request to remove security=share

Christopher R. Hertel crh at
Wed Mar 15 17:12:12 GMT 2006

Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 11:50:48AM -0600, Steven French wrote:
>>types of installation and don't see any particular reason to get rid of it
>>on the Samba server (of course "security = user" should be the default for
>>the server, but it is so trivial to support seems not worth removing).
> Just have to add a me too comment: This is _not_ trivial to
> support anymore. Quite a bunch of code right now exists just
> to support the guessing game in security=share. This used to
> be shared with the valid users code, but that has been
> replaced. That's why I said it would remove a bunch of
> really messy code.
> Any strong opinions against my share read/write user
> parameter proposal? If not, then I'll take this as my plan
> for the weekend or so :-)

I like the idea, but I'll do a "me too" regarding Mr. Bartlett's comment
that there doesn't appear to be any way to make this work with NTLMv2 auth
(or, probably, Kerberos either).  That's not really surprising, though.

Chris -)-----

"Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem" ISBN: 013047116X
Samba Team --     -)-----   Christopher R. Hertel
jCIFS Team --   -)-----   ubiqx development, uninq.
ubiqx Team --     -)-----   crh at
OnLineBook --    -)-----   crh at

More information about the samba-technical mailing list