[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: -mm merge plans for 2.6.20
Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> In-Reply-To: <>
> On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 12:32:05 -0600, Steve French wrote:
>> smbfs deprecation is ok but there are a few things to consider:
> How well-tested is the plaintext password support?
> By default the /proc/fs/cifs/SecurityFlags setting is 0x7 (MAY_SIGN |
> MAY_NTLM | MAYNTLMV2). Trying to connect to an old Samba server
> with that, I got a message that the server requested a plain text
> password but client support was disabled.
> After changing the flags to 0x37 (adding MAY_LANMAN | MAY_PLNTXT),
> I got "invalid password." Looking at the ethereal traces, it seemed
> that the password was being sent as encrypted Unicode, and the only
> way to make it connect was to set the flags to 0x30.
I don't remember any problems reported with plain text password
support on current cifs and I have certainly seen it negotiated with no
but I will double check with your reported flag combination.
> Also, the client doesn't automatically pick up the domain name from
> smb.conf like smbfs does.
That is true, and is intentional. cifs sends a domain of null (ie use
the server's
default domain) - but it can be overridden on mount
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-12-11 05:21    [W:0.051 / U:0.440 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site