greg at kwikfind.com
Wed Oct 10 16:03:10 GMT 2001
On Wednesday 10 October 2001 06:55 pm, Joel Hammer wrote:
> Just thinking about the nasty stuff that windows users might shove up on my
> linux samba server makes my blood boil!
Interesting. Without Winows users, there wouldn't be much of a need for
> Seriously, it seems like bad practice to let just any user save to a
> common directory, download from it, and to erase/change any files he/she
> wants to.
Not sure how else you can setup a project directory for a team to
collectively work in. Maybe passing around floppy disks?
>During the last worm (nimda), samba servers could be used as a
> nidus of infection by transmitting the worm to windows clients.
Not if you setup one of the many server based virus scanning systems. I use
RAV to scan all incoming and outgoing email. I've also set RAV to scan all
Samba shares every night when my people are not in the office. The system
checks for new virus defs every 30 min.
> It strikes me that there is an "easy" solution for this.
> Would it not be possible to have two shares for clients.
> One share is read only, whence the client may download files to his/he
> machine. The other share is the upload share. The client would save his/her
Wow talk about a mess. It's been hard enough implementing oplocks. Can't
imagine what it would be like trying to read from one place and write to
More information about the samba