[CentOS] Network FS w/o user setup
tedjeanmiller at sbcglobal.net
Sun Jun 22 01:48:16 UTC 2008
Thanks for the reply. I think we are making progress, see
comments/questions interspersed below.
Les Mikesell wrote:
> Ted Miller wrote:
>> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> Well ... you would need to Join the "Samba Server" to your "Windows
>>> Domain". If that domain is ADS (Active Directory Services) then it
>>> is a different procedure than if it is a WinNT type Windows Domain.
>> This is getting well outside the range of complexity that I am looking
>> for. If I add more detail, maybe something more suitable to my
>> situation will suggest itself to members of the list.
>> 1. This is a very small network, only one primary file server
>> (office2). A second file server (RAIDer1) has only one shared
>> directory, so is not really an issue.
>> 2. Users log in primarily from Linux boxes, but have to run virtual
>> Windows machines for some software, and also log in from Windows laptops.
> Virtual windows machines should be no different in terms of network
> connections, so you can ignore that distinction.
>> 3. office2 is set up with logins and home directories for all users,
>> and directories are permissioned such that users can run programs on
>> office2 (if needed) and directory permissions work right.
> Is samba running there? If so, you are mostly done.
Yes, at the moment I have Samba running, but apparently not properly
configured. I am also in the process of moving this machine from Centos 4
to Centos 5, and am trying to do it better this time. At the moment
office2 is dual boot, still defaulting to C4.
>> Because all the users and permissions already exist on office2, I
>> would like those existing permissions to be reflected when the file
>> system is shared, just the same as when it is accessed locally. To
>> restate: my desire is that users, logins, and permissions be identical
>> whether a user is logged into office2 or whether that user is using a
>> network file share from another virtual or physical machine, running
>> Linux or Windows. I would think there would be a "market" for a
>> network file system where sharing a directory tree involved no more
>> than assigning a network share name to it. If (and only if) you had
>> access to the file locally, you now have access to it on the network.
>> Very simple to administer, very simple to understand--one set of
>> permissions (kept locally) works everywhere.
> This mostly "just works" if you deal with a few complications that on a
> small scale can be worked around without too much trouble. The first
> complication is that you need to maintain passwords separately for Linux
> and Windows because they are stored with different encryption. If you
> aren't already using samba, you need to 'smbpasswd -a username' for each
> user and input the password (or go around and let them type it
Done at this point.
> After this, a windows user mapping a samba-shared
> directory from your office2 machine will have the same access as the
> same user logged in locally. There are the same issues with directories
> that users share with group permissions, but samba offers some extra
> options to force owner/group/permissions on newly created files that
> will help.
That is something I need to fix, because I do have some issues with group
accessed files, where certain operations require me to log in as root and
run a script that cleans up the file ownership, otherwise some users can no
longer access the files. Any pointers on where to find documentation on this?
> Windows/samba connections are treated as single users with
> all access through that connection treated with the permissions of the
> matching linux login. With samba in 'user' mode, the authentication is
> done before you can even see the shares and even if you have multiple
> shares mapped from the server they must all be as the same user. There
> is also a 'share' mode where you authenticate separately per connection.
I have been using 'share' mode, but a little reading makes it sound like I
should switch to 'user' mode to make my life easier. I have been adding
various user permission lines to each share. Will they keep working if I
just comment out those lines?
>> From everything I have heard, a windows domain controller would be
>> more work than it is worth for this size of project, as I am looking
>> for something machine-scale, not enterprise scale.
> You might look at webmin, since it has an option to maintain unix and
> samba passwords at the same time and it can also keep multiple machines
> in sync.
Does anyone maintain webmin for Centos? I have most of the common repos
hooked to yum, but webmin draws a blank.
> The other complication is that if you also want to share files
> via NFS, the permissioning mechanism is entirely different. NFS just
> looks at the uid/gid/modes like a local file, so you need to make the
> password files consistent across all the Linux boxes.
Does NFS work with windows? I have wasted considerable time on Google
trying to answer that question, and the only answer I find is that there
are commercial products that (for a per-seat fee) will connect windows to
NFS. I read that NFS v.4 was supposed to "play better" with windows, but I
could not find any official comment, or windows drivers, or even any
recommendations of client only drivers.
> There is also the
> issue that users who have root access to their own workstation can
> pretend to be any user over NFS.
Not an issue in this situation, users do not have root access.
> For a single-user Linux workstation
> scenario, it might make more sense to only provide samba shares and use
> cifs mounts instead of NFS. NFS makes more sense between multiuser
> unix/linux boxes where only the administrator(s) have root access.
That is what I did under C4, but with considerable frustration, but maybe a
simplified version of what I had (minus per-share permission listing in
smb.conf) would get me most of what I want.
>> I hope this more clearly expresses my desires, even if only so that
>> everyone can tell me to keep dreaming, because what I want doesn't
>> exist--or in the open source tradition, quit dreaming and start
>> coding. (Unfortunately I am still working on my first C++ lesson book.)
> I don't think you need to code anything since there are already several
> options with varying degrees of complexity. Centralizing
> authentication will help if you have many users and password changes.
> But that can be as simple as turning on domain controller emulation on
> samba on your office2 server and configuring everything else (windows
> and Linux) to use it.
Any pointers to where I could learn the implications/pluses/minuses of
that? It might be useful with my multiple machines (real and virtual) per
> Or it can be as complicated as running a separate
> Active Domain controller. I've always been surprised that Linux
> distributions didn't come with a pre-configured LDAP server that
> automatically worked for local users and samba and could server other
> Linux boxes as you add them without starting over, but so far I don't
> think any provide that.
Sounds like a great idea for a CentosPlus .rpm.
>> Sorry I neglected this (and all other) threads for a week or more, as
>> I had to learn how to do video editing to rescue an otherwise
>> disastrously unusable video project for my employer.
> If these remote users are doing anything but video editing, another
> useful option might be to use remote X logins or freenx/NX for a remote
> Linux desktop directly from your office2 machine instead of accessing
> its files on their workstation. How well it works depends on what they
> are doing and the relative CPU and video use compared to file access.
Video editing is getting done on a windows-native-boot laptop. Video
editing seems to be something that open source doesn't do very well.
More information about the CentOS