request to remove security=share
Christopher R. Hertel
crh at ubiqx.mn.org
Wed Mar 15 00:57:30 GMT 2006
Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 17:18 -0600, Steven French wrote:
>>>but it is so trivial to support
>>Perhaps one case in which it is nicer to be working on the "client"
>>The client is easy ... as it is still is NTLM (would be fun to allow
>>NTLMv2), just skip session setup and stick the encrypted challenge in
That is the way real share-mode works. In the old days, it was the
plaintext password that was returned in the tconx. Now it's the response
(the encryption of the challenge).
> The problem is the username arguments in the hash calculation.
> Otherwise, this would sort of almost work (due to the way this is
That's why Volker proposed the "share write user" and "share read user"
options. It ties the share to a password (or a pair or password) using
the existing user lookup mechanisms which already work. It also bypasses
all of the cruft of trying to "guess" a username so that a password can be
found. Finally, it forces one single password per access option
(read/write) rather than going through a list of possibilities as we do
now. That makes the whole thing much more consistent (and simpler).
"Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem" ISBN: 013047116X
Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/ -)----- Christopher R. Hertel
jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/ -)----- ubiqx development, uninq.
ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/ -)----- crh at ubiqx.mn.org
OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/ -)----- crh at ubiqx.org
More information about the samba-technical