smbmount vs. smbclient

[jbk at mail2.gis.net (jbk)]

Kristian Hermansen wrote:
> On 3/13/07, jbk <jbk at mail2.gis.net> wrote:
>> No, I don't trust all the users on my network. I trust that
>> teenagers will seek out all corners of the data base if
>> something sparks their interest. I can't predict what that
>> is and I do have sensitive personal data on the server.
> 
> I don't mean to sound brash....But!!!
> 
> Sensitive personal data on the SMB server?  You are aware that SMB
> sniffers can pick up that data and reconstruct it as soon as you
> transfer it right?  No authentication is needed.  Additionally,
> cracking SMB is not hard.  So maybe you will keep out the 12 year
> olds, but those teens will have it cracked in no time!

What I meant was the un-witting click on this or that and 
see what is in there then oops you copied a whole folder 
into another or deleted it by accident. I'm a realist, if 
someone is doing as you suggest I have a bigger problem than 
just hacking. The sensitive information I refer to has more 
to do with existence, time, and order, not the actual 
information, which for the most part is common knowledge in 
the household. SMB has been good at maintaining that.

Jim K-R

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.