similar to: INVITE: SMB3 IO Lab participation at Storage Developers Conference Sept. 18-21, 2023 in Freemont, CA.

Dear all, what is about the support for POSIX ACL in Samba protocol implementation of SMB2 and SMB3? >From what I extracted from SNIA and SambaXP developer conference talks and as well as the official Samba Wiki, support for POSIX ACL in SMB2 and SMB3 has been completely abandonned. Am I right? If so, is there any other possibility to allow Linux Clients to natively access access control lists

The SMB3 POSIX extensions is different from the old Unix extensions. The Unix extensions can only support vers=1.0, but the new SMB3 POSIX extensions can support SMB3.1.1, vers=3.1.1. You can check this 2018 presentation slides: https://www.snia.org/sites/default/files/SDC/2018/presentations/SMB/Steve_French_SMB311.pdf Page 12 shows that POSIX extensions has been added. Page 22 shows that SMB3

In current kernels we have the new IOCTL / QueryInfo passthrough where you can use a simple ioctl() on an object in a SMB2/3 share and pull the full security descriptor. It would be fairly trivial to expand this to allow setting the security descriptor too using SetInfo. We can add that when there is a need. Now, since this is available through a simple ioctl() interface, you can access this

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 03:05:12PM +0000, Kraus, Sebastian via samba wrote: > Dear all, > what is about the support for POSIX ACL in Samba protocol implementation of SMB2 and SMB3? > From what I extracted from SNIA and SambaXP developer conference talks and as well as the official Samba Wiki, > support for POSIX ACL in SMB2 and SMB3 has been completely abandonned. Am I right? Yes.

ACL management can be done for SMB2/SMB3 ACLs with two common tools depending on your preference. smbcacls (somewhat similar to using cacls.exe or icacls.exe in Windows but specifying the UNC name rather than a local path name). smbcacls sets up and tears down a network connection each time it is run and uses Samba user space code. or setcifsacl/getcifsacl (which calls cifs.ko to access the

Thanks for the first reply, Jeremy. What about the (future) implementation of RichACL? Will there be any native Linux Client support along with the SMB2/SMB3 protocol? I know, there is a native implemenation for RichACLs in ext4 FS. Unfortunately, smbcals is not a native Linux ACL Tool and has a very unhandy syntax. I just tested some days ago. ;-) I am looking for a solution that allows the

Hi, I want to use the SMB3 POSIX extensions in the latest Samba (with SMB3.1.1, vers=3.1.1). By following the user manual, I have added the "posix" mount option when mounting, but it shows the following error messages. Error messages: [xxxxx] CIFS VFS: Server does not support mounting with posix SMB3.11 extensions. [xxxxx] CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -95 Mount option:

Hello Samba folks, Server 2012 has an option to create encrypted shares which enable in-transit data encryption between Windows 8 clients using SMB 3.0. ( http://blogs.technet.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communityserver-blogs-components-weblogfiles/00-00-00-47-85-metablogapi/2313.clip_5F00_image00111_5F00_757A262D.jpg ) I ran across a presentation from Michael Adam where he mentioned

Hi, I am running samba-4.1.4 on my Fedora OS. I have provided the "client max protocol = SMB3" and "server max protocol = SMB3" parameters in smb.conf file I'm able to get only SMB2.1 packets using wireshark after fileshare access from my windows 7 machine. And not SMB3 packets. SMB2->NegotiateProtocol Response 0x0202 0x0210 Samba-4.1.4 is supporting SMB3 also. So

Dear Jeremy, thanks for your instant reply. :-) Along with Linux native getfacl/fetfacl, I also tested getcifsacl/setcifsacl (for sure thoroughly ;-)). Unfortunately, these CIFS client tools seem to have been designed as part of the "old" CIFS Unix Extensions, working only for SMB/CIFS mounts, and are not supposed to work with SMB2/SMB3 mounts, as I guess. During my tests, the

Where is the patch?I can help to get this integrated -----邮件原件----- 发件人: Jeremy Allison [mailto:jra at samba.org] 发送时间: 2016年9月1日 7:57 收件人: Michael Adam 抄送: zhengbin 08747 (RD); weidong 12656 (RD); 'samba at lists.samba.org' 主题: Re: [Samba] status of Continuous availability in SMB3 On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:29:51AM +0200, Michael Adam via samba wrote: > On 2016-08-31 at 08:13 +0000,

On 2016-08-31 at 08:13 +0000, zhengbin.08747 at h3c.com wrote: > hi Michael Adam: > Thanks for you work on samba. Here I am looking for some advice and your help. > I have been stuck in continuous availability of samba 4.3.9 for two weeks. Continuous availability in SMB3 is an attractive feature and I am strugling to enable it. > > smb.conf, ctdb.conf are attached. Cluster file

Hello.. My server have this settings in [global] section: max protocol = smb3 min protocol = smb2 When I try connect to server using my clients (Centos 7.3/Ubuntu 16.04) I can't because clients still trying NT1. I must explicity add in smb.conf on clients the option ' client max protocol = smb3' and the connections works again. The question is: If I have defined the min and max

On 05/10/2019 06:49, Chris Han via samba wrote: > Hi, I want to use the SMB3 POSIX extensions in the latest Samba (with > SMB3.1.1, vers=3.1.1). By following the user manual, I have added the > "posix" mount option when mounting, but it shows the following error > messages. > > Error messages: > [xxxxx] CIFS VFS: Server does not support mounting with posix SMB3.11

Hi all, Quick question - does Samba server still support Unix extensions when connecting over SMB3? My Linux client recently got upgraded to a CIFS module version that uses SMB3 by default, and since then I lost the ability to create symlinks on my CIFS shares. Running "mount" shows the share mounted with the "nounix" option. If I follow the advice in dmesg and add the

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:29:51AM +0200, Michael Adam via samba wrote: > On 2016-08-31 at 08:13 +0000, zhengbin.08747 at h3c.com wrote: > > When carring out the test, I have a wireshark process run. It is confirmed that protocol smb3 is used. In the tree connection phase, server's response to client claims that it does not support DFS/Continuous Availability. > > I'm

Hai,   ( not all on samba topic but one i wanted to share. )   I did read :  https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/LinuxCIFSKernel mainly because of, from that page, 4.7 Kernel Fix badlock regression for guest mounts (mount with -o guest can fail to Samba servers when patched for badlock). I encountered such a problem yesterday. Luckly not in the office..   The fix. Cifs.ko version

Thanks for the reply. I was checking this with several IT professionals and the consensus was that it should never be exposed over the internet (even SMB3.0) and they all recommended to use it over SSH or VPN. A couple of people said there are more security professionals venting/using/supporting SSH which is why they recommend using that. I was just wondering, would this just be the leftover

Hello, How secure is SMB3 over Internet? I see that Microsoft Azure is doing SMB3 shares over internet so they seem to think it's secure. Does the SAMBA team recommend this type of scenario OR do they recommend instead running it over a SSH tunnel/VPN?

Hi, Getting straight to the point: /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool domain classicupgrade --dbdir=/root/elara/samba/ --use-xattrs=yes --realm=mycompanyname.com.pl/root/elara.smb.conf After cleaning up all duplicate names and sutch I end up with: ldb: ldb_trace_request: (tdb)->search ldb: ldb_trace_response: ENTRY dn: CN=CONFIG cn: CONFIG upperBound: 4000000 lowerBound: None xidNumber: None