#### "The Linux Gazette...making Linux just a little more fun!"

# The Answer Guy

#### By James T. Dennis, linux-questions-only@ssc.com
Starshine Technical Services, http://www.starshine.org/

### Sometimes Short of the Question

From Laurin Killian on Fri, 08 Jan 1999

James,

I enjoy your column, but sometimes you seem to stop short of the "real" answer. What I mean is, you don't answer the specific question that is being asked. This is good in some ways - because I've picked up some interesting ideas from your more general answers.

Case in point, Answer Guy 36, "How to "get into" an Linux system from a Microsoft client": The guy says he can "get into" - use SMB to view files on his linux box - from win95 and NOT WinNT(sp4). The big issue is the difference, he can see his files with win95, NOT with NT. As of sp4, NT uses encrypted passwords by default for shares and will not view files from a share that does not use encrypted passwords.

> Yes. I remembered that. However I didn't remember the details so I wanted to refer him to the FAQ.

There are two options that are detailed in an article in Linux Journal #56 and also in the documentation for samba, in the files:

> `ENCRYPTION.txt, WinNT.txt, NT4_PlainPassword.reg`

Basically, turn off encryption on NT, or turn on encryption on the samba box.

The easier, of course, is to turn off encryption on the NT box, but to show interoperability with NT, it is a good idea to actually turn on (password) encryption on the samba server.

> Actually it seems harder to disable the encryption on the NT box (or boxes) since you have to do it on every one of them by hand in their weird registry editor.

> Enabling the encryption support on the Linux box is a one time hassle (per server) can can conceivably be automated. It would be nice if we could make it the default --- but those pesky U.S. crypto export regulations are probably chilling that idea.

What my question really boils down to is this: Should I email you more detailed answers when I know them, since I don't seem to have the email of the person who asked the question?

-Laurin

> You're welcome to relay the more specific answers through me. In this case I think the original poster did get the right info from the FAQ. (Usually I get a follow up if my answer didn't quite do it).

> Although I avoid saying "RTFM" to any question --- I will sometimes "cop out" and point at a specific FM to R. Sometimes that has more to do with my mood and schedule than with any rationality and the value of the question at hand.

##### Copyright © 1999, James T. Dennis
Published in The Linux Gazette Issue 37 February 1999

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
11 | 12 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 21 | 22
23 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 37 | 38
39 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49