Unfortunately no one can be told what fun_plug is - you have to see it for yourself.
You are not logged in.
The setup was about 5 WinXP Workstations mapped drive on the DNS-323(Firmware Version: 1.07). Running as a workgroup. This access denied problem forced me to install ffp and used another half day to figure out the problem.
1. User saved Excel(not only Office 2007) will result file with mode 700(nobody, 501) on the 323. Normally it should be 777(nobody, 501).
-rwx------ 1 nobody 501 2914816 Aug 20 19:14 aaaaaa.xls
Dunno why/how Excel ignore all those smb.conf "force mode 0777" parameters and save the file in mode 700.
2. Unfortunately, one of the PC here(PC1) logged in with "admin" and password was the same as the admin account on the 323, which PC1 used local account "admin" first(windows behavior) and succeed for connect the share instead of "guest/nobody". File created by PC1 will result in 777/700(admin, 500).
Maybe due to the default smb.conf do not have "guest only = yes"?
3. The above behavior combined, PC1 cannot access the excel files saved by other users (700, nobody, 501), or other users cannot access PC1's saved files if the file is mode 700.
If we expand these symptoms, any PC's login account/password matched with the 323 internal accounts will not be "guest" connected and causing problems under the mode 700 permission. They will not be able to open each other's file.
================================================================
To get around, Need to unmatch the password.
I changed the admin password on the 323, and disconnected the share on PC1, reboot, and mapped the drive again. Tested PC1 created file on share, checked permission - 777,nobody,501, OK. Tried open other user's 700,nobody,501 files, OK. Normal now.
More on the 700 problem:
Normally, this will not cause problem if all users using the guest account(nobody) to connect the share. Even the file was saved as mode 700, they still able to access it(same user). But users created and logged in for FTP will unable to access the files.
Just wondering will other brand's NAS also nasty like this? Upcoming, I still got orders to replace a few sites' win98 "file server" with hopefully low maintenance NAS.
Last edited by alexccs (2009-08-21 06:19:19)
Offline