Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Samba 4.11 Aims To Be Scalable To 100,000+ Users
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostMind explaining why it's so bad when it's obviously a niche case? What's your solution to getting XP support?
Besides, a lot of workstations ship with it disabled, and/or Win10 disables it at random on PCs.
Comment
-
Over the last three years Samba has become so "secure" that it can't be used anymore.
But heck, if you can't connect to anything I guess that is indeed the ultimate in security
In any case it's been interesting reading through all of these comments about it. No matter what side of these issues one may be on, I think most will agree that Samba is now so difficult to configure that it's well outside the range of the average, or even above average, users capabilities.
Heck, I'm an embedded systems designer with almost four decades of experience and I finally just gave up about eight months ago. I actually went out and bought a 2TB SSD one day to transfer data between my Linux and Windows systems, and haven't looked back since. I just couldn't afford to spend any more man months on it. Especially after finally realizing that even if I got it working one day, it was going to break again within the next few months.
And yes, I tried almost every "solution" mentioned here.
In any case, I can only imagine that with such a major new release coming things are going to get much, much, worse before they get better.
Comment
-
Originally posted by muncrief View PostIn any case it's been interesting reading through all of these comments about it. No matter what side of these issues one may be on, I think most will agree that Samba is now so difficult to configure that it's well outside the range of the average, or even above average, users capabilities.
Of course I needed a third party application for Windows because its native ftp client is stuck in the 80s https://www.nsoftware.com/sftp/netdrive/Last edited by starshipeleven; 08 July 2019, 03:21 AM.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostAnd is that a surprise to you, considering how little you elaborate?
wtf? You say that as though removing a password on root doesn't sit within that threshold? Nobody uses SMB1 anymore except for a few odd cases that nobody is looking out for. It's not as critical as you're making it out to be. Meanwhile, removing a root password is far more dangerous than an outdated obscure file-sharing protocol.
That's exactly my point. How dense are you? It's assumed that the insecurities involved are bad enough that nobody would want to enable SMB1 unless they knew what they were about to get involved in. So, your reason for not having to explain is also the same reason why your comment was useless and unnecessary.
SMB1 is far from something that is not looked for you may wanna check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EternalBlue
Not having a root password is not as much of a problem (for most unix's who do the sane thing and disable root SSH access) as the only way to exploit it is to have code exec on the box. If this is on a personal box/network - You get to break it and keep all the pieces. Yes, insecure passwords are a fun thing in an exploit *chain*.
Doing something that silly on a prod network should get you a written warning.
SMB1 is RCE (remote code exec) on windows all by itself.
That is why it is bad.
And the reason why it is still active is that people still insist on using it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by muncrief View PostIn any case it's been interesting reading through all of these comments about it. No matter what side of these issues one may be on, I think most will agree that Samba is now so difficult to configure that it's well outside the range of the average, or even above average, users capabilities.
Comment
-
Originally posted by boxie View PostSMB1 is far from something that is not looked for you may wanna check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EternalBlue
I've enabled FTP on sooo many of these devices to fix the "issues" people were having in connecting to it from Windows 10 and newer workstations where it seems SMB1 was disabled by default.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by boxie View PostOk, enough with the attacks, they are not civil - you might be frustrated, but trying to insult people does not win you an argument - even on the Internet - you are being an ass.
Doing something that silly on a prod network should get you a written warning.
SMB1 is RCE (remote code exec) on windows all by itself.
That is why it is bad.
And the reason why it is still active is that people still insist on using it.Last edited by schmidtbag; 08 July 2019, 08:50 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostAgain, maybe if you spent more time thinking about your response, we wouldn't be here right now. I don't take the aggressive side until someone's behavior is unjustified. And for the record, there is not a direct correlation between correctness and justification.
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostI would argue getting fired is warranted, but to each their own.
Originally posted by schmidtbag View PostI didn't say it wasn't bad. I know it's bad. If people insist on using it, they either know what they're doing or must suffer the consequences of not choosing a more ideal solution (such as a different OS or FTP). But again, that's obvious. If someone asks a question, I plan to answer it as-is. If I sense they're about to do something really irresponsible, I'll also tell them to reconsider their actions, but most people on Phoronix aren't dumb enough to use SMB1 on something important.
if the person is indeed smart, then they might figure to avoid the sharp hurty bits.
Comment
Comment