Nabble - Samba - jcifs

Re: multiple domain problem

2008-10-04T06:21:38Z

That's not always the case, thus the problem.

----- Original Message -----

From: ioplex@...

To: swap_raw4u@...

Cc: jcifs@...

Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 11:40 AM

Subject: Re: [jcifs] multiple domain problem

On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 5:04 AM, swapnil rawat <swapsid@...> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
>      Which property of jcifs should be used , so that i can allow
> users from multiple domain to access my web application.
>    So far i am using jcifs.smb.client.domain property where i provide
> my domain name as value.
>   Now i want to allow users from different domains to access my web application
>   Also i am using JCIFS NTLM HTTP Authentication filter
>   Any help is truely appreciated

Provided that there are trust relationships between the domains, cross
domain authentication should just work. No configuration changes
necessary.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

RE: multiple domain problem

2008-10-03T12:32:49Z

I’d appreciate if you can send me that version. I made that change by myself, but I’m not happy with the way I did it, and I’d like to see how you did it.

Regards

From: jcifs-bounces+jlmartinez=bpi-gruposantander.com@... [mailto:jcifs-bounces+jlmartinez=bpi-gruposantander.com@...] On Behalf Of AJ Weber
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 8:35 AM
To: swap_raw4u@...; jcifs@...
Subject: Re: [jcifs] multiple domain problem

I wrote a multi-domain version of the filter. It's still in "beta", and it requires a minor change to one of the JCIFS classes to allow it to work (I sent that request to Michael via the list, and he hasn't replied at all).

I could package it and release it as soon as I get a chance.

-AJ

----- Original Message -----

From: swapsid@...

To: jcifs@...

Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 5:04 AM

Subject: [jcifs] multiple domain problem

Hi Everyone,

      Which property of jcifs should be used , so that i can allow
users from multiple domain to access my web application.
    So far i am using jcifs.smb.client.domain property where i provide
my domain name as value.
   Now i want to allow users from different domains to access my web application
   Also i am using JCIFS NTLM HTTP Authentication filter
   Any help is truely appreciated

Internet communications are not secure and therefore Banco
Santander International does not accept legal responsibility for
the contents of this message. Any views or opinions presented are
solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those
of Banco Santander International unless otherwise specifically
stated.

Las comunicaciones via Internet no son seguras y por lo tanto
Banco Santander International no asume responsabilidad legal ni
de ningun otro tipo por el contenido de este mensaje. Cualquier
opinion transmitida pertenece unicamente al autor y no
necesariamente representa la opinion del Banco Santander
International a no ser que este expresamente detallado.

Re: multiple domain problem

2008-10-03T08:40:18Z

On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 5:04 AM, swapnil rawat <swapsid@...> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Which property of jcifs should be used , so that i can allow
> users from multiple domain to access my web application.
> So far i am using jcifs.smb.client.domain property where i provide
> my domain name as value.
> Now i want to allow users from different domains to access my web application
> Also i am using JCIFS NTLM HTTP Authentication filter
> Any help is truely appreciated

Provided that there are trust relationships between the domains, cross
domain authentication should just work. No configuration changes
necessary.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

Re: multiple domain problem

2008-10-03T05:34:56Z

I could package it and release it as soon as I get a chance.

-AJ

----- Original Message -----

From: swapsid@...

To: jcifs@...

Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 5:04 AM

Subject: [jcifs] multiple domain problem

Hi Everyone,

      Which property of jcifs should be used , so that i can allow
users from multiple domain to access my web application.
    So far i am using jcifs.smb.client.domain property where i provide
my domain name as value.
   Now i want to allow users from different domains to access my web application
   Also i am using JCIFS NTLM HTTP Authentication filter
   Any help is truely appreciated

multiple domain problem

2008-10-03T02:04:42Z

Hi Everyone,

Which property of jcifs should be used , so that i can allow
users from multiple domain to access my web application.
So far i am using jcifs.smb.client.domain property where i provide
my domain name as value.
Now i want to allow users from different domains to access my web application
Also i am using JCIFS NTLM HTTP Authentication filter
Any help is truely appreciated

Re: Re: jcifs Digest, Vol 69, Issue 14

2008-10-01T04:20:26Z

I don't think you have a way of avoiding it.

First, the user name and password you type in the web.xml is what I call a "machine" user. It is only used to create the session between the web server and the Active Directory. It's part of a process called SMB Signing. You can read about it in the FAQ.

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 9:40 AM, swapnil rawat <swapsid@...> wrote:

HI All,
I am new to jcifs . I am asked to achieve SSO in my application
I am using jcifs ntlm http authentication protocol.
I am successfully able to apply SSO to my application but the
only problem is i have to provide username and password into my
web.xml file.

How could i achieve SSO without configuring the username and password
in my web.xml file
any help is truely appreciated
Thankyou

On 9/30/08, jcifs-request@... <jcifs-request@...> wrote:
> Send jcifs mailing list submissions to
> jcifs@...
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/jcifs
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> jcifs-request@...
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> jcifs-owner@...
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of jcifs digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Potential concurrency problem (Ronny Schuetz)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:56:13 +0200
> From: Ronny Schuetz <Usenet.r96@...>
> Subject: [jcifs] Potential concurrency problem
> To: jcifs@...
> Message-ID: <gbt0lu.12j8.1@...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> jCIFS version is 1.2.19. Just ran into an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
> in NbtAddress#getWINSAddress(). NbtAddress#NBNS contains 4 entries, Java
> failed to access index 4.
>
> The only reason why the index was incremented to 4 is - as it looks like
> - that NbtAddress#switchWINS() (at least the part incrementing
> nbnsIndex) isn't synchronized, i.e. it could happen that it gets
> incremented to a value outside the array bounds if executed by multiple
> threads in parallel.
>
> This can be verified by using multiple threads calling
> UniAddress#getByName() in loops in parallel (with
> jcifs.netbios.cachePolicy set to 0 and all netbios timeouts set 1 to
> enforce the switching) and replacing the line (NbtAddress#switchWINS()):
>
> nbnsIndex = (nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length ? nbnsIndex + 1 : 0;
>
> by equivalent code that includes some sleeps at the right place
>
> if((nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length)
> {
> try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException e) {}
> nbnsIndex = nbnsIndex + 1;
> }
> else
> {
> try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException e) {}
> nbnsIndex = 0;
> }
>
> Synchronizing the method NbtAddress#switchWINS() in general or just the
> line changing the index on the class object seems to help.
>
> Best regards,
> Ronny
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> jcifs mailing list
> jcifs@...
> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/jcifs
>
>
> End of jcifs Digest, Vol 69, Issue 14
> *************************************
>

Re: Potential concurrency problem

2008-10-01T01:22:12Z

Michael B Allen wrote:

>> Mhm, I usually tend to synchronize as close as possible to the place
>> where the variable is changed.
>
> There is no correlation between correctly synchronizing access to
> shared variables and their proximity.

But it helps to make the code clearer and avoids future errors in case
the methods using the variable are called from additional places. I
don't want to spend my time discussing that. I don't care how the issue
gets addressed.

Ronny

Re: jcifs Digest, Vol 69, Issue 14

2008-09-30T23:40:26Z

HI All,
I am new to jcifs . I am asked to achieve SSO in my application
I am using jcifs ntlm http authentication protocol.
I am successfully able to apply SSO to my application but the
only problem is i have to provide username and password into my
web.xml file.

How could i achieve SSO without configuring the username and password
in my web.xml file
any help is truely appreciated
Thankyou

On 9/30/08, jcifs-request@... <jcifs-request@...> wrote:

> Send jcifs mailing list submissions to
> jcifs@...
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/jcifs
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> jcifs-request@...
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> jcifs-owner@...
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of jcifs digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Potential concurrency problem (Ronny Schuetz)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:56:13 +0200
> From: Ronny Schuetz <Usenet.r96@...>
> Subject: [jcifs] Potential concurrency problem
> To: jcifs@...
> Message-ID: <gbt0lu.12j8.1@...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> jCIFS version is 1.2.19. Just ran into an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
> in NbtAddress#getWINSAddress(). NbtAddress#NBNS contains 4 entries, Java
> failed to access index 4.
>
> The only reason why the index was incremented to 4 is - as it looks like
> - that NbtAddress#switchWINS() (at least the part incrementing
> nbnsIndex) isn't synchronized, i.e. it could happen that it gets
> incremented to a value outside the array bounds if executed by multiple
> threads in parallel.
>
> This can be verified by using multiple threads calling
> UniAddress#getByName() in loops in parallel (with
> jcifs.netbios.cachePolicy set to 0 and all netbios timeouts set 1 to
> enforce the switching) and replacing the line (NbtAddress#switchWINS()):
>
> nbnsIndex = (nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length ? nbnsIndex + 1 : 0;
>
> by equivalent code that includes some sleeps at the right place
>
> if((nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length)
> {
> try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException e) {}
> nbnsIndex = nbnsIndex + 1;
> }
> else
> {
> try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException e) {}
> nbnsIndex = 0;
> }
>
> Synchronizing the method NbtAddress#switchWINS() in general or just the
> line changing the index on the class object seems to help.
>
> Best regards,
> Ronny
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> jcifs mailing list
> jcifs@...
> https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/jcifs
>
>
> End of jcifs Digest, Vol 69, Issue 14
> *************************************
>

Re: Re: Potential concurrency problem

2008-09-30T11:10:32Z

On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Ronny Schuetz
<Usenet.r96@...> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> thanks for your reply.
>
>> Yup. This is a concurrency error (albeit one that will only occur if
>> you have an unresponsive WINS server and rarely at that).
>>
>> However, synchronizing switchWINS is not a good solution as it will
>> still leave the possibility for concurrency problems.
>>
>> You should use the NameServiceClient.java lock where it is calling
>> switchWINS. Meaning add a synchronized (LOCK) { } around that WINS
>> manipulation like:
>>
>> 261 synchronized (LOCK) {
>> 262 if (NbtAddress.isWINS( request.addr ) == false)
>> 263 break;
>> 264
>> 265 /* Message was sent to WINS but
>> 266 * failed to receive response.
>> 267 * Try a different WINS server.
>> 268 */
>> 269 if (request.addr == NbtAddress.getWINSAddress())
>> 270 NbtAddress.switchWINS();
>> 271 request.addr = NbtAddress.getWINSAddress();
>> 272 }
>
> Mhm, I usually tend to synchronize as close as possible to the place
> where the variable is changed.

There is no correlation between correctly synchronizing access to
shared variables and their proximity.

> Anyway, just found a better solution that
> is safe without additional synchronization. Just replace
>
> nbnsIndex = (nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length ? nbnsIndex + 1 : 0;
>
> with
>
> nbnsIndex = NBNS.length > 0 ? (nbnsIndex + 1) % NBNS.length : 0;
>
> This should fix the issue. Worst case, nbnsIndex isn't incremented as
> often as switchWINS() has been called, but it cannot exceed the array
> bounds. Works fine here.

That will not fix the overall concurrency issue but it might
sufficiently mask it.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

Re: Potential concurrency problem

2008-09-30T08:22:44Z

Hi Mike,

thanks for your reply.

> Yup. This is a concurrency error (albeit one that will only occur if
> you have an unresponsive WINS server and rarely at that).
>
> However, synchronizing switchWINS is not a good solution as it will
> still leave the possibility for concurrency problems.
>
> You should use the NameServiceClient.java lock where it is calling
> switchWINS. Meaning add a synchronized (LOCK) { } around that WINS
> manipulation like:
>
> 261 synchronized (LOCK) {
> 262 if (NbtAddress.isWINS( request.addr ) == false)
> 263 break;
> 264
> 265 /* Message was sent to WINS but
> 266 * failed to receive response.
> 267 * Try a different WINS server.
> 268 */
> 269 if (request.addr == NbtAddress.getWINSAddress())
> 270 NbtAddress.switchWINS();
> 271 request.addr = NbtAddress.getWINSAddress();
> 272 }

Mhm, I usually tend to synchronize as close as possible to the place
where the variable is changed. Anyway, just found a better solution that
is safe without additional synchronization. Just replace

nbnsIndex = (nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length ? nbnsIndex + 1 : 0;

with

nbnsIndex = NBNS.length > 0 ? (nbnsIndex + 1) % NBNS.length : 0;

This should fix the issue. Worst case, nbnsIndex isn't incremented as
often as switchWINS() has been called, but it cannot exceed the array
bounds. Works fine here.

Best regards,
Ronny

Re: Potential concurrency problem

2008-09-30T07:44:17Z

On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:56 AM, Ronny Schuetz <Usenet.r96@...> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> jCIFS version is 1.2.19. Just ran into an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
> in NbtAddress#getWINSAddress(). NbtAddress#NBNS contains 4 entries, Java
> failed to access index 4.
>
> The only reason why the index was incremented to 4 is - as it looks like
> - that NbtAddress#switchWINS() (at least the part incrementing
> nbnsIndex) isn't synchronized, i.e. it could happen that it gets
> incremented to a value outside the array bounds if executed by multiple
> threads in parallel.
>
> This can be verified by using multiple threads calling
> UniAddress#getByName() in loops in parallel (with
> jcifs.netbios.cachePolicy set to 0 and all netbios timeouts set 1 to
> enforce the switching) and replacing the line (NbtAddress#switchWINS()):
>
> nbnsIndex = (nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length ? nbnsIndex + 1 : 0;
>
> by equivalent code that includes some sleeps at the right place
>
> if((nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length)
> {
> try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException e) {}
> nbnsIndex = nbnsIndex + 1;
> }
> else
> {
> try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException e) {}
> nbnsIndex = 0;
> }
>
> Synchronizing the method NbtAddress#switchWINS() in general or just the
> line changing the index on the class object seems to help.

Yup. This is a concurrency error (albeit one that will only occur if
you have an unresponsive WINS server and rarely at that).

However, synchronizing switchWINS is not a good solution as it will
still leave the possibility for concurrency problems.

You should use the NameServiceClient.java lock where it is calling
switchWINS. Meaning add a synchronized (LOCK) { } around that WINS
manipulation like:

261 synchronized (LOCK) {
262 if (NbtAddress.isWINS( request.addr ) == false)
263 break;
264
265 /* Message was sent to WINS but
266 * failed to receive response.
267 * Try a different WINS server.
268 */
269 if (request.addr == NbtAddress.getWINSAddress())
270 NbtAddress.switchWINS();
271 request.addr = NbtAddress.getWINSAddress();
272 }

Please try this and let me know. If it works OK I'll incorporate the fix.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

Potential concurrency problem

2008-09-30T03:56:13Z

Hi,

jCIFS version is 1.2.19. Just ran into an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
in NbtAddress#getWINSAddress(). NbtAddress#NBNS contains 4 entries, Java
failed to access index 4.

The only reason why the index was incremented to 4 is - as it looks like
- that NbtAddress#switchWINS() (at least the part incrementing
nbnsIndex) isn't synchronized, i.e. it could happen that it gets
incremented to a value outside the array bounds if executed by multiple
threads in parallel.

This can be verified by using multiple threads calling
UniAddress#getByName() in loops in parallel (with
jcifs.netbios.cachePolicy set to 0 and all netbios timeouts set 1 to
enforce the switching) and replacing the line (NbtAddress#switchWINS()):

nbnsIndex = (nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length ? nbnsIndex + 1 : 0;

by equivalent code that includes some sleeps at the right place

if((nbnsIndex + 1) < NBNS.length)
{
try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException e) {}
nbnsIndex = nbnsIndex + 1;
}
else
{
try { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch(InterruptedException e) {}
nbnsIndex = 0;
}

Synchronizing the method NbtAddress#switchWINS() in general or just the
line changing the index on the class object seems to help.

Best regards,
Ronny

Come join me on Review Japan.

2008-09-28T21:15:37Z

Network Email

Join me on Review Japan

"A place to share your experiences and memories of Japan"

P Alb has:

144 friends
3 photos
12 videos
12 discussions
16 blog posts
3 songs

Come join me on Review Japan!

- P Alb

Click to Join

Members on Review Japan:

Mike Tokue

Nur Awatif

Susan Ball Faeder

nipagard

Lia

About Review Japan

"A place to share your experiences and memories of Japan, and share reviews of restaurants, places, products, activities, movies, and all things Japanese"

172 members
46 photos
11 songs

23 videos
23 discussions
24 blog posts

To control which emails you receive on Review Japan, click here

Re: networkExplorer: don't prompt for username/password

2008-09-23T14:42:59Z

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Newell, Gary <gary.newell@...> wrote:
> JCIFS Guru's:
>
> Is there a jcifs setting that will modify networkExplorer's default behavior
> such that if an openFile attempt fails, then it will not prompt the user for
> a username/password? Instead, I just want it to report the failure status
> back to me and continue.

Probably if you change the logic of the } catch( SmbAuthException sae ) { block.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

Re: networkExplorer: determine domain\username

2008-09-23T14:39:49Z

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Newell, Gary <gary.newell@...> wrote:
> jcifs:
>
> Is it possible in networkExplorer to determine what domain\username is
> currently accessing the servlet?

Yes. There's a line in doGet that looks like:

req.getSession().setAttribute( "npa-" + server, ntlm );

You can get to the domain an username from the ntlm object.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

networkExplorer: determine domain\username

2008-09-23T14:25:02Z

jcifs:

Is it possible in networkExplorer to determine what domain\username is currently accessing the servlet?

Thanks!

Gary

networkExplorer: don't prompt for username/password

2008-09-23T14:16:36Z

JCIFS Guru's:

Is there a jcifs setting that will modify networkExplorer's default behavior such that if an openFile attempt fails, then it will not prompt the user for a username/password? Instead, I just want it to report the failure status back to me and continue.

Thanks!

Gary

Re: Windows domain required for authentication?

2008-09-23T07:31:36Z

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:34 AM, Hannes <info4h@...> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> within a prototyping project we have to evaluate authentication on a Windows
> domain from a Java application running on Linux. My question is:
>
> - do I really need a Windows domain controller installed or can I authentify
> against Samba on a Linux based host instead of a Windows Box?
>
> I would like to avoid bringing a Windows machine into my project. It would be
> great if we could simulate it with Samba!

It depends. Are you talking about a web application that uses the NTLM
HTTP Filter or something else that would call SmbSession.logon()
directly?

If you're using the Filter then see the "logonShare" example in the
NTLM HTTP Filter document.

If you're using SmbSession.logon() then you would just supply a "dc"
that constructed from a URL pointing to a share on a machine that is
an authority for the users you are authenticating.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

Re: Windows domain required for authentication?

2008-09-23T05:19:53Z

Yes, you can use Samba, and even just use a workstation with a file-share for prototyping/testing.

----- Original Message -----

From: info4h@...

To: jcifs@...

Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 3:34 AM

Subject: [jcifs] Windows domain required for authentication?

Hi all,

within a prototyping project we have to evaluate authentication on a Windows
domain from a Java application running on Linux. My question is:

- do I really need a Windows domain controller installed or can I authentify
against Samba on a Linux based host instead of a Windows Box?

I would like to avoid bringing a Windows machine into my project. It would be
great if we could simulate it with Samba!

Any hint is appreciated!

Best regards
Hannes

Windows domain required for authentication?

2008-09-23T00:34:59Z

Hi all,

within a prototyping project we have to evaluate authentication on a Windows
domain from a Java application running on Linux. My question is:

- do I really need a Windows domain controller installed or can I authentify
against Samba on a Linux based host instead of a Windows Box?

I would like to avoid bringing a Windows machine into my project. It would be
great if we could simulate it with Samba!

Any hint is appreciated!

Best regards
Hannes

llgY Young lolitas and boys fucking site. zag They so young

2008-09-20T21:30:53Z

Re: deadlock in jcifs jar..

2008-09-20T20:36:31Z

On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Con O'Donnell <conod@...> wrote:

> Hi I think there is a potential deadlock condition in 1.2.23/1.2.24
>
> If I call logon from mutliple threads and one of them expires:
> /* logoff old sessions */
> if (SO_TIMEOUT > 0 && sessionExpiration < (now =
> System.currentTimeMillis())) {
> sessionExpiration = now + SO_TIMEOUT;
> iter = sessions.listIterator();
> while( iter.hasNext() ) {
> ssn = (SmbSession)iter.next();
> if( ssn.expiration < now ) {
> ssn.logoff( false );
> }
> }
>
> then the session logoff is called...
>
>
> I then occassionally get a deadlock:
>
> "Thread-19":
> at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.treeConnect(SmbTree.java:128)
> - waiting to lock <0x1b9129a8> (a java.lang.Object)
> at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.send(SmbTree.java:64)
> at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.treeDisconnect(SmbTree.java:168)
> - locked <0x1b90f2a0> (a jcifs.smb.SmbTransport)
> at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logoff(SmbSession.java:301)
> - locked <0x1b90f2a0> (a jcifs.smb.SmbTransport)
> at jcifs.smb.SmbTransport.getSmbSession(SmbTransport.java:138)
> - locked <0x1b90f2a0> (a jcifs.smb.SmbTransport)
> at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logon(SmbSession.java:167)
> at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logon(SmbSession.java:162)
>
> "Thread-11":
> at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.treeConnect(SmbTree.java:130)
> - waiting to lock <0x1b90f2a0> (a jcifs.smb.SmbTransport)
> - locked <0x1b9129a8> (a java.lang.Object)
> at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logon(SmbSession.java:169)
> at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logon(SmbSession.java:162)
>
>
> due to the dual locks in treeConnect
>
> void treeConnect( ServerMessageBlock andx,
> ServerMessageBlock andxResponse ) throws
> SmbException {
> String unc;
> SmbTransport transport = session.transport();
> synchronized(transport.setupDiscoLock) {
> synchronized(transport) {
>
>
> Other than radically changing the locking system I think reversing the order
> of these locks would really help the situation
> as the transport lock is being held routinely by most functions so by
> nesting these in the curent order (setupDiscoLock and transport)
> there is a race condition where any thread calling logoff will potentially
> end up calling treeconnect while already holding the transport lock..

This issue is well known. Unfortunately the fix is not trivial
(changing the order of locks or adding new ones cannot fix it) and I
don't have any time to work on it.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

deadlock in jcifs jar..

2008-09-20T18:06:37Z

Hi I think there is a potential deadlock condition in 1.2.23/1.2.24

If I call logon from mutliple threads and one of them expires:
                                        /* logoff old sessions */
        if (SO_TIMEOUT > 0 && sessionExpiration < (now = System.currentTimeMillis())) {
            sessionExpiration = now + SO_TIMEOUT;
            iter = sessions.listIterator();
            while( iter.hasNext() ) {
                ssn = (SmbSession)iter.next();
                if( ssn.expiration < now ) {
                    ssn.logoff( false );
                }
            }

then the session logoff is called...

I then occassionally get a deadlock:

"Thread-19":
        at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.treeConnect(SmbTree.java:128)
        - waiting to lock <0x1b9129a8> (a java.lang.Object)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.send(SmbTree.java:64)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.treeDisconnect(SmbTree.java:168)
        - locked <0x1b90f2a0> (a jcifs.smb.SmbTransport)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logoff(SmbSession.java:301)
        - locked <0x1b90f2a0> (a jcifs.smb.SmbTransport)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbTransport.getSmbSession(SmbTransport.java:138)
        - locked <0x1b90f2a0> (a jcifs.smb.SmbTransport)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logon(SmbSession.java:167)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logon(SmbSession.java:162)

"Thread-11":
        at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.treeConnect(SmbTree.java:130)
        - waiting to lock <0x1b90f2a0> (a jcifs.smb.SmbTransport)
        - locked <0x1b9129a8> (a java.lang.Object)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logon(SmbSession.java:169)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.logon(SmbSession.java:162)

due to the dual locks in treeConnect

    void treeConnect( ServerMessageBlock andx,
                            ServerMessageBlock andxResponse ) throws SmbException {
        String unc;
        SmbTransport transport = session.transport();
           synchronized(transport.setupDiscoLock) {
                 synchronized(transport) {

Other than radically changing the locking system I think reversing the order of these locks would really help the situation
as the transport lock is being held routinely by most functions so by nesting these in the curent order (setupDiscoLock and transport)
there is a race condition where any thread calling logoff will potentially end up calling treeconnect while already holding the transport lock..

All the Best

Get more out of the Web. Learn 10 hidden secrets of Windows Live. Learn Now

want to fuck your daughter when no one s around?.. comb

2008-09-18T07:50:41Z

Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.

Windows User rights for jcifs smb authentication

2008-09-18T04:02:48Z

I am not able to authenticate user using jcifs 1.2.1 package . My user is not in "Backup Operator's Group" on Windows system.

jcifs.smb.SmbAuthException: Access is denied.
        at jcifs.smb.SmbTransport.checkStatus(SmbTransport.java:515)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbTransport.send(SmbTransport.java:629)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbSession.send(SmbSession.java:240)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbTree.treeConnect(SmbTree.java:154)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbFile.doConnect(SmbFile.java:850)
        at jcifs.smb.SmbFile.connect(SmbFile.java:893)
        at testclient.main(testclient.java:148)

When I put this user into the group, authentication is successful. Please guide me any other way as I don't want to put my user in "Backup Operator's Group" due to security reasons.

Your response is appreciable.
--
Amol M. Agare
Mobile-91-9970164819

Re: Strange Behavior with Time on Win98

2008-09-18T03:10:44Z

> The problem is that I don't test Win98 anymore and haven't in a very
> long time. People just don't use it (except for you?!).
>
> I recall Win98 having some exceptional time handling that is almost
> certainly broken after years of changes.
>
> Unfortunately I can't afford to work on JCIFS for "Free" or "free"
> anymore so that's about as much advice as I can give you.

Thanks for anwsering. Is there a easy way to disable
servertimezoneoffset complete without codepatching as a workaround for
this problem?

Thanks,
Mirko
>

This communication and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain information that is copyrighted or confidential and exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or the entity to which it is addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify us at once so that we may take the appropriate action and avoid troubling you further.
Thank you for your cooperation. Please contact your local IT staff or email info@... if you need assistance.

Re: Problem authenticating at our customer's site

2008-09-18T02:10:24Z

Michael B Allen wrote:

> This looks like a name service issue. You'll need to figure out if
> WINS is used or only DNS and adjust resolveOrder accordingly and make
> sure the servers DNS can resolve the names supplied in the SMB URL.
>
> But I'm not really sure what you're trying to do. Are you using the
> NTLM HTTP Filter or are you just trying to access a file on a server
> from a servlet?
>
> Mike
>
>

Mike,

Thanks for your help.

I've asked our tech guy at the customer's site to try the WINS settings
and resolveOrder.

We're using the NTLM HTTP Filter for a single sign-on mechanism.

I'll post more results as and when I get them.

Thanks,

Richard

Re: Problem authenticating at our customer's site

2008-09-17T20:12:02Z

On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Richard Heath <richard.heath@...> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We've been having problems getting JCIF to work on our customer's network so
> I created a test application running under tomcat and have tried it on their
> webserver.
>
> The settings are:
> jcifs.smb.client.password=<private>
> jcifs.smb.client.username=<private>
> jcifs.netbios.cachePolicy=1200
> jcifs.smb.client.soTimeout=300000
> jcifs.util.loglevel=4
> jcifs.http.domainController=172.31.101.6
> jcifs.smb.client.domain=BZ
>
> Unfortunately the process stops before the actual authentication is
> processed:
>
> SmbComNegotiate[command=SMB_COM_NEGOTIATE,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0018,flags2=0xC003
> ,signSeq=0,tid=0,pid=59807,uid=0,mid=1,wordCount=0,byteCount=12,wordCount=0,dialects=NT
> LM 0.12
> ]
> New data read: Transport1[0.0.0.0<00>/172.31.101.6:0]
> 00000: FF 53 4D 42 72 00 00 00 00 98 03 C0 00 00 00 00 | SMBr......└....|
> 00010: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 9F E9 00 00 01 00 |...........Θ....|
>
> SmbComNegotiateResponse[command=SMB_COM_NEGOTIATE,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0098,flags
> 2=0xC003,signSeq=0,tid=0,pid=59807,uid=0,mid=1,wordCount=17,byteCount=28,wordCount=17,dialectIn
> dex=0,securityMode=0xF,security=user,encryptedPasswords=true,maxMpxCount=50,maxNumberVcs=1,maxB
> ufferSize=16644,maxRawSize=65536,sessionKey=0x00000000,capabilities=0x0001F3FD,serverTime=Wed
> S
> ep 17 16:34:59 CEST
> 2008,serverTimeZone=65416,encryptionKeyLength=8,byteCount=28,encryptionKey=
> 0x0517FB14BDB5678D,oemDomainName=BZ]
> NodeStatusRequest[nameTrnId=1,isResponse=false,opCode=QUERY,isAuthAnswer=false,isTruncated=fals
> e,isRecurAvailable=false,isRecurDesired=false,isBroadcast=false,resultCode=0,questionCount=1,an
> swerCount=0,authorityCount=0,additionalCount=0,questionName=*
> <00>,questionType=0x
> 0021,questionClass=IN,recordName=null,recordType=0x0000,recordClass=0x0000,ttl=0,rDataLength=0]
>
> 00000: 00 01 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 20 43 4B 41 |............ CKA|
> 00010: 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 |AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA|
> 00020: 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 00 00 21 |AAAAAAAAAAAAA..!|
> 00030: 00 01 |.. |
>
> NetBIOS: new data read from socket
> NodeStatusResponse[nameTrnId=1,isResponse=true,opCode=QUERY,isAuthAnswer=true,isTruncated=false
> ,isRecurAvailable=false,isRecurDesired=false,isBroadcast=false,resultCode=0,questionCount=0,ans
> werCount=1,authorityCount=0,additionalCount=0,questionName=null,questionType=0x0000,questionCla
> ss=IN,recordName=*
> <00>,recordType=0x0021,recordClass=IN,ttl=0,rDataLength=173]
> 00000: 00 01 84 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 20 43 4B 41 |............ CKA|
> 00010: 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 |AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA|
> 00020: 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 00 00 21 |AAAAAAAAAAAAA..!|
> 00030: 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 AD 07 42 5A 44 43 30 36 20 |.......¡.BZDC06 |
> 00040: 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 00 44 00 42 5A 20 20 20 | .D.BZ |
> 00050: 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 00 C4 00 42 5A 20 | .─.BZ |
> 00060: 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 1C C4 00 42 | .─.B|
> 00070: 5A 44 43 30 36 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 44 |ZDC06 D|
> 00080: 00 42 5A 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 |.BZ |
> 00090: 1E C4 00 42 5A 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 |.─.BZ |
> 000A0: 20 20 1D 44 00 01 02 5F 5F 4D 53 42 52 4F 57 53 | .D...__MSBROWS|
> 000B0: 45 5F 5F 02 01 C4 00 00 50 56 A8 06 49 00 00 00 |E__..─..PV¿.I...|
> 000C0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
> 000D0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
> 000E0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
> 000F0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |....... |
>
>
>
> Any ideas? It worked fine on our network and continued well after the stage
> it stopped on our customer's system

This looks like a name service issue. You'll need to figure out if
WINS is used or only DNS and adjust resolveOrder accordingly and make
sure the servers DNS can resolve the names supplied in the SMB URL.

But I'm not really sure what you're trying to do. Are you using the
NTLM HTTP Filter or are you just trying to access a file on a server
from a servlet?

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

Re: Strange Behavior with Time on Win98

2008-09-17T19:38:57Z

On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Weber, Mirko
<Mirko.Weber@...> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have a problem with the LastModifiedTime of files, when communicate with a
> Win98 share from a linux client (to a linux-share or Win2000-share no
> problem).
>
> With the following code:
>
> src.createNewFile();
> src.copyTo(dest);
> System.out.println("now:"+new Date().getTime()+","+new Date());
> System.out.println("src:"+new Date(src.getLastModified()));
> System.out.println("dest:"+new Date(dest.getLastModified()));
>
> I get the output:
> now:Wed Sep 17 14:48:25 GMT 2008
> src:Sun Nov 02 03:06:40 GMT 2008
> dest:Wed Dec 17 15:22:40 GMT 2008
>
> The strange think is, when I look at the log-Level a read the
> SmbComQueryInformationResponse there is the right Time, only when I access
> the Time over getLastModified or when I copy the file with copyTo the time
> get this strange offset. Here the sample with logging:
>
> now:Wed Sep 17 14:48:25 GMT 2008
> queryPath: \TMP\src
> SmbComQueryInformation[command=SMB_COM_QUERY_INFORMATION,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0018,flags2=0x4003,signSeq=0,tid=55298,pid=2090,uid=0,mid=13,wordCount=0,byteCount=10,filename=\TMP\src]
>
> New data read: Transport1[ROEGO01<00>/172.18.84.107:139]
> 00000: FF 53 4D 42 08 00 00 00 00 98 03 40 00 00 00 00 |ÿSMB.......@....|
> 00010: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 D8 2A 08 00 00 0D 00 |.........Ø*.....|
>
> SmbComQueryInformationResponse[command=SMB_COM_QUERY_INFORMATION,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0098,flags2=0x4003,signSeq=0,tid=55298,pid=2090,uid=0,mid=13,wordCount=10,byteCount=0,fileAttributes=0x0020,lastWriteTime=Wed
> Sep 17 16:50:40 GMT 2008,fileSize=0]
>
> src:Sun Nov 02 03:06:40 GMT 2008
>
> My hint is, that this has something to do with the serverTimeZone that I get
> from SmbNegotiateResponse:
>
> SmbComNegotiateResponse[command=SMB_COM_NEGOTIATE,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0098,flags2=0x0000,signSeq=0,tid=0,pid=2090,uid=0,mid=1,wordCount=17,byteCount=8,wordCount=17,dialectIndex=0,securityMode=0x2,security=share,encryptedPasswords=true,maxMpxCount=2,maxNumberVcs=1,maxBufferSize=2920,maxRawSize=65536,sessionKey=0x80030080,capabilities=0x00000203,serverTime=Wed
> Sep 17 14:50:38 GMT
> 2008,serverTimeZone=65416,encryptionKeyLength=8,byteCount=8,encryptionKey=0x800003803F19D148,oemDomainName=]
>
> and the line of code in the SmbFile.java of queryPath() where in the
> else-Tree (for old Systems I think) you have the line:
>
> SmbComQueryInformationResponse response =
> new SmbComQueryInformationResponse(
> tree.session.transport.server.serverTimeZone * 1000 *
> 60L );
>
> With this I can explain the constant offset, but I don't know where is the
> error. So my question is: Is the queryPath for Win98 wrong, is something on
> the server wrong? Also for the linux-share I get the same high
> serverTimezone in SmbComNegotiateResponse but there is no problem in the
> copyTo-Methode with such a timeOffset.

The problem is that I don't test Win98 anymore and haven't in a very
long time. People just don't use it (except for you?!).

I recall Win98 having some exceptional time handling that is almost
certainly broken after years of changes.

Unfortunately I can't afford to work on JCIFS for "Free" or "free"
anymore so that's about as much advice as I can give you.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

Re: Using jCIFS as a smb server rather than a smb client

2008-09-17T19:24:22Z

On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Ron Cozad <rcozad55@...> wrote:

> I desire to have a Tomcat servlet that mimics a smb server.
>
> Why? I need to interface an application to a document repository. I can
> not modify either the application nor repository. The application only
> supports smb client, no webdav or url support. The repository does not
> provide smb server services.
>
> My plan is to put a gateway in place that pretends to be an smb server for
> the application but talks native transport with the repository.
>
> It appears that jCIFS provides smb client support only. Could someone
> confirm that?
>
> If I am wrong, is there any example code available using jCIFS as an smb
> server?
>
> If I am right, please refer me to another toolkit.

You're right. JCIFS does not implement the server side of CIFS.

Lookup Alfresco JLAN. They use it in their CMS for what sounds like
exactly the same purpose you describe.

Mike

--
Michael B Allen
PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO
http://www.ioplex.com/

Problem authenticating at our customer's site

2008-09-17T08:29:20Z

Hi,

We've been having problems getting JCIF to work on our customer's
network so I created a test application running under tomcat and have
tried it on their webserver.

The settings are:
jcifs.smb.client.password=<private>
jcifs.smb.client.username=<private>
jcifs.netbios.cachePolicy=1200
jcifs.smb.client.soTimeout=300000
jcifs.util.loglevel=4
jcifs.http.domainController=172.31.101.6
jcifs.smb.client.domain=BZ

Unfortunately the process stops before the actual authentication is
processed:

SmbComNegotiate[command=SMB_COM_NEGOTIATE,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0018,flags2=0xC003
,signSeq=0,tid=0,pid=59807,uid=0,mid=1,wordCount=0,byteCount=12,wordCount=0,dialects=NT
LM 0.12
]
New data read: Transport1[0.0.0.0<00>/172.31.101.6:0]
00000: FF 53 4D 42 72 00 00 00 00 98 03 C0 00 00 00 00 | SMBr......└....|
00010: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 9F E9 00 00 01 00 |...........Θ....|

SmbComNegotiateResponse[command=SMB_COM_NEGOTIATE,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0098,flags
2=0xC003,signSeq=0,tid=0,pid=59807,uid=0,mid=1,wordCount=17,byteCount=28,wordCount=17,dialectIn
dex=0,securityMode=0xF,security=user,encryptedPasswords=true,maxMpxCount=50,maxNumberVcs=1,maxB
ufferSize=16644,maxRawSize=65536,sessionKey=0x00000000,capabilities=0x0001F3FD,serverTime=Wed
S
ep 17 16:34:59 CEST
2008,serverTimeZone=65416,encryptionKeyLength=8,byteCount=28,encryptionKey=
0x0517FB14BDB5678D,oemDomainName=BZ]
NodeStatusRequest[nameTrnId=1,isResponse=false,opCode=QUERY,isAuthAnswer=false,isTruncated=fals
e,isRecurAvailable=false,isRecurDesired=false,isBroadcast=false,resultCode=0,questionCount=1,an
swerCount=0,authorityCount=0,additionalCount=0,questionName=*
<00>,questionType=0x
0021,questionClass=IN,recordName=null,recordType=0x0000,recordClass=0x0000,ttl=0,rDataLength=0]

00000: 00 01 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 20 43 4B 41 |............ CKA|
00010: 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 |AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA|
00020: 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 00 00 21 |AAAAAAAAAAAAA..!|
00030: 00 01 |.. |

NetBIOS: new data read from socket
NodeStatusResponse[nameTrnId=1,isResponse=true,opCode=QUERY,isAuthAnswer=true,isTruncated=false
,isRecurAvailable=false,isRecurDesired=false,isBroadcast=false,resultCode=0,questionCount=0,ans
werCount=1,authorityCount=0,additionalCount=0,questionName=null,questionType=0x0000,questionCla
ss=IN,recordName=*
<00>,recordType=0x0021,recordClass=IN,ttl=0,rDataLength=173]
00000: 00 01 84 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 20 43 4B 41 |............ CKA|
00010: 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 |AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA|
00020: 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 00 00 21 |AAAAAAAAAAAAA..!|
00030: 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 AD 07 42 5A 44 43 30 36 20 |.......¡.BZDC06 |
00040: 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 00 44 00 42 5A 20 20 20 | .D.BZ |
00050: 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 00 C4 00 42 5A 20 | .─.BZ |
00060: 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 1C C4 00 42 | .─.B|
00070: 5A 44 43 30 36 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 44 |ZDC06 D|
00080: 00 42 5A 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 |.BZ |
00090: 1E C4 00 42 5A 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 |.─.BZ |
000A0: 20 20 1D 44 00 01 02 5F 5F 4D 53 42 52 4F 57 53 | .D...__MSBROWS|
000B0: 45 5F 5F 02 01 C4 00 00 50 56 A8 06 49 00 00 00 |E__..─..PV¿.I...|
000C0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
000D0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
000E0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................|
000F0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |....... |

Any ideas? It worked fine on our network and continued well after the
stage it stopped on our customer's system

Thanks,

Richard

Strange Behavior with Time on Win98

2008-09-17T08:03:16Z

Strange Behavior with Time on Win98

Hello,

I have a problem with the LastModifiedTime of files, when communicate with a Win98 share from a linux client (to a linux-share or Win2000-share no problem).

With the following code:

src.createNewFile();
src.copyTo(dest);
System.out.println("now:"+new Date().getTime()+","+new Date());
System.out.println("src:"+new Date(src.getLastModified()));
System.out.println("dest:"+new Date(dest.getLastModified()));

I get the output:
now:Wed Sep 17 14:48:25 GMT 2008
src:Sun Nov 02 03:06:40 GMT 2008
dest:Wed Dec 17 15:22:40 GMT 2008

The strange think is, when I look at the log-Level a read the SmbComQueryInformationResponse there is the right Time, only when I access the Time over getLastModified or when I copy the file with copyTo the time get this strange offset. Here the sample with logging:

now:Wed Sep 17 14:48:25 GMT 2008
queryPath: \TMP\src
SmbComQueryInformation[command=SMB_COM_QUERY_INFORMATION,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0018,flags2=0x4003,signSeq=0,tid=55298,pid=2090,uid=0,mid=13,wordCount=0,byteCount=10,filename=\TMP\src]

New data read: Transport1[ROEGO01<00>/172.18.84.107:139]
00000: FF 53 4D 42 08 00 00 00 00 98 03 40 00 00 00 00 |ÿSMB.......@....|
00010: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 D8 2A 08 00 00 0D 00 |.........Ø*.....|

SmbComQueryInformationResponse[command=SMB_COM_QUERY_INFORMATION,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0098,flags2=0x4003,signSeq=0,tid=55298,pid=2090,uid=0,mid=13,wordCount=10,byteCount=0,fileAttributes=0x0020,lastWriteTime=Wed Sep 17 16:50:40 GMT 2008,fileSize=0]

src:Sun Nov 02 03:06:40 GMT 2008

My hint is, that this has something to do with the serverTimeZone that I get from SmbNegotiateResponse:

SmbComNegotiateResponse[command=SMB_COM_NEGOTIATE,received=false,errorCode=0,flags=0x0098,flags2=0x0000,signSeq=0,tid=0,pid=2090,uid=0,mid=1,wordCount=17,byteCount=8,wordCount=17,dialectIndex=0,securityMode=0x2,security=share,encryptedPasswords=true,maxMpxCount=2,maxNumberVcs=1,maxBufferSize=2920,maxRawSize=65536,sessionKey=0x80030080,capabilities=0x00000203,serverTime=Wed Sep 17 14:50:38 GMT 2008,serverTimeZone=65416,encryptionKeyLength=8,byteCount=8,encryptionKey=0x800003803F19D148,oemDomainName=]

and the line of code in the SmbFile.java of queryPath() where in the else-Tree (for old Systems I think) you have the line:

            SmbComQueryInformationResponse response =
                    new SmbComQueryInformationResponse(
                    tree.session.transport.server.serverTimeZone * 1000 * 60L );

With this I can explain the constant offset, but I don’t know where is the error. So my question is: Is the queryPath for Win98 wrong, is something on the server wrong? Also for the linux-share I get the same high serverTimezone in SmbComNegotiateResponse but there is no problem in the copyTo-Methode with such a timeOffset.

Thanks and Kind regards,
Mirko

This communication and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain information that is copyrighted or confidential and exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or the entity to which it is addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify us at once so that we may take the appropriate action and avoid troubling you further.
Thank you for your cooperation. Please contact your local IT staff or email info@... if you need assistance.

Using jCIFS as a smb server rather than a smb client

2008-09-17T07:30:28Z

I desire to have a Tomcat servlet that mimics a smb server.

Why? I need to interface an application to a document repository. I can not modify either the application nor repository. The application only supports smb client, no webdav or url support. The repository does not provide smb server services.

My plan is to put a gateway in place that pretends to be an smb server for the application but talks native transport with the repository.

It appears that jCIFS provides smb client support only. Could someone confirm that?

If I am wrong, is there any example code available using jCIFS as an smb server?

If I am right, please refer me to another toolkit.

Thanks