Account with no lanman hash [ was Re: [Samba] Machine accounts, Samba 3, NT Domain migration

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at
Sat Mar 27 05:16:58 GMT 2004

On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 15:55, Beast wrote:
> * Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at> menulis:
> > > 1. In which tools we trust the output? pwdump or rpc vampire? why
> > > the output is different?
> > 
> > Well, I understand how 'net rpc vampire' functions, and as it makes
> > *exactly* the same calls that an NT BDC makes, I consider it to be
> > the'correct' output.  
> Just a wishes, is it possible to get pwdump.exe version of net rpc
> vampire? so we can get hashses output without installing full blown of
> samba and *script? 
> It then up to administrator what to do with the output, this is the
> cleanest soulution if you already have existing account in ldap.

'net rpc samdump' should do what you need

> Also, net rpc vampire has few advantage over pwdump, it can retrieve
> groups where pwdump can not.

pwdump was a quick hack, from what I understand...

> > 
> > I have not looked at the pwdump source, nor had any experience using
> > it, so I don't know why it's output would differ.
> > 
> > > 2. Is this mean I can not use 3.0.2 or 3.0.2a if I don't have
> > > LANMAN hash? 
> > 
> > This is correct.
> > 
> Sorry for asking again here, can I use samba 3.0.3pre1? sincei can't
> use older version of samba. Just to make sure...

You can.

Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett                                 abartlet at
Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team  abartlet at
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College   abartlet at
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url :

More information about the samba mailing list