Fixed packages have been uploaded for Jessie and Stretch.
On Jul 14, 2017 12:16 PM, "Jason Cohen" wrote:
> You might want to forward this to 868...@bugs.debian.org. I reported the
> issue I found and received a reply indicating that they are building new
> packages but I'm not sure if these iss
You might want to forward this to 868...@bugs.debian.org. I reported
the issue I found and received a reply indicating that they are building
new packages but I'm not sure if these issues were also caught.
On 07/14/2017 12:13 PM, Guy Marcenac wrote:
> Le 14/07/2017 à 16:40, Jason Cohen a écrit :
Le 14/07/2017 à 16:40, Jason Cohen a écrit :
Yup, the issue appears to be that python-samba requires python-talloc
2.1.6 and only 2.1.2 is available in Jessie. This was probably a
typo. The prior python-samba package only required 2.0.6. I've
reported this to the bug tracker.
hi,
It lo
Yup, the issue appears to be that python-samba requires python-talloc
2.1.6 and only 2.1.2 is available in Jessie. This was probably a typo.
The prior python-samba package only required 2.0.6. I've reported this
to the bug tracker.
jason@storage-server:~$ apt show python-samba -a
Package: pytho
Hello everyone,
I attempted to update my Jessie server this morning after seeing the
Samba DSA. However, it appears that there are unmet dependencies that
are causing several of the samba packages to be held back. Anyone
seeing this or know of a resolution?
12 packages can be upgraded. Run 'apt
Hi
The last Samba security update issued as DSA-3548-1 introduced several
upstream regressions, which are addressed in this update.
Before we release the packages we would like to call for additional
testing. The packages can be found on
https://people.debian.org/~carnil/tmp/samba/jessie
On Sat, 16 Apr 2016 05:34:02 + (UTC), Virgo Pärna
wrote:
>
> I'll have to find time to try update again with changes that
> were suggested (server services part and winbind package). Then I could
> be certain that this was the reason, why sama would no longer start up.
>
And I
[please don't top post]
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 06:25:01PM +0100, Birgit Berger (UV Wien) wrote:
> is it better to wait to update samba 4.1.17 to 4.2.10 on jessie?
There aren't any new packages in the stable release, or has this changed
for some reason?
--
The media's the most powerful entity
On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 18:26:43 +0100, oeh univie edv lists
wrote:
>
> [-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: quoted-printable --]
>
> This doesn't sound very reassuring. Is it better to wait to update samba
> 4.1.17 to 4.2.10 on jessie?
>
I'll have to find time to try update again with changes th
is it better to wait to update samba 4.1.17 to 4.2.10 on jessie?
How do I revert to previous version if the update fails? Are there any
instructions how to that?
KR birgit
Virgo Pärna schreibt:
>On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:02:22 +0100, Chris Boot
> wrote:
>>
>> When running a Samba 4 DC, the shift
This doesn't sound very reassuring. Is it better to wait to update samba
4.1.17 to 4.2.10 on jessie?
How do I revert to previous version 4.1.17 if the update fails? Are there
any instructions how do that?
KR birgit
Virgo Pärna schreibt:
>On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:02:22 +0100, Chris Boot
> wrote:
>
On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:02:22 +0100, Chris Boot
wrote:
>
> When running a Samba 4 DC, the shift from 4.1 to 4.2 brings some major
> changes with it and people's smb.conf will need changing. The "server
> services" line needs "winbind" replacing with "winbindd", and the user
> must ensure the winbi
On 14/04/16 10:02, Chris Boot wrote:
> Firstly:
>
>> Finally, two important configuration options should be considered,
>> that we were unable to silently change defaults for:
>> - smb signing = required
>> - ntlm auth = no
>>
>> Without smb signing = required, Man in the Middl
On 12/04/16 21:27, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi
>
> The upcoming Samba update is bigger than usual since for Jessie an
> update is needed to 4.2. We want to expose the package a bit more for
> additional testing. Please test the packages found on
[snip]
Hi folks,
So I missed the testing win
Hi
The upcoming Samba update is bigger than usual since for Jessie an
update is needed to 4.2. We want to expose the package a bit more for
additional testing. Please test the packages found on
https://people.debian.org/~carnil/tmp/samba/
(no apt repository available for these test packa
On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 14:12:46 +0100
Marcus Blumhagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 10:13:41PM +0200, Alexander Shulgin wrote:
[...]
> > I've downloaded all of it anyway, but now I wonder how could a minor
> > fix affect _that_ much so I need to download all of this stuff?
On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 10:13:41PM +0200, Alexander Shulgin wrote:
> [...]
> I've been following the recent samba security update (DSA 1257-1
> issued on February 5th). So I typed this on my terminal:
> [...]
> and was quite surprised by the download size. It was about 23.6
Hi,
I've been following the recent samba security update (DSA 1257-1
issued on February 5th). So I typed this on my terminal:
# apt-get update
...
# apt-get upgrade
and was quite surprised by the download size. It was about 23.6 megs
and included packages `samba', `samba-common&#x
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 12:38:36PM -0700, nate wrote:
>
> if your wanting to authenticate from the domain the easiest way
> is to do security=SERVER and set the password server to the
> PDC of the NT domain. You don't have to do security=domain.
> If you really do want to do security=domain(can y
tony mollica said:
> Hello. I'm trying to put my user directories from an nt
> network(domain) on a Debian box with Samba 2.0.7 and soon to
> have quota support. I would like the domain server to supply
> the password support and I have the 'security', 'password server'
> and 'encrypt passwords'
Hello. I'm trying to put my user directories from an nt
network(domain) on a Debian box with Samba 2.0.7 and soon to
have quota support. I would like the domain server to supply
the password support and I have the 'security', 'password server'
and 'encrypt passwords' variables set. The daemons
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> Replying to myself, but...
>
> The server in question is an Alpha. Any attempt to connect to its workgroup
> (for which it is the master browser) causes the following to appear in
> /var/log/smb:
>
> [2001/04/18 10:48:55, 0] lib/util_sec.c:assert_gid(7
ct a bug in the Alpha debs for the
latest samba security patch; they appear to have been compiled with one or
more incorrect options.
Still digging into it, but solutions remain most welcome, of course.
--
That's not gibberish... It's Linux. - Byers, The Lone Gunmen
Geek Code 3.1: GCS
Hey, folks... I just installed yesterday's samba update from security
(2.0.7-3.2) and none of my NT4 workstations can connect to it after the
upgrade, complaining of unspecified "network errors". I tried rebooting one
of them and it just got worse - that machine is now unable to communicate
with
I hate when you send a message before you start, let alone finish! (Sorry
about the previous, unhelpful email) I was planning on saying that I
didn't find anything at http://www.debian.org/security.html and wanted to
ask why this page hasn't been updated. I believe the security hole was
fixed in
http://www.debian.org/security.html
Thanks,
Dennis
--
dpk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Systems/Network | work: 353.4844
Division of Enginnering Computing Services | page: 222.5875
On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Dave Cinege wrote:
> A few weeks ago I remebmer seeing that big hole was found in samba. A
samba_1.9.17p2-0.0, located both in hamm and in bo-updates (compiled for
libc5 both places since libpam hasn't been updated yet). It's been there
for a while now.
--
Scott K. Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.gate.net/~storm/
On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Dave Cinege wrote:
> A few we
A few weeks ago I remebmer seeing that big hole was found in samba. As of what
debian package version has this been fixed?
-
http://www.psychosis.com/emc/ Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214
http://www.psychosis.com/
--
| De: John M. Rulnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| A: debian-user@lists.debian.org
| Asunto: samba security -- more info?
| Fecha: dilluns, 29 / setembre / 1997 19:10
|
| Dear Folks,
|
| If you know about the samba security problem, could you please send me
| as soon as possible a poin
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997, John M. Rulnick wrote:
> Thank you. Actually, I'm wondering if you could point me to the
> *source* fixes for samba (assuming it is not just a Debian security
> problem), since the information is to be passed on to a non-Debian
> sysadmin.
Here is the original announcement:
> Thank you. Actually, I'm wondering if you could point me to the
> *source* fixes for samba (assuming it is not just a Debian security
> problem), since the information is to be passed on to a non-Debian
> sysadmin.
Well, I didn't look that far into it. Yes, you are right, it
isn't a Debian prob
Thank you. Actually, I'm wondering if you could point me to the
*source* fixes for samba (assuming it is not just a Debian security
problem), since the information is to be passed on to a non-Debian
sysadmin.
John
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL
> Just don't expect to find and update your samba package with dselect. :-(
> Usde dpkg instead.
True. But I'll never think of saying that, as I never use dselect anyway.
I nearly always use dpkg (unless I really want to upgrade my whole system
to "unstable", then dselect is useful, but otherwise
Just don't expect to find and update your samba package with dselect. :-(
Usde dpkg instead.
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997, joost witteveen wrote:
> > Dear Folks,
> >
> > If you know about the samba security problem, could you please send me
> > as soon as possible a point
> Dear Folks,
>
> If you know about the samba security problem, could you please send me
> as soon as possible a pointer to more information, or to the (source)
> patch or fix?
The fixed package is in bo-updates, on a (recent) mirror near you.
--
joost witteveen, [EMAIL PROTEC
Dear Folks,
If you know about the samba security problem, could you please send me
as soon as possible a pointer to more information, or to the (source)
patch or fix?
Thank you.
John
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
T
36 matches
Mail list logo
