similar to: client-side symlinks ?

04.05.2023 15:32, Ralph Boehme ?????: > On 5/4/23 13:57, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >> Is it possible for windows to actually see and use symlinks on samba server? >> Windows NTFS does have notion of junctions and symbolic links, so when one >> open file A (which is a symbolic link), windows actually opens file B. >> Can such mechanism be used when A is on samba

On 5/4/23 13:57, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: > Is it possible for windows to actually see and use symlinks on samba > server? > Windows NTFS does have notion of junctions and symbolic links, so when one > open file A (which is a symbolic link), windows actually opens file B. > Can such mechanism be used when A is on samba share? currently not, but with the upcoming SMB3 UNIX

On 04/05/2023 12:57, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: > Hi! > > Is it possible for windows to actually see and use symlinks on samba > server? > Windows NTFS does have notion of junctions and symbolic links, so when one > open file A (which is a symbolic link), windows actually opens file B. > Can such mechanism be used when A is on samba share? > > This is probably a

Hello, since we install the most recent windows updates from 07/2023 Test-ComputerSecureChannel -Verbose show False [4]. Moved the machine to local workgroup, deleted machine account on the ad controller and rejoined it (which works), but Test-ComputerSecureChannel -Verbose show again False. I'm not sure this is an issue on the samba or on the windows side. Affected samba versions so far:

Hi! I joined a newly installed samba (4.20.1) server to a domain, - just testing things. Now I want to remove this test server from a domain, but I can't: root at svdcm2:/# samba-tool domain leave -U tls\\mjt-adm WARNING: Using passwords on command line is insecure. Installing the setproctitle python module will hide these from shortly after program start. Password for [TLS\mjt-adm]:

20.06.2024 17:01, Ralph Boehme wrote: > On 6/20/24 2:03 PM, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >> How to remove this machine from a domain? > net ads leave ... Yeah, I tried that one right after `samba-tool domain leave` - it complains there's no way to leave a domain if joined as a DC. I *guess* this is the error `samba-tool domain leave` faces too, just without proper error

Hi! When I mount a samba share on linux (with mount -t cifs), samba correctly return EBUSY when trying to open a file for writing which is locked by some other client. However, I can trivially rename or (remove and create anew) such file from linux without any restrictions. After doing so, windows clients fail to open this (replaced) file exactly the same way as if I replaced it behind

Hi! This is a heads-up for now, more debugging to follow. I had to downgrade samba from 4.20.1 to 4.19.6 because 4.20 broke case insensitive file access entirely. Only exact case filename works, no matter which value is set in "case sensitive" parameter. In 4.19, things works again. /mjt -- GPG Key transition (from rsa2048 to rsa4096) since 2024-04-24. New key:

16.03.2024 20:11, Ralph Boehme wrote: > On 3/16/24 14:18, Michael Tokarev wrote: >> So I'm trying to go exactly the opposite route: I'm mounting a samba >> share on linux (with cifs, see $subject). > > ah, missed that. Had read it as if you were acting on the Samba server directly. > > This smells like "strict rename" isn't enabled ? it isn't

On 7/14/23 07:42, Daniel M?ller wrote: > Where to get the patch? > We are running samba 4.17.4 on debian11 . We compiled from source. it's linked in the bugreport https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15418 <https://cpaste.org/?df0494cac0063e2e#Cx69G684EBPQ71S6sAUVXSYburgV6gPyKHfPSbfmHZPJ> Hth! -slow -- Ralph Boehme, Samba Team https://samba.org/

Where to get the patch? We are running samba 4.17.4 on debian11 . We compiled from source. Greetings Daniel -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Ralph Boehme via samba [mailto:samba at lists.samba.org] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 13. Juli 2023 18:40 An: samba <samba at lists.samba.org> Betreff: Re: [Samba] Test-ComputerSecureChannel -Verbose False since windows 10/11 update 07/2023 Hi

16.03.2024 16:06, Ralph Boehme wrote: > On 3/16/24 06:59, Michael Tokarev via samba wrote: >> How to prevent rm and mv from touching a locked file? > > cf man smb.conf "kernel share modes" and > > git diff d40f57321a12~9..d40f57321a12 Hello Ralph! I'm not sure we understand each other here. Yes I'm aware of "kernel share modes" and turning off

Hello all, https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15418#c20 "This could be a shortterm fix in order to behave like an unpatched windows server" What is the attack scenario of an unpatched windows server? After all Microsoft likely patched to fix an issue, the short term solution probably restores not only NLA but also the vulnerability.. I am not arguing against the fix, as the

23.04.2024 04:32, Jones Syue ??? via samba wrote: > https://lists.samba.org/archive/cifs-protocol/2024-April/004282.html > Just for reference Microsoft will update doc [MS-SMB2] later :) This does not answer how windows chooses signing key if the connection is anonymous, though -- it is what started this whole thread :) Thanks, /mjt

Yes, in my opinion quite an arrogancy... This is the translation of what I got from the supporter: "Our developers have discussed and have concluded that we stand by our previous statement and define the problem as a problem of Samba AD Server (4.17.*). Although Synology is an open source product based on Samba, but we don't always stick to it and adapt our own code in many

Sebastian Neustein wrote: > I have to migrate our data from one old samba server to a new one. Due > to various reasons we had to change some settings. Now I struggle to > get the acls right. > ?Previously the acls were stored via posix and extended attributes, > now they are stored only in extended attributes With the default settings of vfs_acl_xattr samba takes posix acls

On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 03:19:59PM +0200, Ralph Boehme wrote: >On 8/21/23 11:53, Jones Syue ??? via samba wrote: >>>OH - that's *really* interesting ! I wonder how it is >>>changing the SMB3+ redirector to do this ? >> >>It looks like applications could do something and give a hint to SMB3+ >>redirector, so far not quite sure how to make it, >>per

Hi Ralph > On 8/18/23 09:55, Sebastian Neustein via samba wrote: >> With the default settings of vfs_acl_xattr samba takes posix acls >> into account when delivering data - how can I activate >> "acl_xattr:ignore system acls = yes" >> without loosing the information saved in posix acls? Background: our >> future file system won't be able to support

Hi! We had a painful debugging session today, with a samba AS member server not being able to auth users anymore. The issue seems to be due to defect in samba internal DNS resolution as done in winbind. TL;DR: samba internal DNS client should not rely on UDP-only DNS, but should retry using TCP if TC bit is set in answer. There's a real-life issue with this simplistic DNS implementation.

Hello Jeremy, > OH - that's *really* interesting ! I wonder how it is > changing the SMB3+ redirector to do this ? It looks like applications could do something and give a hint to SMB3+ redirector, so far not quite sure how to make it, per process monitor (procmon) could show that write I/O size seems could be pass from the application layers,