Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: As Arnold said "I'll be Back!". Sorry to say I am.

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    139

    As Arnold said "I'll be Back!". Sorry to say I am.

    ops: I managed to get the Samba application running with the following smb.conf contents:
    #
    # smb.conf is the main samba configuration file. You find a full commented
    # version at /usr/share/doc/packages/samba/examples/smb.conf.SuSE
    # Date: November 16, 2004
    [global]
    workgroup = creicoad
    unix extensions = yes
    encrypt password = no
    #

    However, left clicking on the network displayed "Samba 2.2.5-UL (Elbert)" in the listing produces the "X" panel stating:
    "\\Elbert is not accessible. You might not have permission to use this resource --yata yata--, followed by The account is not authorized to log in from this station"

    I obviously do not have the correct options/variables in the [global] section.

    Any thoughts?

    TIA.
    Everything I learn gives me another way to say \"OOPS!\" :oops:

  2. #2
    Associate
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    25
    This is off the top of my head - I have done this but it has been a long time - but here goes:

    1. I seem to recall that the passwords _have to_ be encrypted.

    2. Have you added a smb user on the linux box? I added a user in the usual manner and then had to give him/her a samba password thusly:
    # smbpasswd -a username
    The '-a' is key first time around as it 'adds' the passwd for the user.

    3. The above user should be the same name that is used in windows to log in for MS networking. This is because smb is patched onto *nix which requires usernames and passwords while MS only needs the password. (Your MS username gets passed to the samba box and this is used to determine if there is something there that you are allowed to see.)

    4. You will need to have set up some shares - 'homes' might be the easiest for a start so you can see if everythings working.

    I don't know if any of this helps - I'm assuming a lot since you only posted a small bit of info - I'm assuming that you are going through the same process that I did I guess. (process = mistakes)

    Some of the real gurus can probably straighten out anything that I got wrong - I hope.

    O.F.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    139

    Re: As Arnold said "I'll be Back!". Sorry to say I

    Thank you O.F. Your kind reply does indeed help.

    I was hoping to avoid having to set up all the smb passwords, etc., because of the necessity to change the users fairly often.

    Unless someone has a thought on NOT having to use the uid/passwd/share location, I guess I will have to go that route.

    Again, thanks for the reply.
    Everything I learn gives me another way to say \"OOPS!\" :oops:

  4. #4
    Associate
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    25
    Well now that I reflect a bit - I think there is a way to make a share universally available. Like I said it has been awhile.

    From the sample smb.conf:

    # This one is useful for people to share files
    [tmp]
    comment = Temporary file space
    path = /tmp
    read only = no
    public = yes

    This one looks to me like it should be universally available - without all the stuff I wrote previously. In fact I am sure I have done something similar but I think I had to do something like:

    force user = username

    where username had the permissions on the share that I wanted to dole out to everybody. I'm at home now and all my config files are at work - I can check tomorrow and get back on this.

    I think I steered you wrong the first time because I didn't understand your goals.

    O.F.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    139

    Re: As Arnold said "I'll be Back!". Sorry to say I

    Thank you O. F.

    It's getting close to late here at the office as well. I look forward to any and all wisdom you might conjur up.
    Everything I learn gives me another way to say \"OOPS!\" :oops:

  6. #6
    Associate
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    25

    Re: As Arnold said "I'll be Back!". Sorry to say I

    One of the good things about linux is that once you get stuff set up you can usually just forget about it - and that's what I've done - forgotten. Once I've gotten it running and a year or two or more passes I don't remember what I've done. So anyway here is what I did on one server to set up a share to give read only access for everyone on the lan:

    [global]
    workgroup = FOO
    netbios name = BAR
    security = SHARE
    encrypt passwords = Yes
    update encrypted = Yes
    hosts allow = 192.168.0. localhost

    [rav]
    path = /home/rav
    guest account = rav
    guest only = Yes
    guest ok = Yes
    writeable = No
    hosts allow = 192.168.0.

    This has been working for a couple of years - in theory you should be able to change the writeable to Yes if that's what you want.

    But on another server that I needed to provide write access to a number of users I ended up using this share:

    [lcat2000]
    path = /home/lcat2000
    guest account = ana
    force user = ana
    force group = lcat
    read only = No
    guest ok = Yes
    hosts allow = 192.168.0.202,192.168.0.207
    hosts deny = 192.168.0.

    Here the '/home/lcat2000' directory is owned by user 'ana' and belongs to group 'lcat'. Since 'ana' has read/write access anyone connecting from the hosts that are "allowed" has the same (because it forces the ana properties). We have static ip addresses so this works for me.

    In another case on the same server I restricted access by user as follows:

    addresses]
    path = /home/addresses
    username = juanita
    valid users = elisabeth,juanita,tadeo
    write list = juanita,elisabeth,tadeo
    read only = No

    In this case all 3 users have r/w access but they have to have passwords to connect.

    One thing I found out was that if you have a share that is supposed to be world readable and a user tries to connect to the server who has a samba user account setup on the server under their windows username then s/he can't see anything at all on the server until the correct samba password is provided (for the share that s/he has password protected access to). On the other hand if user 'joeblow' who doesn't have an account connects - no problem - the world readable share is there.

    I hope this helps. If I can do it then you can too - I got all this up and running mostly through trial and error.

    O.F.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    139

    Re: As Arnold said "I'll be Back!". Sorry to say I

    O. F. Let me begin by warmly thanking you for the time you've taken.

    I will work in this direction and let you know the outcome.

    Thank you.
    Everything I learn gives me another way to say \"OOPS!\" :oops:

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    139

    Re: As Arnold said "I'll be Back!". Sorry to say I

    I'm embarrased ops: to admit that your suggestions, and various others, were tried, and I still fail with the following message when trying to open the server:

    \\Elbert is not accessable. You might not have permission to use this network resource. Contact the administrator --yata yata-- The account ids not authorized to log in from this station.
    I've used several UID's/passwd's/directories/ipaddr's, etc., with the same results. I've made sure permissions/groups/logins were valid, etc..

    I will not give up till I get through this!
    Everything I learn gives me another way to say \"OOPS!\" :oops:

  9. #9
    Associate
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Posts
    25
    What system are you using on the client machine? The one that you are using to access \\Elbert? My experience has pretty much all been with win98. My users all have to login to windows with the exact username that they have on the file server - and they don't use passwords with their windows login. This means that they are queried for their password when they access the server. If they Have a password on their windows session that is different from the samba server password then no dice.

    I also remember one time having difficulty with an XP machine which would only allow access to other computers/servers in the lan that were in the same workgroup. I never figured out how to give it access outside of its own workgroup and found it easier to just change its workgroup. Could that be it?

    That's all I can think of right now.

    O.F.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    139

    Re: As Arnold said "I'll be Back!". Sorry to say I

    Once again - Thanks for the response.

    By the way, how long have you been in this goofy business?

    I am sitting at an XP machine attempting to get in to the server 'elbert' via the 'Network' icon on this machine.

    The folks here use a login and password to get in to the workgroup via the Windows 2000 controlling server on the LAN. Then through various client terminal apps and IPAddrs they move around SCO Unix servers and other WinTel boxes and print servers.

    I'm trying to get this new Linux machine (elbert) on line through the LAN as seen in the Windows Network display for some different usages.

    I bet the entry to the 'elbert' machine depends on having smb passwords, doesn't it? If so, I haven't set up any UID/passwd's except through the normal 'adduser' function in 'yast', or on the command line.
    Everything I learn gives me another way to say \"OOPS!\" :oops:

Similar Threads

  1. Websense / Cisco "ip urlfilter server vendor" functionality in OSS product
    By Outlaw in forum Linux - Hardware, Networking & Security
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-19-2010, 06:33 PM
  2. The Official "I want WMP 10 Back" Thread
    By scarslilpyro in forum Windows - General Topics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-07-2006, 10:11 AM
  3. "MicroHat" "SoftRed"
    By Fatal Error in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-12-2005, 09:03 PM
  4. "groupadd" and "tree" utilities are nowhere??
    By aromes in forum Redhat / Fedora
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-05-2003, 03:50 AM
  5. Xlib:  extension "GLX" missing on display ":0.0".
    By ph34r in forum Linux - Software, Applications & Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-06-2001, 04:52 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •