Slashdot Mirror
Samba 3.0.0 Released
Matt writes "As posted on Samba.org the fine folks at Samba.org released their newest version of the popular free Windows File- and Print Server. Most famous additions are Active Directory integration and possibilities to form NT4 trust relationships. Release notes are online." See also their press release.
..at O'Reilly's Safari Bookshelf!
Congrats to the Samba Team!
now my linux box has to deny having a relationship the that windows server next door.
There are exploits in every product, opensource or not. It's just a matter of you taking necessary precautions like using a decent firewall and patching regularly.
...and possibilities to form NT4 trust relationships.
but is it wise to trust a NT4 server?
We've had Samba in Brazil for centuries...
;)
Amazing how the USA thinks they are ahead of everyone else...
I was recently banging my head against the wall when attempting to use a Samba share on an XP box that had worked fine on all my Win2K boxes.
Days & days of hacking the config and attempting to get it to work to no avail. Finally I find that it appears that WinXP has some security "features" added into it that break the use of samaba shares.
This frustration I felt has actually pushed me one more step towards switching all of our machines over to Linux. It may not happen tomorrow, but it will happen.
--Remove chicken to e-mail
The author missed one of the bigger points that they have working now. BDC! You can finally, if it works - I haven't tried it, have automated fail over without hacking some scripts and running a few PDCs. Very COOL!
That and it says it will work "out of the box" with Windows Server 2003. I wonder if that means they fixed the "trust" issue with Windows XP trying to auth with it for login without reg hacks....
Aside from that concern I can personally say that Samba rules. I have benchmarked it as being a faster file/print server compared to Windoze on identical hardware. A Linux box that can act as a domain controller, and now participate in cross-domain trust relationships and use AD is a helpful tool for weaning folks away from Micro$loth.
I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about. I'm running Samba at home, and my XP boxes can pick up the shares on it just fine.
You may need to add smbpasswd entries for the machines users, but other than that, it should be ok.
opensource != secure
Thanks Egan, good safety tip.
by any stretch of the imagination, in fact there are probably numerous untold exploits available for this software. Its just a matter of time, as with any opensource product.
And let`s also remember that _because_ it is open source, we now have thousands of developers who can view the code, find potential exploits, and then propose patches, QUICKLY and WITHOUT BIAS. Unfortunately, for patches to the same styled exploits that would exist in a closed source networking protocol, we would need to depend on a small team of developers under a common management structure (one pointy haired boss = single point of failure).
Open Source != secure
Open Source == better method toward security
davejenkins.com |
I quite happy with this new release, what I like the most about it is the new Active Directory support, I have been waiting for it since I started to use it in my homenetwork. Another impressive feature is UNICODE support (isn't mentioned in the post), one of my family members needed it badly to deal with non-latin charsets.
And the new "get" command which is similar to windows "net" is useful too.
Keep up the great work SAMBA team!
The IT section color scheme sucks.
Samba 2.2.x + XP + SP1 requires some tweaking to do domain logons for XP clients.
:)
Basic file sharing is fine, but if you're using Samba as a domain controller, you need to set a SignOrSeal reg value off to allow domain logons and also unset a "check profile ownership acls" setting which was introduced by SP1.
-- Someone who uses Samba 2.2.x as domain controller for several hundred XP boxes
I've experienced numerous random lockups using samba v3. The mount point would just hang requiring a samba restart.
After searching for a while, I found that there's a bug in Redhat 9's new thread library which samba somehow triggers. There's a workaround on the net, look for it and avoid hassling the samba team - they're not at fault here!
One thing that does change with Samba 3 is the way that you need to configure Squid to use NTLM authentication...
If you upgrade and try using the old authenticators built with squid, you'll be stuck. Samba 3 comes with it's own helper utility (ntlm_auth) to work with other applications such as Squid.
I have written a Samba 3 / Squid Walkthrough that takes users step by step through getting this going.
Find out about it here:
http://itmanagers.net/article-4--0-0.html
There is an easy fix to this for XP:
Settings -> Control Panel -> Admin Tools -> Local Security Policy
Look under Local Policies, then Security Options.
Look for "Domain Member: Digitally encrypt or sign secured channel (always)" and set it to DISABLED.
That should solve some of your problems.
XP only wants to trust other Windows machines when working in a domain environment.
No, they never did this. Oplocks are problematic in that
Windows boxes tend not to respond to oplock break requests
if there are *any* network problems. Most people have cheap
switches/hubs etc. For instance on my home network I can
only reliably ssh transfer a 100mb file over one of my
switches (the gigabit one), the 100Mbit switch will
consistantly corrupt the tcp stream causing ssh to abort.
oplocks need *reliable* networking hardware.
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
I wouldn't do it. And I write lots of the Samba code :-).
The protocol is just too complex to be sure any implementation
is safe.
Hopefully that should tell you something. It should also
tell you why we don't want it in the Linux kernel. Microsoft
put it in their kernel - I think that's a mistake.
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.