[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ale] SMB options

On Saturday 10 January 2004 07:01 pm, Adrin wrote:
> I can't believe you were wanting to run smb over the WAN without a vpn. 
Why not?  I use iptables to insure only users behind specific firewalls can 
connect.  The data isn't sensitive, it's already been put on net via FTP by 
the user who own the data.

> But
> I guess it worked for you.  Here is a suggestion.  you can use network
> neighbor hood/places.  In W2k and maybe in XP you can add a network place. 
> With that you can set it up to use ftp or http. If you set it up to use
> ftp, you can click and drag the files and folders to copy files.  You could
> probably even save data from programs to the remote folders.  There are at
> least 2 draw backs that I can see right off.  1. You can't map it as a disk
> drive.  2. Were ever it puts you in at the ftp login is the highest,
> (root), directory level you will be able to access.

This won't work.  The users of the SMB clients need to access the data as 
easily as a file server.  

> I can understand way Alltel did this.  It is just an example of a provider
> taken control over something they shouldn't have too in order to keep
> support calls down. I don't need to do an example on this list I am sure.
> Adrin
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org]On Behalf Of David
> > Hamm
> > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 11:31 AM
> > To: ale at ale.org
> > Subject: [ale] SMB options
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have an FTP server sittting on the Internet.  One group of users
> > uploads files via FTP the other group downloads those files via SMB. 
> > Securing SMB communications in most cases is handeled by listing the SMB
> > users's IP address in an IPTables rule with a -j ACCEPT.  But recently I
> > gained an SMB user an ALLTel's network and ALLTel blocks port 135.  The
> > only options I can come up with is eithher FreeSwan or PopTop and from
> > recent experiences I'm not excited about using either.  I wonder if I
> > could run SMB on another port? Under Linux I don't see a problem but the
> > Windows workstations mounting the share can't be modified since they also
> > participate in an SMB based LAN.  Any suggestions are welcomed.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ale mailing list
> > Ale at ale.org
> > http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale