On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Ross Walker <rswwalker at gmail.com> wrote: > Well on the 2008 box you can have a share available by NFSv3 AND CIFS and on the old Redhat boxes you might be able to mount the CIFS share since they don't support NFSv3, though if they don't support NFSv3 I have my doubts they support mounting CIFS as well. > > Is it that NFSv2 itself is insecure, or only the Windows implementation of NFSv2? Is NFSv2 on CentOS an acceptable substitute? Can you relocate the data? > > You might be painted into a corner here, being forced to upgrade under duress. > It's not specifically NFS, but more related to how the application stack was designed. We are essentially working around some 6 year old design decisions. When they were built, little thought was placed on allowing full access as the systems are on an isolated network. Over the years, other systems began to interface to the original application. Because one of those systems fall is a compliance target system, the original box needs to be compliant also.