Re: Can anyone reproduce this Samba problem?
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Karl Vogel vogelke+u...@pobox.com wrote: http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2008/04/17/a-shared-drop-box-using-samba/ has some suggestions that might help. It is a good link - In fact it's what I based my setup on. However, it relies on both 'inherit owner' and 'directory mode' / 'force directory mode' working simultaneously. And on my install, for some reason, that does not work. I can only get one or the other to work. Still not sure if it's a general Samba issue or FreeBSD-specific (or me being dumb somehow). -John ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Can anyone reproduce this Samba problem?
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:54:02 -0700,
John W jwde...@gmail.com said:
J I have been trying to set up a 'dropbox' Samba share on FreeBSD, but am
J not having luck. I went back and forth on the Samba ML for a bit, and
J now I'm trying to determine if I am seeing FreeBSD-specific bad
J behavior.
http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2008/04/17/a-shared-drop-box-using-samba/
has some suggestions that might help.
--
Karl Vogel I don't speak for the USAF or my company
:-{8Person who is unhappy with the results of her
breast-enlargement surgery. --Dave Barry's emoticons
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Can anyone reproduce this Samba problem?
Interestingly, if I turn off 'inherit permissions', then 'inherit owner' DOES take effect correctly. However, that means the sticky bit does not get inherited, which will not work for me. I need both to be inherited, and for some reason they are behaving mutually-exclusive (with 'inherit permissions' taking precedence). If I understood your problem correctly, you don't actually want to set sticky bit on the root directory, but suid - so the chmod would be like chmod 4xxx mydir In FreeBSD suid-bitted directory will make all the subdirs to inherit the owner. Sticky bit causes bit different behaviour - see sticky (8) and chmod(1) -Reko ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Can anyone reproduce this Samba problem?
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Reko Turjareko.tu...@liukuma.net wrote: Interestingly, if I turn off 'inherit permissions', then 'inherit owner' DOES take effect correctly. However, that means the sticky bit does not get inherited, which will not work for me. I need both to be inherited, and for some reason they are behaving mutually-exclusive (with 'inherit permissions' taking precedence). If I understood your problem correctly, you don't actually want to set sticky bit on the root directory, but suid - so the chmod would be like chmod 4xxx mydir In FreeBSD suid-bitted directory will make all the subdirs to inherit the owner. Sticky bit causes bit different behaviour - see sticky (8) and chmod(1) I want both the owner AND the sticky bit to be inherited. That is my dilemma. The sticky bit is necessary in my case because I do not want anyone but the owner to modify a file once created. And further, I am setting the owner to 'nobody' so this means *no* user can modify a file once created, not even files they themselves created. That is exactly the point of this share I'm trying to create. This directory will be open to many users, via a public share, with no passwords. I want everyone to be able to create new files/dirs in this share, but I do not want anyone to be able to rename/delete/modify/overwrite/etc. *any* files once created. I am trying to avoid using SUIDDIR (see my email), though I realize that is an option. If I cannot make Samba's 'inherit owner' option work on FreeBSD, that may be my only choice. Regardless of that, I would like to determine if this is a Samba bug or not, and which versions are affected, if so. However, even if I were to use SUIDDIR, I would still need the sticky bit to prevent modifications to files. Unless I am missing something, of course (: -John ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Can anyone reproduce this Samba problem?
I have been trying to set up a 'dropbox' Samba share on FreeBSD, but am not having luck. I went back and forth on the Samba ML for a bit, and now I'm trying to determine if I am seeing FreeBSD-specific bad behavior. Could anyone out there see if they can reproduce my issue on FreeBSD? I have a simple reproduction case (repeatable for me, at least), and I'm curious if people see the same behavior on: - Samba 3.2 (broken for me) - Samba 3.3 (broken for me) - Samba 3.4 (It's not in ports, I haven't installed it manually yet, but someone with Ubuntu has confirmed it works for them with this version) Here is tail of the old thread with gory details, if anyone's interested: http://www.mail-archive.com/sa...@lists.samba.org/msg102359.html So here is what I am trying to do, and how to reproduce my issue: I want a dropbox share, with the sticky bit set, and with the file owner to be inherited from the share directory, for new files/dirs. Note: I do not want to use SUIDDIR if possible. I realize it is an option, but am trying to avoid it for now. So I have a directory like this: drwxrwxr-t 20 nobody myuser 512 Aug 19 20:07 myshare And it is shared in smb.conf like this: [myshare] comment = my share path = /path/to/myshare read only = no inherit permissions = yes inherit owner = yes Now I want to create a directory in this share (from a Windows machine, or smbclient). What I would *expect* is this: drwxrwxr-t 2 nobody myuser 512 Aug 19 14:07 some_new_dir Notice that the sticky bit is set, and the user is set to 'nobody' which will ensure that no users, including the original creator, can alter this directory once created. And in fact, this is what happens when Jeremy Allison tried it on Ubuntu 8.10 with Samba 3.4 (see thread mentioned earlier). HOWEVER, on both my FreeBSD boxes with either Samba 3.2 or 3.3, I instead get this: drwxrwxr-t 2 myuser myuser512 Aug 19 14:07 some_new_dir Notice the owner is 'myuser' instead of 'nobody'. Thus, the user 'myuser' can now rename the directory (for instance), which is not acceptable. It seems as though 'inherit owner' is just being ignored. I don't know why. Interestingly, if I turn off 'inherit permissions', then 'inherit owner' DOES take effect correctly. However, that means the sticky bit does not get inherited, which will not work for me. I need both to be inherited, and for some reason they are behaving mutually-exclusive (with 'inherit permissions' taking precedence). I have tried this on Samba3.3 and 3.2, both on FreeBSD-7.2_RELEASE (amd64) machines, and neither works. So to sum up: I'd very much appreciate it if some FreeBSD people could try reproducing this with any/all of Samba 3.2,3.3,3.4. I'd also be curious of the results with Samba3.2 or 3.3 on a non-FreeBSD Unix. I'm just trying to determine if I'm crazy or not (: Thanks -John ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
