An exploit on Linux and BSD allows attackers to gain root access through Samba

An exploit on Linux and BSD allows attackers to gain root access through Samba
ubuntu.com/usn/usn-3296-1/

If you have samba installed and on and have a folder in a share used for shared libraries.


FTFY:
An exploit on Samba can allow attackers to gain root access in specific circumstances on Linux or BSD systems.

>rearranging the deck chairs

It's a Linux vulnerability.

don't bother, unless it's a kernel exploit linus babbies will kick and scream like babies

>using samba in 2017

Already patched. Keep your system up-to-date.

>being this dumb
The exploit is there because of SAMBA not LINUX. If your linux boxes dont use samba this CVE has no impact whatsoever
>winfags trying this hard
Git gud m8s

>Linux = Samba
kek, wintoddlers are adorable.

>Windows = Samba
Freetards are so cute.

The exploit went 7 years before being patched, too. Sad!

lolwat?

WannaCrypt only affected Windows through SMB. It wasn't a Windows exploit.

right but SMB is BUILD INTO WINDOWS

samba is an OPTIONAL PACKAGE and they ALREADY PATCHED IT

SMB is optional in Windows.

It's still installed by default. Which isn't this case with my beloved Gentoo.

>wincucks being this desperate to deflect

Wannacuck is just the beginning of windaids getting rekt every month.

Yeah, but that comes default.

wintoddlers btfo

>using Samba
>using Samba for shared libraries
>already patched out

NSA's fault tho

>I'm gonna break muh rusty cagemmmyuuuah

...

>using samba

>Dear John, please Johnny please come home
>I need your love and the kids they gotta be fed
>And John, if you don't hurry back I'll be gone

>2017
>using Samba

AND IF YOU START FESSIN'
I GOT A SMITH & WESSON FOR YA

the damage control ITT is actually reasonable and the way that level-headed people should normally reply to these kinds of exploits, remember kids that 98.9% of pwnings are 100.0% user authorized and rarely involve popping obscure, autistic 0days on unprotected systems (because that's a lot of work when the system administrator is almost always retarded anyway) that you can secure with a firewall on literally any consumer router made in the last 15 years anyway

what makes it funny is that if this kind of exploit was on any other platform all of the damage controllers would be getting their panties in a knot exclaiming the end of proprietary software for the 176th time this year

upnp replaced samba as the local insecure file sharing method, for anything requiring security you would use sshfs.

What's wrong with samba?

Use it only for a shared public folder with no personal files, firewall it automatically in unknown networks and have it available only on trusted networks. It's near-universal with built-in clients for any desktop OS, many free clients on mobile devices and you don't have to deal with encryption and certificates.

It just works, what's wrong with that?

I miss the days when the news came out with zero days for IE6 and Outlook Express almost daily. The wcry botnet is still fun.

ONE STEP FORWARD TWO STEPS BACK

It's a Samba vulnerability.

Disabling that doesn't disable SMB, it just disables SMBv1 and CIFS, which means that you won't be able to see shares on your network anymore. You can still connect to them if you know their direct addresses and still share on the network.

SMB is not even running as a separate service in Windows anymore. It is baked into your operating system.

Patched, biatch.

Will someone fucking answer this? I want to know too.
What other viable option is there for samba, dont dont give me that ftp shit. Samba is for when you dont need to download the entire fucking file to use it or edit it then repoload when done. Doesnt make sense.

What's your use case?

Linux repository - 60k files
Windows repository - 2 million files

Ergo, Linux is shit

sshfs

I use it for all kinds of stuff.
Everything from dumping files from my phone to my computer, to using it like dlna, to doing nested virtual machines.
One of my vms is a win7 on a 10gb .img file. I mount my samba in the vm and just load the machines over samba (slow as fuck but its for super niche bullshit, not my usual vm solution).

Without doing it like this, I would have to have the image file (size of win7) + (size of a completely different vm file) + (wiggle room)
And I dont feel like wasting 0.5TB on a single vm image to do one thing about 5 times a year

It's funny how everytime a windows shill makes a thread about a in linux vulnerability it has already been fixed, but whenever windows has a vulnerability there is usually widespread damage before Microsoft gets off their ass.

Wrong pic?

I'm really sorry and I know you said "don't give me that ftp shit"
I have no clue how samba works, even after a short web search, but I use ftp for dumping files from my phone to my computer, what is better about samba in this case for example?
will look up a bit more on samba but the explanations so far are above my understanding it seems.

yeah, you only need to find a samba server accessable from the internet that allows anonymous writes and runs as root ...
i don't think something like that exists

gave it another read and it just seems to me that it has a lot of extras compared to ftp, I guess you like that.

Samba needs to run as root in order to change file ownership.
Allowing anonymous write is just stupid, and is not set by default. Those, who can set up the file permissions and samba configuration correctly will most likely know not to do that.

GROOVE STREET NIGGUH

no, no it doesn't.

Thank god grsec protects me from such horrors.

>thats the joke

Ill look into this, thanks for the suggestion.
Does this allow files to be edited over the network?

For dumping files from the phone it has no advantage other than allready being set up.

The main advantage of samba really shines in my vm example. Samba allows files to be edited over the network, as oppose to how with ftp you have to first download the file, make the changes, and the reupload the file.
I find this feature really appealing. As said, I can run a 60 gb vm file inside of a computer whos entire harddrive is only 10 gb.

Ive also mounted a samba share (on computer a) to a folder on computer b, and pointed a dlna server running on computer b to the folder which has the samba server running, and watched movies though this daisy chained nigger rigged bullshit setup without any issues.
Looks like this:
(movie is on computer a) > (computer a's movie folder is mounted on computer b) > (computer b's dlna server is pointed at folder that a is mounted to) > (xbox or something on b's subnetwork can see the movies on computer A via the connection to computer b)
or a shorter versoin
movies computer a > dlna computer b > xbox on tv

Another example of using samba as a way to serve files without having to download them is Ive used it to watch shit in the other room on a raspberry pi because I didnt have another computer to spare, so I just mounted the samba and streamed it from the computer to the media player like a dlna server would.

From what I understand, ftp really shines when it comes to speed. I have gotten my samba server (vm to host, and laptop though direct connection to second ethernet port on pc) to all transfer at speeds that are only bottle necked by my hdds read/write speeds.
My ethernet cables are probably the biggest bottle neck when I transfer stuff through the router

you aren't even close to the fucking train nigga what the fuck are you doing

I make my network shares read only. I case I do get some cryptolocker on my desktop computer, it won't spread to the shared files on my servers. I rarely need to modify files on my servers, but when I do, I can simply transfer the edit back with scp, or do the edit directly with vim or other tools.

Thats good practice.
I have different shares with different permissions.
I usually keep things read only and invisible to the unauthorized users (each device gets its own account), and then I have a clusterfuck dump folder that I need to sort though and move to its correct folder that is off the samba

My mom is 60 kilo
Your mom is 2000 kilo
Ergo, your mom is bloated.

HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEY GOOD LOOKIN'

Women are aliens, dog. ALIENS!

That's because the NEETS that maintain linux have lots of time on their hands whereas the employed professionals at microsoft are too busy maintaining the worlds most used OS to patch every vulnerability that you might come across.

Being fixed doesn't mean it's not a problem anymore though, since distro maintainers and users need to update their shit first. It's not that different from the recent windows SMB exploit where the problem was fixed but because people don't keep their systems up to date lots of machines were still affected. This exploit will probably mostly affect people with a NAS, like synology, that use samba. Since those systems are probably not always up to date.