Re: [Samba] hosts allow / hosts deny (CIDRs?)
- Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 21:10:00 -0700
- From: "Ronald F. Guilmette via samba" <samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Samba] hosts allow / hosts deny (CIDRs?)
In message <ca330312-5343-b7e5-328a-d2b554330081@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Am 17.10.2017 um 04:24 schrieb Ronald F. Guilmette via samba:
>> Just a trivial question...
>> Do the hosts allow and hosts deny clauses (i.e. within smb.conf) support
>> the use of IPv4 CIDR notation (e.g. A.B.C.D/maskbits) ?
>> The specific documentation page I was looking at, i.e.:
>> was rather entirely ambiguous on this one small point. When describing
>> the interfaces clause, it says explicitly that CIDRs are allowed. But
>> when it comes to hosts allow and hosts deny, the same page is silent
>> about CIDR notation.
>> So, you know, I have to ask
>yes they do and you could have easily tried it out
Well, actually, I *did* try it out. And it did *seem* to work, but what
do I know? I also tried, but was unable to find where exactly the
smbd/nmdb log records are being sent to, by default, on my FreeBSD system,
and thus, I was unable to check properly to see if my addition of a
line in my smb.conf file like "hosts allow = <<CIDR>>" did or did not
cause a parse error, i.e. when I restarted the daemon.
So, for all I can tell, perhaps I glitched the "hosts allow" directive
and perhaps smbd/nmdb are now allowing *all* hosts to access my stuff.
I was not able to tell if this might be happening, and that's why I asked
And anyway, isn't it a Good Thing that I asked? I mean doesn't somebody
maybe want to fix the documentation page that I gave a link to, so that
it will henceforth be clear in noting (which it currently fails to do)
that CIDRs are allowed in hosts allow/deny directives?
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the