page, and found that the notes say ``Not a problem in R 1.4.0 (2001-12-08)''. Well, it's still a problem for me --- using R 1.4.1. (Details: platform sparc-sun-solaris2.7 arch

In the meantime I also did a lot of testing to find out where exactly the issue starts. This is what I found: 4.13.13 still works. I can joing a DC running this version without problem. 4.13.14 show exactly the same error as I also see on 4.21. So what exactly was changed between these two versions? According to release notes there have just been a few security fixes. I don't see how any of

On Wed, 09 Oct 2024 17:36:34 +0000 bd730c5053df9efb via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hi all! > > I was following a recent thread here and read Rowland Penny's answer > (https://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/2024-October/249858.html) > stating > > [...]I have stopped using 'username map' & 'min domain uid' because, > has you have

I am trying to determine which tdb files must be backed up in order to perform a proper system restore. I am running Centos's samba-4.9.1-6.el7.x86_64 as a PDC. There is a basic backup routine which backs up all files under /var/lib/samba but this appears to be wasteful, especially as gencache.tdb keeps growing until I delete. I can find a Samba3 reference at