SMB Are we safe? - Printable Version

+- Forum (
+-- Forum: Community (/forum-5.html)
+--- Forum: Other news (/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: SMB Are we safe? (/thread-3910.html)

SMB Are we safe? - Skywatch - 26th May, 2017 04:53 AM

Just saw the above. Does it apply to versions used by Xbian?

RE: SMB Are we safe? - Nachteule - 26th May, 2017 06:46 AM

Next hot air message Exclamation

As everybody knows, we're using Debian distro, we have to rely on Debian bug fixes Smile

RE: SMB Are we safe? - namarang - 12th Dec, 2020 11:55 PM

totally agree about SMB1. This I don’t agree with. “ Mapped resources are easier for them to locate, require less training, and are safer to use, especially when provided automatically through group policy.” 1. We have been trying to move users away from drive letters to UNCs, if windows had ability to map UNC as folder points of /mycomputer York guidance would be sound, it doesn’t. 2. Many server have many shares, in many organizations there literally isn’t enough drive letters, smaller orgs will not to DFS and even if they have just something like a NAS that often has 10+ shares, all those drive letters is not easier than clicking one browsable object If Microsoft thinks browsing computers with WS-discovery is not safe it should remove the ability to use it and move to mDNS ...