Hello,

 

Today we have 3 possible choices for SMB exports privacy on Unraid: Yes / Yes (hidden) / No

 

I have a little problem with "Yes" because it is too permissive and with "Yes (hidden)" which is too restrictive.

 

- With "yes" : it is possible to list all available shares, even when authenticating with "guest" or "anonymous" on \\UNRAID_HOST\

- With "yes (hidden)": In this mode, very well the share is hidden for guest/anonymous. However, even if I authenticate with a "real" user, they are hidden of course.

 

I use Solid Explorer on mobile, I would like to have a single shortcut to \\UNRAID_HOST\ to be able to list my shares to which I have at least read access. In "Yes (hidden)" mode I have to create a shortcut for each share. It quickly becomes a mess with many shares.

 

It would be nice to have :

 

* Yes -> The current behavior : export for all including guest/anonymous and Unraid users with or without access rights

* Yes (hidden) -> The current behavior, hidden for all

* Unraid authentication -> Listed only in case it's a unraid user, with a sub-option "Hide share if Unraid user doesn't have read rights on it".

* No -> Current behavior

 

I agree that this is not a very important feature, but more of a comfort feature where there is a lot of shares and privacy is best.

 

Sorry for my English,

 

 

 

Just stumbled across this, and I second this idea- or if anyone has any good solutions I'd appreciate it. I don't like that when browsing my server as a guest I can see all the folders even though I don't have access to them. I guess technically I can choose not to export them or to export them as hidden, but I want my users to see the folders which they have access to and nothing else.

I'd love a feature like OP described, or some advice on how to get by in the meantime.

Bump

17 hours ago, gluebaby said:

but I want my users to see the folders which they have access to and nothing else.

 

This is not an option in Unraid.   If there is a Samba combination of settings that provides this it would be nice to know as it could then be implemented.    Not sure it is even possible on a Windows server although I could be wrong about that.

6 hours ago, itimpi said:

 

This is not an option in Unraid.   If there is a Samba combination of settings that provides this it would be nice to know as it could then be implemented.    Not sure it is even possible on a Windows server although I could be wrong about that.

Access based enumeration? 

Some quick testing with @gluebabys suggestion.

 

I created two shares:

• visible: Export = Yes, Security = Private, my user has read/write access
• nvisible: Export = Yes, Security = Private, my user has no access

Without any modification to SMB:

Both shares are visible. After applying ABE like described in this article:

I just added those two settings to the SMB configuration:

 

It probably needs more testing to figure out any edge-case, drawbacks, etc., but it seems to be technically possible.

38 minutes ago, Bastian said:

Some quick testing with @gluebabys suggestion.

 

I created two shares:

• visible: Export = Yes, Security = Private, my user has read/write access
• nvisible: Export = Yes, Security = Private, my user has no access

Without any modification to SMB:

Both shares are visible. After applying ABE like described in this article:

I just added those two settings to the SMB configuration:

 

It probably needs more testing to figure out any edge-case, drawbacks, etc., but it seems to be technically possible.

I will give this a try when I get home, but yeah I suspected such a thing would be possible.

On 4/3/2024 at 12:11 PM, Bastian said:

Some quick testing with @gluebabys suggestion.

 

I created two shares:

• visible: Export = Yes, Security = Private, my user has read/write access
• nvisible: Export = Yes, Security = Private, my user has no access

Without any modification to SMB:

Both shares are visible. After applying ABE like described in this article:

I just added those two settings to the SMB configuration:

 

It probably needs more testing to figure out any edge-case, drawbacks, etc., but it seems to be technically possible.

This is brilliant. It worked for me. Thank you @gluebaby and @Bastian!

Hello,

 

Thank you for your help, which helped me to do exactly what I wanted.

 

However, what is added in Settings => SMB =>SMB Extras is put to the [global] part of Samba config. So in practice, the "hide unreadable = Yes" part shouldn't be there, because it is, if I'm not being silly, normally specific to shares(?), in the [share_name] part.

 

The "access based share enum = Yes" parameter is sufficient for the same result.

1 hour ago, Nyxtorm said:

Hello,

 

Thank you for your help, which helped me to do exactly what I wanted.

 

However, what is added in Settings => SMB =>SMB Extras is put to the [global] part of Samba config. So in practice, the "hide unreadable = Yes" part shouldn't be there, because it is, if I'm not being silly, normally specific to shares(?), in the [share_name] part.

 

The "access based share enum = Yes" parameter is sufficient for the same result.

After some more digging:

• both properties are actually share configurations (source: smb.conf)
• A property defined in [Global] is applied to any share (THE GLOBAL SECTION parameters in this section apply to the server as a whole, or are defaults for sections which do not specifically define certain items. (source: manpage)). The cross-reference in PARAMETERS furthermore states: Note that all S parameters can also be specified in the [global] section - in which case they will define the default behavior for all services.)

In conclusion, Global can define share properties, in which case they are applied to all shares. After your post I also was a bit confused why it worked at all

6 hours ago, Bastian said:

After some more digging:

• both properties are actually share configurations (source: smb.conf)
• A property defined in [Global] is applied to any share (THE GLOBAL SECTION parameters in this section apply to the server as a whole, or are defaults for sections which do not specifically define certain items. (source: manpage)). The cross-reference in PARAMETERS furthermore states: Note that all S parameters can also be specified in the [global] section - in which case they will define the default behavior for all services.)

In conclusion, Global can define share properties, in which case they are applied to all shares. After your post I also was a bit confused why it worked at all

Interesting, thank you for your analysis! 😀

 

For my part, I won't be using the "hide unreadable" option, which goes beyond my initial request, which was to hide shares, and could slow down some folder listing:

 

Quote

Please note that enabling this can slow down listing large directories significantly. Samba has to evaluate the ACLs of all directory members, which can be a lot of effort.