[ale] Samba Not Quite Right

[hbbs at comcast.net]

> Well, you can cheat a little.  This will force anyone connecting to the
> "public" share to have a smbguest account sans entering a username and
> password.
> 
> [public]
>         comment = Public Share
>         path = /path/to/share
>         browseable = yes
>         guest ok = yes
>         guest only = yes
>         read only = no
>         writeable = yes
>         create mask = 0777
>         directory mask = 0777

In the reading I've done since I posted, it's looking as though "security =
share" is really what I want.  I'm still testing that out. 
> 
> ON the issue of not controlling accounts:  Do you really want to keep

> track/manage usernames and passwords?  If a Win2K server is already doing
> the authentication, then it only makes sense to use their authentication
> so the users only have a single username and password to remember.  You
> may not have control over who exists on the network, but you can control
> who can access what on your server.  I did this for a previous employer,
> deploying one web server for students, and another for faculty, all doing
> auth through a Winnt PDC.

Believe me, I would do exactly that and I have done that in the past when I ran
a Samba server in a WinNT environment, but in that environment, the WinNT domain
accounts were being (more or less) competently managed.  Here, that's not the
case; put another way, I can't rely on the Win2K accounts.  
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale