What is worse: SMB1 or NFS with squash all to admin?
#1
Hello,
After recent SMB scare I have set min SMB protocol on my Synology NAS (updated to latest) to SMB2. Kodi 17.3 on updated and upgraded Kodibuntu stopped to see shares from Synology. I have edited global samba.conf adding lines abut min protocol
min protocol = SMB2
client min protocol = SMB2
client max protocol = SMB3
but it did not help. I switched over to NFS then, but for Kodi to browse a share I have to set squash option to "map all users to admin" on my NAS. Otherwise shares are listed, but do not work.

Now, what is worse: to have on my NAS dangerous SMB1 allowed or allow all users connecting to exposed NFS share admin privileges? Both are scary.

foormanek.
Reply
#2
add

client max protocoll = SMB2

to your global samba.conf

that should make the share available again, IIRC. Set this for your NAS as well.

Which SMB version is used on your NAS/Kodibuntu version?

Remember that Kodibuntu isn't supported anymore, as this OS has its flaws
Reply
#3
on kodibuntu samba is 4.3.11-ubuntu
on NAS - do not know - latest delivered by synology. I do not fiddle with console there, all is done from gui and it works.

I have changed client max protocol = SMB3 to SMB2 in /etc/samba/smb.conf, restarted samba - and it still does not work.

What is your linux base for kodi? If SMB2 works for you then maybe I could reinstall mine.
Reply
#4
So you have changed to max protocol SMB 2 on both...your NAS and your PC?

And that doesn't work? I really doubt that a bit as SMB 2 should be possible.
Reply
#5
known issue. Once the server doesn't allow NT1 anymore, browsing shares doesn't work. This is a samba issue.
You can add shares manually by entering the correct path in kodi though. Already existing sources work as well.
Reply
#6
you're probably better off skipping kodi's built-in nfs client and just using nfs4 mounted using autofs or fstab on the host, then mount readonly with root_squash and noexec and kodi will just see it as a directory not a remote share.
Reply
#7
(2017-05-28, 15:34)sej7278 Wrote: you're probably better off skipping kodi's built-in nfs clien

thank you, I will try that when I become desperate enough Smile which will most probably happen soon. But it is not easy to fiddle in this way with a htpc tucked under tv.
Reply
#8
(2017-05-28, 15:34)sej7278 Wrote: you're probably better off skipping kodi's built-in nfs client and just using nfs4 mounted using autofs or fstab on the host, then mount readonly with root_squash and noexec and kodi will just see it as a directory not a remote share.

If you don't use a shared database (mysql), that would work. If you do use a shared database I'm not sure if each node would require the same setup or not or if that would even work. What's wrong with exporting the nfs like:
Code:
% cat /etc/exports
/srv/nfs          192.168.0.0/24(ro,fsid=0,no_subtree_check)
/srv/nfs/tv-shows 192.168.0.0/24(ro,no_subtree_check,insecure)
/srv/nfs/movies   192.168.0.0/24(ro,no_subtree_check,insecure)
/srv/nfs/music    192.168.0.0/24(ro,no_subtree_check,insecure)

For more, see: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Kod...NFS_server
Need help programming a Streamzap remote?
Reply
#9
(2017-05-28, 16:03)graysky Wrote: What's wrong with exporting the nfs like:

% cat /etc/exports
/srv/nfs 192.168.0.0/24(ro,fsid=0,no_subtree_check)

As I understand this should be done on the server side. The server is a Synology DS414 NAS running their proprietary DSM os. It is linux based, but I prefer to use only gui on it and gui has a limited set of options for nfs shares. Modifying system files by hand there is asking for trouble. Even if I do not break something on the spot, then a later update may wreck havoc.
Reply
#10
Use the GUI and use NFS. I my experience, NFS is both faster, more reliable, and more secure than samba.
Need help programming a Streamzap remote?
Reply
#11
NFS even with squash "all users to admin" seems to be better. Exporting shares from server as read only seems to prevent connecting users from doing any harm to server despite being virtual admins. And SMB higher than 1 seems to be not implemented in Kodi yet, as I have learned from a dev answering my post elsewhere, so there is no point in messing with smb.conf, global or local.
Thank you all for attending.
Reply

Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
What is worse: SMB1 or NFS with squash all to admin?0