[Samba] Get logged on username (several sessions on the same
machine)
Ryan Novosielski
novosirj at umdnj.edu
Sat Mar 15 08:37:26 GMT 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
My recommendation is to use the [homes] share, not the [netlogon] share,
probably for this reason. I'm not really sure how I arrived at that
conclusion, but possibly I ran into that same issue long ago.
Kurthermal wrote:
> I'm aware that the fact connections aren't while the should is a client
> issue (let's say due to a finger press on the reset switch). I also know
> that it can possible that multiple users have a session open from the
> same machine (let's say a Linux box where Alice and Bob are connected
> with SSH and where they "smbmount" some ressources on a Samba Server).
> I now understand that there is no really a way to do what I want only
> with Samba, and that this is due to pure logic and SMB/CIFS
> specifications (if I'm wrong, please correct me).
>
> root preexec option in [netlogon] resource definition helps me now to
> get the real name of the connected user (since in my case only one
> person can use a workstation).
>
> Note that I see more than one execution of "root preexec" in one logon,
> as if client opens/closes/opens/closes/opens "netlogon" share from 2 to
> 4 times in its logon procedure...
>
> Thanks for your answer, cheers.
> K.
>
>
> Douglas VanLeuven wrote :
>> Kurthermal wrote:
>>
>>> But the machine has been rebooted and another user has opened a session
>>> on it, but 'net status session' or 'net session' continue to claim that
>>> there are 2 users logged on the same machine. It isn't always the case,
>>> I think it can be due for example to a reset of the machine so windows
>>> didn't close cleanly the network resources.
>>>
>>
>> I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough. I wasn't attempting to explain your
>> circumstance. I was trying to state a general design principal using a
>> kind of Socratic method.
>>
>> Windows workstations are notorious for not bothering to signal goodbye.
>> There are MS KB articles about fine tuning Windows servers to avoid
>> exhausting resources because the workstations are like that. It's not a
>> samba issue, it's a windows issue. I only tried to explain why it is
>> the way it is because you used the bug word.
>>
>> There has been a samba option for forever (since at least 1.x or beta)
>>
>> deadtime = <minutes>
>>
>> just so the sessions don't hang around forever. I never tried setting
>> it to 1 min., but you could experiment. But it doesn't work if an
>> application forgets to close a file or release a lock..
>>
>> I never tried it, but it should be possible to script something with the
>> "root preexec" if this is really an issue for you. But be warned -
>> there are legitimate reasons multiple users can be logged on to a samba
>> machine at the same time.
>>
>> For example. My wife is logged on a widows machine. I connect with
>> remote desktop.
>>
>> Samba version 3.0.28-0.1.95-1624-SUSE-SL10.3
>> PID Username Group Machine
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 7207 ranger1$ machine 192.168.202.35 (192.168.202.35)
>> 7207 FOREST\doug users 192.168.202.35 (192.168.202.35)
>> 7339 FOREST\cindy users 192.168.202.35 (192.168.202.35)
>> 7207 FOREST\cindy users 192.168.202.35 (192.168.202.35)
>> 7339 ranger1$ machine 192.168.202.35 (192.168.202.35)
>>
>> There's nothing I know of to readily distinguish your circumstance from
>> this circumstance other than quiescence on the connection for a period
>> of time.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>>
>>> Is there a way to get samba close all connections from a machine if
>>> another user try to open a new network resource from that machine ?
>>>
>>> Or is there another way to get the currently active session on a PDC
>>> client ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Douglas VanLeuven wrote :
>>>
>>>> Kurthermal wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Am I the only one to have noticed this behaviour ?
>>>>> Do I have to report a bug or so ?
>>>>> Where can I get some answers ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> If a service was running as a prior user and needed network resources
>>>> from the samba server in addition to the currently logged on user,
>>>> wouldn't it be wrong to make the assumption those resources should no
>>>> longer be available?
>>>>
>>>> It only takes one exception to break a general case.
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Doug
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
- --
---- _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _
|Y#| | | |\/| | \ |\ | | |Ryan Novosielski - Systems Programmer II
|$&| |__| | | |__/ | \| _| |novosirj at umdnj.edu - 973/972.0922 (2-0922)
\__/ Univ. of Med. and Dent.|IST/AST - NJMS Medical Science Bldg - C630
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFH24rGmb+gadEcsb4RAkSzAKCU4+mQjQtgef61EYmcqefYh43auQCgqoi9
mi9SQAmLYYR405FZuBcH2Nk=
=RmUT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the samba
mailing list