Why don't I have write permission to a Samba server from a Windows 2003 client.
Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Why don't I have write permission to a Samba server from a Windows 2003 client.
Hi, I have a samba server, and want to get write permission on a windows 2003 client. but everytime when I want to write files, it prompts me "Access is denied" and I think that should not happen at all.
And ideas will be highly appreciated.
I set security level to "share", please see details below
[global]
workgroup=demo
server string = Samba Server
log file = /var/adm/samba_log.%m
security = SHARE
and if I run "ls -l /export/home", you will see, which means, root should have all the write permissions.
# ls -l /export/home
total 18
drwx------ 2 root root 8192 Oct 28 16:32 lost+found
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 512 Feb 23 19:08 smbshare
but I can only read files on that Samba Server from a windows client, but have no write permissions?
why, please help me, thanks in advance.
Your windows user needs appropriate rights on that share, corresponding to a samba user on the server. Have a look at smbpasswd.
Thanks for your timely reply.
what I don't understand here is the "share" security level, in my mind, "share" means, it doesn't have to do authentication. and just give a guest account to sb who wants to access the Samba share, so do you mean I need to run this in "user" level, and add the samba user account by smbpassed?
Distribution: suse, opensuse, debian, others for testing
Posts: 307
Rep:
The usual linux filesystem permissions still apply !
"guest ok = yes" just means that samba accepts unauthenticated users, the rest depends on linux file permissions.
The problem here is that if you grant write access for a guest user, which is mapped to the user nobody if I remember right, you'll either have to move all files to nobody.nogroup or set them 777.
The usual linux filesystem permissions still apply !
"guest ok = yes" just means that samba accepts unauthenticated users, the rest depends on linux file permissions.
The problem here is that if you grant write access for a guest user, which is mapped to the user nobody if I remember right, you'll either have to move all files to nobody.nogroup or set them 777.
First, thanks for your reply!
Why it will be mapped to the user "nobody", I set this "guest account = root", shouldn't it be mapped to the user "root"
The usual linux filesystem permissions still apply !
"guest ok = yes" just means that samba accepts unauthenticated users, the rest depends on linux file permissions.
The problem here is that if you grant write access for a guest user, which is mapped to the user nobody if I remember right, you'll either have to move all files to nobody.nogroup or set them 777.
Just now, I did what you told me to do.
simply put "chmod 777 smbshare"
so now others also have write permissions there, and I verifed on my windows client, it's cool, I can write files there already, but still don't understand why after I set "guest account = root", but I was still mapped to "nobody"? can you give me some hints?
Distribution: suse, opensuse, debian, others for testing
Posts: 307
Rep:
I think "guest account = root" is very unsafe and therefore not allowed / ignored, just like setting the files to 777!
You should create a new linux user (smbshare for example) and set "guest account = smbshare" and set the linux file permissions for this user. So 700 (best), 750 or 755 should be OK, depending on your security requirements. You'll want to have a look at smb.conf config options with the term "mask" in them like "create mask". They may be necessary to make sure that newly created files/directories are actually writable and not just readable.
I think "guest account = root" is very unsafe and therefore not allowed / ignored, just like setting the files to 777!
You should create a new linux user (smbshare for example) and set "guest account = smbshare" and set the linux file permissions for this user. So 700 (best), 750 or 755 should be OK, depending on your security requirements. You'll want to have a look at smb.conf config options with the term "mask" in them like "create mask". They may be necessary to make sure that newly created files/directories are actually writable and not just readable.
Thanks a lot.
I think this really make sense to me, I should never use "guest account" in dailywork. whatever, this "guest account = root" doesn't work like I thought of.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.