Re: [2.6 patch] remove smbfs

[AstralStorm]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:30:55 -0600
"Steve French" <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Jan 30, 2008 7:13 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:47:17 +0200
> > > > > > > In addition, cifs cannot completely replace smbfs atm.
> > > > > > > Even todays sold NAS-boxes (often running anchient
> > > > > > > samba-2.x.x) work only with smbfs on the client side.
> I am not convinced that this (mounting to older servers) would be a
> problem with the proper mount options but it is more intuitive for
> smbfs for some of the lanman servers.   I do want to make sure that we
> don't make it too easy to mount with insecure lanman (ie due to
> downgrade attacks) without the user at least doing that (specify weak
> lanman security explicitly).  Today the user has to explicitly specify
> sec=lanman which is confusing but at least makes explicit the weaker
> security.
> 
> There are four common issues with mounting to these very old servers:
> 1) remembering to mount specifying lanman security (sec=lanman)

I think it'd be nice to add an alias called oldsmb or similar for that
option in mount.cifs. It should only be needed for old win9x servers.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature