home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Contributor: Andrew Tridgell <samba-bugs@samba.anu.edu.au>
- Date: April 1995
-
- Subject: Discussion of NetBIOS in a Unix World
- ============================================================================
-
- This is a short document that describes some of the issues that
- confront a SMB implementation on unix, and how Samba copes with
- them. They may help people who are looking at unix<->PC
- interoperability.
-
- It was written to help out a person who was writing a paper on unix to
- PC connectivity.
-
-
- Usernames
- =========
-
- The SMB protocol has only a loose username concept. Early SMB
- protocols (such as CORE and COREPLUS) have no username concept at
- all. Even in later protocols clients often attempt operations
- (particularly printer operations) without first validating a username
- on the server.
-
- Unix security is based around username/password pairs. A unix box
- should not allow clients to do any substantive operation without some
- sort of validation.
-
- The problem mostly manifests itself when the unix server is in "share
- level" security mode. This is the default mode as the alternative
- "user level" security mode usually forces a client to connect to the
- server as the same user for each connected share, which is
- inconvenient in many sites.
-
- In "share level" security the client normally gives a username in the
- "session setup" protocol, but does not supply an accompanying
- password. The client then connects to resources using the "tree
- connect" protocol, and supplies a password. The problem is that the
- user on the PC types the username and the password in different
- contexts, unaware that they need to go together to give access to the
- server. The username is normally the one the user typed in when they
- "logged onto" the PC (this assumes Windows for Workgroups). The
- password is the one they chose when connecting to the disk or printer.
-
- The user often chooses a totally different username for their login as
- for the drive connection. Often they also want to access different
- drives as different usernames. The unix server needs some way of
- divining the correct username to combine with each password.
-
- Samba tries to avoid this problem using several methods. These succeed
- in the vast majority of cases. The methods include username maps, the
- service%user syntax, the saving of session setup usernames for later
- validation and the derivation of the username from the service name
- (either directly or via the user= option).
-
- File Ownership
- ==============
-
- The commonly used SMB protocols have no way of saying "you can't do
- that because you don't own the file". They have, in fact, no concept
- of file ownership at all.
-
- This brings up all sorts of interesting problems. For example, when
- you copy a file to a unix drive, and the file is world writeable but
- owned by another user the file will transfer correctly but will
- receive the wrong date. This is because the utime() call under unix
- only succeeds for the owner of the file, or root, even if the file is
- world writeable. For security reasons Samba does all file operations
- as the validated user, not root, so the utime() fails. This can stuff
- up shared development diectories as programs like "make" will not get
- file time comparisons right.
-
- There are several possible solutions to this problem, including
- username mapping, and forcing a specific username for particular
- shares.
-
- Passwords
- =========
-
- Many SMB clients uppercase passwords before sending them. I have no
- idea why they do this. Interestingly WfWg uppercases the password only
- if the server is running a protocol greater than COREPLUS, so
- obviously it isn't just the data entry routines that are to blame.
-
- Unix passwords are case sensitive. So if users use mixed case
- passwords they are in trouble.
-
- Samba can try to cope with this by either using the "password level"
- option which causes Samba to try the offered password with up to the
- specified number of case changes, or by using the "password server"
- option which allows Samba to do it's validation via another machine
- (typically a WinNT server).
-
- Samba supports the password encryption method used by SMB
- clients. Note that the use of password encryption in Microsoft
- networking leads to password hashes that are "plain text equivalent".
- This means that it is *VERY* important to ensure that the Samba
- smbpasswd file containing these password hashes is only readable
- by the root user. See the documentation ENCRYPTION.txt for more
- details.
-
-
- Locking
- =======
-
- The locking calls available under a DOS/Windows environment are much
- richer than those available in unix. This means a unix server (like
- Samba) choosing to use the standard fcntl() based unix locking calls
- to implement SMB locking has to improvise a bit.
-
- One major problem is that dos locks can be in a 32 bit (unsigned)
- range. Unix locking calls are 32 bits, but are signed, giving only a 31
- bit range. Unfortunately OLE2 clients use the top bit to select a
- locking range used for OLE semaphores.
-
- To work around this problem Samba compresses the 32 bit range into 31
- bits by appropriate bit shifting. This seems to work but is not
- ideal. In a future version a separate SMB lockd may be added to cope
- with the problem.
-
- It also doesn't help that many unix lockd daemons are very buggy and
- crash at the slightest provocation. They normally go mostly unused in
- a unix environment because few unix programs use byte range
- locking. The stress of huge numbers of lock requests from dos/windows
- clients can kill the daemon on some systems.
-
- The second major problem is the "opportunistic locking" requested by
- some clients. If a client requests opportunistic locking then it is
- asking the server to notify it if anyone else tries to do something on
- the same file, at which time the client will say if it is willing to
- give up it's lock. Unix has no simple way of implementing
- opportunistic locking, and currently Samba has no support for it.
-
- Deny Modes
- ==========
-
- When a SMB client opens a file it asks for a particular "deny mode" to
- be placed on the file. These modes (DENY_NONE, DENY_READ, DENY_WRITE,
- DENY_ALL, DENY_FCB and DENY_DOS) specify what actions should be
- allowed by anyone else who tries to use the file at the same time. If
- DENY_READ is placed on the file, for example, then any attempt to open
- the file for reading should fail.
-
- Unix has no equivalent notion. To implement this Samba uses either lock
- files based on the files inode and placed in a separate lock
- directory or a shared memory implementation. The lock file method
- is clumsy and consumes processing and file resources,
- the shared memory implementation is vastly prefered and is turned on
- by default for those systems that support it.
-
- Trapdoor UIDs
- =============
-
- A SMB session can run with several uids on the one socket. This
- happens when a user connects to two shares with different
- usernames. To cope with this the unix server needs to switch uids
- within the one process. On some unixes (such as SCO) this is not
- possible. This means that on those unixes the client is restricted to
- a single uid.
-
- Note that you can also get the "trapdoor uid" message for other
- reasons. Please see the FAQ for details.
-
- Port numbers
- ============
-
- There is a convention that clients on sockets use high "unprivilaged"
- port numbers (>1000) and connect to servers on low "privilaged" port
- numbers. This is enforced in Unix as non-root users can't open a
- socket for listening on port numbers less than 1000.
-
- Most PC based SMB clients (such as WfWg and WinNT) don't follow this
- convention completely. The main culprit is the netbios nameserving on
- udp port 137. Name query requests come from a source port of 137. This
- is a problem when you combine it with the common firewalling technique
- of not allowing incoming packets on low port numbers. This means that
- these clients can't query a netbios nameserver on the other side of a
- low port based firewall.
-
- The problem is more severe with netbios node status queries. I've
- found that WfWg, Win95 and WinNT3.5 all respond to netbios node status
- queries on port 137 no matter what the source port was in the
- request. This works between machines that are both using port 137, but
- it means it's not possible for a unix user to do a node status request
- to any of these OSes unless they are running as root. The answer comes
- back, but it goes to port 137 which the unix user can't listen
- on. Interestingly WinNT3.1 got this right - it sends node status
- responses back to the source port in the request.
-
-
- Protocol Complexity
- ===================
-
- There are many "protocol levels" in the SMB protocol. It seems that
- each time new functionality was added to a Microsoft operating system,
- they added the equivalent functions in a new protocol level of the SMB
- protocol to "externalise" the new capabilities.
-
- This means the protocol is very "rich", offering many ways of doing
- each file operation. This means SMB servers need to be complex and
- large. It also means it is very difficult to make them bug free. It is
- not just Samba that suffers from this problem, other servers such as
- WinNT don't support every variation of every call and it has almost
- certainly been a headache for MS developers to support the myriad of
- SMB calls that are available.
-
- There are about 65 "top level" operations in the SMB protocol (things
- like SMBread and SMBwrite). Some of these include hundreds of
- sub-functions (SMBtrans has at least 120 sub-functions, like
- DosPrintQAdd and NetSessionEnum). All of them take several options
- that can change the way they work. Many take dozens of possible
- "information levels" that change the structures that need to be
- returned. Samba supports all but 2 of the "top level" functions. It
- supports only 8 (so far) of the SMBtrans sub-functions. Even NT
- doesn't support them all.
-
- Samba currently supports up to the "NT LM 0.12" protocol, which is the
- one preferred by Win95 and WinNT3.5. Luckily this protocol level has a
- "capabilities" field which specifies which super-duper new-fangled
- options the server suports. This helps to make the implementation of
- this protocol level much easier.
-
- There is also a problem with the SMB specications. SMB is a X/Open
- spec, but the X/Open book is far from ideal, and fails to cover many
- important issues, leaving much to the imagination. Microsoft recently
- renamed the SMB protocol CIFS (Common Internet File System) and have
- published new specifications. These are far superior to the old
- X/Open documents but there are still undocumented calls and features.
- This specification is actively being worked on by a CIFS developers
- mailing list hosted by Microsft.
-
-