Chuck Ebbert wrote:
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:32:05 -0600, Steve French wrote:
smbfs deprecation is ok but there are a few things to consider:
How well-tested is the plaintext password support?
By default the /proc/fs/cifs/SecurityFlags setting is 0x7 (MAY_SIGN |
MAY_NTLM | MAYNTLMV2). Trying to connect to an old Samba server
with that, I got a message that the server requested a plain text
password but client support was disabled.
After changing the flags to 0x37 (adding MAY_LANMAN | MAY_PLNTXT),
I got "invalid password." Looking at the ethereal traces, it seemed
that the password was being sent as encrypted Unicode, and the only
way to make it connect was to set the flags to 0x30.
I don't remember any problems reported with plain text password
support on current cifs and I have certainly seen it negotiated with no
problem,
but I will double check with your reported flag combination.
Also, the client doesn't automatically pick up the domain name from
smb.conf like smbfs does.
That is true, and is intentional. cifs sends a domain of null (ie use
the server's
default domain) - but it can be overridden on mount
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
