Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Native Support For Windows File Sharing Coming To Chrome OS (arstechnica.com)

Posted by msmash on from the up-next dept.

Chrome OS 70, which Google plans to release in the second half of next month, will include native support for SMB file shares, giving it built-in access to files stored on Windows servers. With this, Chrome OS users can add SMB file shares to the Files app and use them to store and load documents. From a report: Currently, using these network resources requires the use of an extension that adds a similar ability to add file shares to the Files app. Google has been working to make Files a more capable application. As well as integrating support for networked files, the company is also experimenting with giving it more access to Android files, something that will streamline the use of Android applications by exposing their data files to Chrome OS apps. The SMB support helps smooth a pain point when mixing Chromebooks with other systems: it makes it easier to use Chrome OS with corporate file servers, home networked storage devices, and of course, Windows PCs. Instead of needing the extra extension to be installed, these things will just work out of the box.

51 comments

  1. Native access to all your files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use Chrome, and Google will know exactly what you got on your computer. There's always Firefox of course...

    1. Re:Native access to all your files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Pssst... Firefox is predominantly funded by Google. They'll still know exactly what you got on your computer.

    2. Re:Native access to all your files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, you can't use Firefox on ChromeOS except through the Android version (slow) or something like Crouton (which is a bit heavy-weighted).

    3. Re:Native access to all your files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use Chrome, and Google will know exactly what you got on your computer. There's always Firefox of course...

      RTFS. Heck, RTF Headline. It's coming to Chrome OS, not Chrome the browser.

    4. Re:Native access to all your files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pssst, that's just a payment for including Google as the default search engine. It does not give Google a right to dictate how Firefox should behave, dumb-ass.

    5. Re:Native access to all your files by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Use Windows, and Microsoft will know exactly what you got on your computer. Use Apple, and everyone will know exactly what you have in your bank account.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    6. Re:Native access to all your files by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try, but if you had done any research at all, you'd find out that Google actually does have quite a bit of pull on how Firefox operates (ostensibly due to their funding). This is one reason why Firefox doesn't include ad block technology by default, for example.

  2. Better interoperability between systems is good by JcMorin · · Score: 1

    Maybe that will fee us some times doing other stuff than fixing friend computer to be able to open a network file.

    1. Re:Better interoperability between systems is good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe that will fee us some times doing other stuff than fixing friend computer to be able to open a network file.

      Judging from your writing style, you must have eaten a lot of leaded paint chips when you were young.

    2. Re:Better interoperability between systems is good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed he has, this must be another creimer sock puppet account.

      Have you ever heard the story of creimer, his uncle, the tree, the bees and the lard bucket?

      Here is what his girlfriend says about it:

      Bonus:
      Here is a story that creimer told me when convincing me what a hard life he had:

      The tree was him and the tree knot was his butt hole!

      So, his uncle packed his fat ass with lard and with his cock! Not that it makes much of a difference but anyway, there it is!

  3. I don't know why... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 2

    ... but with the combination of Windows file sharing and a browser, this looks like a security problem just waiting to happen. There is too much complexity being added to browsers, too many attack surfaces. At what point is it not possible to assure proper levels of security?

    1. Re:I don't know why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But doesn't emacs already support this?

    2. Re:I don't know why... by JackieBrown · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's for ChromeOS not Chrome.

    3. Re:I don't know why... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I'm sure this is just some custom build of Samba, probably with a dead-simple log in interface (not that Samba is all that hard to connect to Active Directory these days). It's an interesting option, and I might even consider it for some of our systems where something like Google Docs would be more than sufficient.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:I don't know why... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Pay attention.... They added the SMB capability to the Files app, not the Web Browser app.

    5. Re:I don't know why... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

      ...It's for ChromeOS not Chrome....

      oops, my bad. Thanks for the correction! (though I still think browsers are getting too complex. JavaScript, I mean, what are they thinking...)

    6. Re:I don't know why... by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's a wrapper around libsmbclient. Works well !

      Feel free to ask me any questions you might have.

    7. Re:I don't know why... by RoccamOccam · · Score: 1

      Wow! No question from me, but I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for all of your work on Samba!

    8. Re:I don't know why... by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      No problem. Samba is still a really fun and interesting program to work on ! I'm going to be up in Redmond next week working with Microsoft engineers on adding POSIX compatibility to SMB3+ and then at the SNIA Conference in Santa Clara, CA the week after giving a couple of talks, and attending the SMB3 plugfest (where we get to work out all the interoperability bugs with other engineers working on SMB).

      https://www.snia.org/events/st...

      See you there ! :-).

    9. Re:I don't know why... by technix4beos · · Score: 1

      Can you share any screenshots of the connection interface? Are you already using this on your Chromebook? Does it support persistent connections? (ie: making a network share and having it re-connect after a shutdown/reboot) ...?

      --
      user@host$ diff /dev/urandom /dev/uspto
    10. Re:I don't know why... by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      I actually don't use a Chromebook myself, I have a Linux laptop instead so can't give you screenshots.

      For single sign-on you'll need to have your Chromebook joined to the AD Domain (also using Samba underneath).

      Reconnection on restart isn't there yet, but is an obvious enhancement to consider (don't want to comment on future product plans).

  4. Lets get IE 5 and Active X again. by jellomizer · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I am all for new features. But giving the browser more access to the file structure and networked files, reminds me of the Windows 98 Lets integrate the browser in the OS and the old Netscape, Lets make the browser the OS methodology.

    If your browser can do it natively, then you are opening the door for outside sites that use the browser to do it as well. It reminds me of when Active X came out to compete with Java Applets. One of its big selling points was the ability to open and save files. And used a do you trust this Active X as its only security measure. This turned IE into a security nightmare.

    Having this feature, even with a lot of safeguards, being native means you may be a single security flaw away from a major problem. Besides unlike 20 years ago, system files are not the big problem, it is what is in your document folders and shared is where all the valuable stuff is.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re: Lets get IE 5 and Active X again. by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Informative

      But giving the browser more access to the file structure and networked files, reminds me of the ...

      Chrome OS is not a browser. The "OS" part of the name kinda gives it away.

    2. Re:Lets get IE 5 and Active X again. by hunter44102 · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is Chrome OS not the browser. Please re read the article

  5. ChromeOS becoming a good operating system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now we just need a decent web browser.

  6. Linux? by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

    I thought it was linux? Why not just allow users to install Samba?

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if the user is a heterosexual? What are they to do?

    2. Re:Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because that's not Googly enough. The Goo-ghoul must have access to as much of your data as possible for it's targeted advertising/marketing AI system. Therefore, a specially designed Samba-esque program with Goo-ghoul technology deeply embedded is required.

    3. Re:Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Goo-ghoul corporate mantra: "Do know evil."

    4. Re:Linux? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Because most users wouldn't be able to configure it properly to work. It probably is Samba underneath, but has an interface and configures all the default settings to make it easier for people to user. I set up a Ubuntu box last weekend and was reminded just how non-user-friendly things can be on Linux. Using the UI, it found my windows machine, but even after typing in my user name and password, it didn't show any of the shared folders. I remember other issues where you could mount the folder, but then you'd have to mess around with setting permissions on the shared folder. You would think it would just set everything to read/write and let the server take care of the permissions, but apparently that makes too much sense.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    5. Re:Linux? by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      Nope. It's just a FLOSS wrapper around FLOSS libsmbclient.

      Nothing proprietary here.

    6. Re: Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet it still doesnâ(TM)t support the UNC paths that 99% of the people you share the file server with will be using.

    7. Re: Linux? by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      It uses the smb url syntax that the Gnome nautilus and KDE file browers use. See here for details:

      https://www.samba.org/samba/do...

      Although the smb:// bare syntax for browsing won't work as NetBIOS is (or should be) dead, dead, dead :-).

    8. Re:Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, that's good to hear.

      I have reservations regarding ChromeOS though. From what I've read, it seems like the user is rubber-roomed like in Android. If I can't recompile the kernel from source, flash, and run my own build, how do I ensure the system isn't making use of innocent libsmbclient code at some lower level for nefarious "Goo-ghoul" surveillance of the data flowing through?

    9. Re:Linux? by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      You can. Chromebooks have "developer mode" which allows you control of the box yourself. It's required by the licenses of the code inside.

    10. Re:Linux? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      The entire point of a Chromebook is to provide a managed environment in which users don't have to implement complex subsystems with severe security ramifications themselves. It means that a Chromebook is (as of now, though not for much longer) much more limited than a GNU/Linux box, but it also makes it a device end users can have some trust in, knowing nobody else is screwing with it (insert usual crap about trusting Google here, but reminder: any OS vendor has that control. Canonical, Red Hat, and even Patrick Volkerding have the ability to take over your computer if you choose the operating system they're responsible for.)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  7. MS CAL licenses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will Google provide CAL licenses or is it up to customer to get those?

    I'm neither Windows nor ChromeOS user, but just tought about the matter as Microsoft probably doesn't like this development and it may start asking audits for the customers having windows servers and knowingly also uses ChromeBooks.

    1. Re:MS CAL licenses? by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't wanna pay for Microsoft CALs ? Use Samba4-Active Directory.

      Problem solved :-).

    2. Re: MS CAL licenses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, you just sell that option to our windows admins and management :D

      As I've seen it as Linux & Mac using long time network, security & infrastructure guy that it isn't easy task to get those heads turned around.

    3. Re: MS CAL licenses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If people are interested in seeing more adoption, they should report successful implementations, making blog posts, videos, with live networks showing that samba works well as DC.

  8. Found the LUDDITE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They added APP appability to the APP app, NOT LUDDITE Files!

    Apps!

  9. Android next, please by hughcharlesparker · · Score: 1

    Great. Can we have the same facility for Android, too?

    1. Re:Android next, please by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      I personally use ES file explorer on my Android devices. It has libsmbclient built in (although they make you pay rent to get access to SMB2, which I think is a bit of a crock personally).

      I watch movies & TV on my tablet PC at home using this.

    2. Re:Android next, please by zilym · · Score: 1

      I used to enjoy ES File Explorer back in the Android 4.0 days, but today I can't stand all the constant updates with useless bloatware, adverts, and anti-features. Finally just uninstalled it for good.

      Google themselves made third party file explorers pretty much worthless on unrooted Android, since apps do not have access to write to the SD Card anymore. It wasn't too big a deal when I could use official vendor supplied methods to root my device, but now vendors have locked things down so tight that I'd have to resort to using some Chinese rootkit tool (Kingroot) just to get my file explorer app working right. Thanks, but no thanks.

    3. Re:Android next, please by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I afree about the anti-features. It has one really good feature though, in that it uses libsmbclient to access a local fileshare, then re-exports it as a web interface to allow media players to use it. That's a killer feature for me.

      I think vlc on Android can also do this, but they ship their own SMB client code I think.

  10. NFS ? by dargaud · · Score: 1

    Can we get support for NFS in Android and Chromium instead of this shit ? Please.

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
    1. Re:NFS ? by Jeremy+Allison+-+Sam · · Score: 2

      Could be done - you'd need to write a wrapper (probably around Ronnie's libnfs. If you want to do it take a look at the wrapper code created for libsmbclient.

      https://github.com/sahlberg/li...

  11. Konqueror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The KDE Konqueror browser supports SMB and SFTP and Fish and...

  12. c6gunner you give away proof you're trash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    6gunner your FAKEname's on a post impersonating me & worse was you altering /. user's words https://linux.slashdot.org/com... since I challenged you to show you do better work and you can't after you tried to mock me you hypocrite LYING loser https://linux.slashdot.org/com... .

    * You're online FAKENAME trash c6gunner & a childish dishonest punk.

    APK

    P.S.=> Impossible to deny FACT of your FAKEname (for your FAKE wasted lie of a so-called life) on that 1st post link above you unbelievable pussy loser... apk

  13. Re: apk you give away proof you're trash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject "APK" (fake name do-nothing nobody): You're a "ne'er-do-well" chatterbox (all talk & no work BETTER than mine) & you proved it.

    APK

    P.S.=> Don't take "potshots" @ your BETTERS like me you CHUMP (& I can say that since you ARE obviously a NOBODY chump do-nothing vs. me)... apk