[jcifs] Question About NTLMv2 Session Security

[tetsu.soh at nts.ricoh.co.jp]

Thanks for your answer.
And I did more homework, and IMHO, NTLM2 = NTLMv2, at least in this
context.

In the document which I referred to (
http://davenport.sourceforge.net/ntlm.html),
the author wrote that "In all levels, NTLM2 session security is supported
and negotiated when available
 (most available documentation indicates that NTLM2 session security is
only enabled on levels 1 and
above, but it is seen in practice with Level 0 as well). "

I think the author has already explained all.

Further more, I found in the samba mailing list, the author had talked more
on this problem.
http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2003-July/030974.html

Anyway, I decide to follow the MS's document, because it's simpler.

Thanks again.

Tetsu

"Caldarale, Charles R" <Chuck.Caldarale at unisys.com> wrote on 2007/07/27
13:39:59:

> > From: On Behalf Of tetsu.soh at nts.ricoh.co.jp
> > Subject: [jcifs] Question About NTLMv2 Session Security
> >
> > But another document,
> > http://davenport.sourceforge.net/ntlm.html, told me
> > that NTLM2 session response can be used in Levels 0, 1, and 2.

> Don't confuse NTLM2 with NTLMv2 - different animals.

> - Chuck

>
> THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY
> MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail
> and its attachments from all computers.