Guest Nonapeptide@gmail.com Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 I have a Windows Server 2003 file server in a workgroup environment that needs to allow anyone who plugs into the network to browse its file shares without being prompted for a username and password. Ideally it would behave just like a Windows XP machine that has a file share. A simple UNC path like this: \\ServerName\ should reply with the available file shares to anyone who asks. What is the option to get this behaviour? I can't seem to find the local policy to get this to work. Thanks bunches,
Guest jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users On 27 May, 00:25, Nonapept...@gmail.com wrote: > I have a Windows Server 2003 file server in a workgroup environment > that needs to allow anyone who plugs into the network to browse its > file shares without being prompted for a username and password. > Ideally it would behave just like a Windows XP machine that has a file > share. A simple UNC path like this: \\ServerName\ should reply with > the available file shares to anyone who asks. > > What is the option to get this behaviour? I can't seem to find the > local policy to get this to work. > > Thanks bunches, In Win XP, there are 3 crucial options with file sharing. Within ctrl panel..administrative tools....Local Security Settings...Local policies 2 interesting options are in one subcategory, 1 is in the other. Whether you check or uncheck SFS.. i.e. choose SFS or AFS. It changes an option here.. And vice versa. The place where the option is is Local Security Settings...local policies...Security Options Now see there are a bunch of items called "Network Access........." The last one is "Sharing and security model for local accounts" If you change that to Guest. then it does SFS. If you change it to Authenticate as themselves, then it does AFS. And vice versa. Now.. regarding SFS It does require the Guest account to be enabled, And the other 2 interesting options are very important "User rights assignments" Allow - Everyone Deny - <-- remove Guest from that list if it is there. If you do those things, then any user can access. Because they authenticate as Guest, and Guest can access. I haven't used AFS as much, but In Win XP.. if using AFS and I mentioned how to set that option.. Your post suggests that perhaps that classic tools..folder options..view..SFS/AFS option is hard to find. So you can set AFS with that other option too. From Local Security Settings. Maybe it is in windows server too. I think with AFS, users authenticate as themselves, and if that fails, then it prompts them for a username/password. The username/password on the remote machine.. (perhaps any user/pass on the remote machine) So, if the account you are currently logged on as, exists on the remote machine, then it will log in without a prompt.. i.e. identical user account . I don't know if it requires identical username, full name, and password. Or just identical username and password.
Guest Nonapeptide@gmail.com Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users Thanks for the prompt reply, James! Your pointer to the Local Policies >> Security Settings node in local security policy opened up some new possibilities for me. Let me restate my goal. What I really need is to create a public folder or two on the file server (much like the public folder on XP or Vista). That way anyone can access files in those folders without being prompted for username and password. Other shares can, and probably should stay access restricted. At first I thought "Network access: Named pipes that can be accessed anonymously" and "Network access: Shares that can be accessed anonymously" would be the way to go, but after messing with it I now think otherwise. When a Windows client tries to access shares on another computer in a workgroup, it seems to send the credentials of the local machine and user, so in effect it's not try to access it anonymously. Unless I'm missing something anonymous shares are not the way to go. Neither is allowing the ANONYMOUS_LOGON access to the share because again the logon attempt isn't really anonymous. Argh. What befuddles me is that this behaviour is default in XP and Vista. If you share something, everyone can access it on the network without username and password. I've just taken that behaviour for granted. I can't help but thinking to myself that this should be alot simpler than I'm making it. I know I'm missing something obvious. Back to Googling... jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > On 27 May, 00:25, Nonapept...@gmail.com wrote: > > I have a Windows Server 2003 file server in a workgroup environment > > that needs to allow anyone who plugs into the network to browse its > > file shares without being prompted for a username and password. > > Ideally it would behave just like a Windows XP machine that has a file > > share. A simple UNC path like this: \\ServerName\ should reply with > > the available file shares to anyone who asks. > > > > What is the option to get this behaviour? I can't seem to find the > > local policy to get this to work. > > > > Thanks bunches, > > In Win XP, there are 3 crucial options with file sharing. > Within ctrl panel..administrative tools....Local Security > Settings...Local policies > 2 interesting options are in one subcategory, 1 is in the other. > > > Whether you check or uncheck SFS.. i.e. choose SFS or AFS. > It changes an option here.. And vice versa. > The place where the option is is > Local Security Settings...local policies...Security Options > Now see there are a bunch of items called "Network Access........." > The last one is "Sharing and security model for local accounts" > > If you change that to Guest. then it does SFS. > If you change it to Authenticate as themselves, then it does AFS. > > And vice versa. > > Now.. regarding SFS > It does require the Guest account to be enabled, > And the other 2 interesting options are very important > "User rights assignments" > Allow - Everyone > Deny - <-- remove Guest from that list if it is there. > > If you do those things, then any user can access. Because they > authenticate as Guest, and Guest can access. > > I haven't used AFS as much, but > > In Win XP.. > if using AFS > and I mentioned how to set that option.. Your post suggests that > perhaps that classic tools..folder options..view..SFS/AFS option is > hard to find. So you can set AFS with that other option too. From > Local Security Settings. > Maybe it is in windows server too. > > I think with AFS, users authenticate as themselves, and if that fails, > then it prompts them for a username/password. The username/password on > the remote machine.. (perhaps any user/pass on the remote machine) > > So, if the account you are currently logged on as, exists on the > remote machine, then it will log in without a prompt.. i.e. identical > user account . > I don't know if it requires identical username, full name, and > password. Or just identical username and password.
Guest jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users On 27 May, 04:04, Nonapept...@gmail.com wrote: > Thanks for the prompt reply, James! > > Your pointer to the Local Policies >> Security Settings node in local > security policy opened up some new possibilities for me. > > Let me restate my goal. What I really need is to create a public > folder or two on the file server (much like the public folder on XP or > Vista). That way anyone can access files in those folders without > being prompted for username and password. Other shares can, and > probably should stay access restricted. > > At first I thought "Network access: Named pipes that can be accessed > anonymously" and "Network access: Shares that can be accessed > anonymously" would be the way to go, but after messing with it I now > think otherwise. When a Windows client tries to access shares on > another computer in a workgroup, it seems to send the credentials of > the local machine and user, so in effect it's not try to access it > anonymously. Unless I'm missing something anonymous shares are not the > way to go. Neither is allowing the ANONYMOUS_LOGON access to the share > because again the logon attempt isn't really anonymous. Argh. > > What befuddles me is that this behaviour is default in XP and Vista. > If you share something, everyone can access it on the network without > username and password. I've just taken that behaviour for granted. I > can't help but thinking to myself that this should be alot simpler > than I'm making it. > > I know I'm missing something obvious. Back to Googling... I have had this with windows xp.. Being prompted for a user/pass.. I have found it just to be whether you choose AFS or SFS.. Either can prompt you, in a different way. if you don't like the prompt, them either way you can get rid of it. Slightly more easily with SFS. If SFS is prompting you then it's not set up right e.g. Guest account is disabled perhaps. With AFS, if you have identical accounts it will prob not prompt you. And that setting I mentioned switches between AFS and SFS. And I mentioned how not to get the prompts with them. I only know Win XP though for file sharing.
Guest Nonapeptide@gmail.com Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users On May 26, 11:30 pm, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk" <jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 27 May, 04:04, Nonapept...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the prompt reply, James! > > > Your pointer to the Local Policies >> Security Settings node in local > > security policy opened up some new possibilities for me. > > > Let me restate my goal. What I really need is to create a public > > folder or two on the file server (much like the public folder on XP or > > Vista). That way anyone can access files in those folders without > > being prompted for username and password. Other shares can, and > > probably should stay access restricted. > > > At first I thought "Network access: Named pipes that can be accessed > > anonymously" and "Network access: Shares that can be accessed > > anonymously" would be the way to go, but after messing with it I now > > think otherwise. When a Windows client tries to access shares on > > another computer in a workgroup, it seems to send the credentials of > > the local machine and user, so in effect it's not try to access it > > anonymously. Unless I'm missing something anonymous shares are not the > > way to go. Neither is allowing the ANONYMOUS_LOGON access to the share > > because again the logon attempt isn't really anonymous. Argh. > > > What befuddles me is that this behaviour is default in XP and Vista. > > If you share something, everyone can access it on the network without > > username and password. I've just taken that behaviour for granted. I > > can't help but thinking to myself that this should be alot simpler > > than I'm making it. > > > I know I'm missing something obvious. Back to Googling... > > I have had this with windows xp.. Being prompted for a user/pass.. > > I have found it just to be whether you choose AFS or SFS.. > Either can prompt you, in a different way. > > if you don't like the prompt, them either way you can get rid of it. > Slightly more easily with SFS. If SFS is prompting you then it's not > set up right e.g. Guest account is disabled perhaps. With AFS, if you > have identical accounts it will prob not prompt you. > > And that setting I mentioned switches between AFS and SFS. > > And I mentioned how not to get the prompts with them. > > I only know Win XP though for file sharing. Okay. It seems that if I simply enable the guest account on my Server 2003 machine I am then able to list file shares using an account on a workgroup computer that does not have an identical counterpart on the server. That's a step in the right direction, but not quite what I had in mind. When I look through the server's event logs, it looks like the first access attempt is using the workstation's local username and password. When that is unsuccessful, it immediately retries using "Guest" (this is behaviour that I was heretofore unaware of). That access request is successful when the guest account is enabled. There are a number of things that puzzle me about this whole thing though. The "Network Access: sharing and security model for local accounts" seems to be irrelevant in this scenario. That policy simply states that in Classic mode if you access the server using a local account then your permissions will be granular; allowing one account the ability to have different permissions than another account. In Guest Only mode, no matter what account you put in, it will map your account to whatever permissions the Guest account has been given. That may or may not included anonymous logins. I haven't figured that out yet. Either way, I have the server in Client mode and enabling the Guest account still allows me to enumerate file shares so that Network Access policy can't be the solution. So now I can allow any workgroup machine\user the ability to use the server's shares, but I have yet to track down the specific policy that grants this to the guest account. I also have yet to figure out if I can select individual folders that the guest account can see and use. That's my ultimate goal. On a related note: I've mentioned several times that I wondered how client OSs like XP and Vista share their folders with anyone on the local network by default. That's still unanswered. It doesn't seem to be through the guest account, as its disabled and the user rights assignment "Deny access to this computer from the network" includes the Guest account. Yet, anonymous access seems to be unlikely as well since several of the Network Access policies dealing with Anonymous accounts look like they stymie anon access. What a can of worms. I'll get to the bottom of this someday... :-|
Guest jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users On 27 May, 06:00, Nonapept...@gmail.com wrote: > On May 26, 11:30 pm, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk" <snip> > > I only know Win XP though for file sharing. > > Okay. It seems that if I simply enable the guest account on my Server > 2003 machine I am then able to list file shares using an account on a > workgroup computer that does not have an identical counterpart on the > server. That's a step in the right direction, but not quite what I had > in mind. > In Win XP, I would say it sounds like you are set to SFS > When I look through the server's event logs, it looks like the first > access attempt is using the workstation's local username and password. > When that is unsuccessful, it immediately retries using "Guest" (this > is behaviour that I was heretofore unaware of). That access request is > successful when the guest account is enabled. > Where are these logs.. Do they exist in Windows XP? I have never seen that behaviour. From my Win XP use, it sounds like a mixture of AFS and SFS. I think that's impossible.. I have never heard of that. Are you sure? Is this retry a second later? I haven't seen the logs though.. would be interested to know where they are accessible. > There are a number of things that puzzle me about this whole thing > though. The "Network Access: sharing and security model for local > accounts" seems to be irrelevant in this scenario. That policy simply > states that in Classic mode if you access the server using a local > account then your permissions will be granular; allowing one account > the ability to have different permissions than another account. In > Guest Only mode, no matter what account you put in, it will map your > account to whatever permissions the Guest account has been given. That > may or may not included anonymous logins. I haven't figured that out > yet. Either way, I have the server in Client mode and enabling the > Guest account still allows me to enumerate file shares so that Network > Access policy can't be the solution. > you say you "have the server in client mode"? That is absolute nonsense. Like saying you have the dart board acting as an arrow. I think you mean Classic.. As in users authenticate as themselves. I don't know much about NT file permissions. (they are for multi-user environment of potentially malicious users. I don't need to really for my own computers at home) > So now I can allow any workgroup machine\user the ability to use the > server's shares, but I have yet to track down the specific policy that > grants this to the guest account. I also have yet to figure out if I > can select individual folders that the guest account can see and use. > That's my ultimate goal. > I mentioned 3 interesting options. 2 of them were "Allow...." and "Deny......" The default is to Allow everyone, and Deny Guest. (deny wins..I guess it is processed after) (so another way of looking at it, is that if you don't deny guest, ten Guest is allowed. So there is no policy that allows Guest, it's allowed if it is not denied. So in a sense, that is a default setting - an unchangeable one. Stupid way of looking at it though. Or maybe it's the Allowing everyone, that allows Guest.) Default is Deny Guest. Although I mentioned that in the context of being relevant to SFS. I suppose it is relevant to AFS too. Infact, windows xp machines are set to AFS by default. Guest Account disabled. Guest Denied. (judging by my win xp installation from the win xp sp2 cd I burned anyway) > On a related note: > > I've mentioned several times that I wondered how client OSs like XP > and Vista share their folders with anyone on the local network by > default. That's still unanswered. Out of interest.. Where did you see the terminology of calling XP a client OS? I know.. I have seen it too.. and it's common. But just wondering where you saw it.. I actually saw that kind of terminology in a book called Networking Complete, described windows 98 as a client OS.. Because relative to Windows NT(the Network OS), its network features were limited.. e.g. just basic password access to network directories. . I think the default is AFS. I think Win XP only has 2 options . SFS or AFS, and no way of opting out. But you can choose not to share any folders. Certainly, I remember that Guest is disabled and Denied. I guess Network Access is - Classic - users authenticate as themselves. People who want SFS will have a problem if they just check the box. They should either run the "Network Setup Wizard". Or after setting SFS.. Check that it does Allow Everyone (it probably is) -remove Guest from the deny list - And check that authentication is as Guest - though it would be if it is set to SFS. As explained. > It doesn't seem to be through the > guest account, as its disabled and the user rights assignment "Deny > access to this computer from the network" includes the Guest account. > Yet, anonymous access seems to be unlikely as well since several of > the Network Access policies dealing with Anonymous accounts look like > they stymie anon access. > What is an anonymous account? BTW, I think with SFS users ONLY authenticate as Guest. So whoever they are. I don't hink it's like , they try to authenticate as themselves and if it fails they do so as Guest. They just do so as Guest. Your logs claim otherwise.. be interesting to know where these logs are.. and if they are in Win XP. 'cos I have win xp.
Guest Nonapeptide@gmail.com Posted May 28, 2008 Posted May 28, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users On May 27, 12:35 pm, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk" <jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 27 May, 06:00, Nonapept...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On May 26, 11:30 pm, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk" > <snip> > > > I only know Win XP though for file sharing. > > > Okay. It seems that if I simply enable the guest account on my Server > > 2003 machine I am then able to list file shares using an account on a > > workgroup computer that does not have an identical counterpart on the > > server. That's a step in the right direction, but not quite what I had > > in mind. > > In Win XP, I would say it sounds like you are set to SFS > > > When I look through the server's event logs, it looks like the first > > access attempt is using the workstation's local username and password. > > When that is unsuccessful, it immediately retries using "Guest" (this > > is behaviour that I was heretofore unaware of). That access request is > > successful when the guest account is enabled. > > Where are these logs.. Do they exist in Windows XP? > > I have never seen that behaviour. From my Win XP use, it sounds like a > mixture of AFS and SFS. I think that's impossible.. I have never > heard of that. Are you sure? > Is this retry a second later? > > I haven't seen the logs though.. would be interested to know where > they are accessible. > > > There are a number of things that puzzle me about this whole thing > > though. The "Network Access: sharing and security model for local > > accounts" seems to be irrelevant in this scenario. That policy simply > > states that in Classic mode if you access the server using a local > > account then your permissions will be granular; allowing one account > > the ability to have different permissions than another account. In > > Guest Only mode, no matter what account you put in, it will map your > > account to whatever permissions the Guest account has been given. That > > may or may not included anonymous logins. I haven't figured that out > > yet. Either way, I have the server in Client mode and enabling the > > Guest account still allows me to enumerate file shares so that Network > > Access policy can't be the solution. > > you say you "have the server in client mode"? That is absolute > nonsense. Like saying you have the dart board acting as an arrow. > > I think you mean Classic.. As in users authenticate as themselves. > > I don't know much about NT file permissions. (they are for multi-user > environment of potentially malicious users. I don't need to really for > my own computers at home) > > > So now I can allow any workgroup machine\user the ability to use the > > server's shares, but I have yet to track down the specific policy that > > grants this to the guest account. I also have yet to figure out if I > > can select individual folders that the guest account can see and use. > > That's my ultimate goal. > > I mentioned 3 interesting options. > 2 of them were "Allow...." and "Deny......" > > The default is to Allow everyone, and Deny Guest. > (deny wins..I guess it is processed after) > > (so another way of looking at it, is that if you don't deny guest, > ten Guest is allowed. So there is no policy that allows Guest, it's > allowed if it is not denied. So in a sense, that is a default setting > - an unchangeable one. Stupid way of looking at it though. Or maybe > it's the Allowing everyone, that allows Guest.) > Default is Deny Guest. > > Although I mentioned that in the context of being relevant to SFS. I > suppose it is relevant to AFS too. > > Infact, windows xp machines are set to AFS by default. Guest Account > disabled. Guest Denied. (judging by my win xp installation from the > win xp sp2 cd I burned anyway) > > > On a related note: > > > I've mentioned several times that I wondered how client OSs like XP > > and Vista share their folders with anyone on the local network by > > default. That's still unanswered. > > Out of interest.. Where did you see the terminology of calling XP a > client OS? > > I know.. I have seen it too.. and it's common. But just wondering > where you saw it.. > I actually saw that kind of terminology in a book called Networking > Complete, described windows 98 as a client OS.. Because relative to > Windows NT(the Network OS), its network features were limited.. e.g. > just basic password access to network directories. . > > I think the default is AFS. > > I think > Win XP only has 2 options . SFS or AFS, and no way of opting out. > But you can choose not to share any folders. > > Certainly, I remember that Guest is disabled and Denied. I guess > Network Access is - Classic - users authenticate as themselves. > > People who want SFS will have a problem if they just check the box. > They should either run the "Network Setup Wizard". Or after setting > SFS.. > Check that it does Allow Everyone (it probably is) > -remove Guest from the deny list - > > And check that authentication is as Guest - though it would be if it > is set to SFS. > As explained. > > > It doesn't seem to be through the > > guest account, as its disabled and the user rights assignment "Deny > > access to this computer from the network" includes the Guest account. > > Yet, anonymous access seems to be unlikely as well since several of > > the Network Access policies dealing with Anonymous accounts look like > > they stymie anon access. > > What is an anonymous account? > > BTW, I think with SFS users ONLY authenticate as Guest. > So whoever they are. I don't hink it's like , they try to > authenticate as themselves and if it fails they do so as Guest. They > just do so as Guest. > > Your logs claim otherwise.. be interesting to know where these logs > are.. > > and if they are in Win XP. 'cos I have win xp. >> In Win XP, I would say it sounds like you are set to SFS << I think essentially it is. This post explains it rather cogently: http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/12009443/m/957006982831 Look for the last message on the list from a user called Bluenote. It's basiclaly what you told me to do. >> Where are these logs.. Do they exist in Windows XP? << It's just standard event viewer. You can navigate to it in the Admin Tools folder or open up the run box and type 'eventvwr'. You must first turn on both "audit account logon events" and "audit logon events" from the following local policy: Local Computer Policy >> Computer Configuration >> Windows Settings >> Security Settings >> Local Policies >> Audit Policy. Then access network resources on your machine from another machine. You should see logon/logoff events in the Security log in event viewer. >> I have never heard of that. Are you sure? << Pretty sure I'm sure. >> Is this retry a second later? << It's not even a second later. It's so quick that it shows both logon events at the exact same second. >> you say you "have the server in client mode"? That is absolute nonsense. Like saying you have the dart board acting as an arrow. I think you mean Classic.. As in users authenticate as themselves. << Yep. Just a typo. >> Out of interest.. Where did you see the terminology of calling XP a client OS? << It's just a common way of talking about OSs that are not explicitly designed to handle being dedicated servers. Of course, client machines can serve things and have software installed on it that in effect makes the client os a server (IIS on XP comes to mind). It's just a matter of semantics. >> What is an anonymous account? << An anonymous user or an anonymous access attempt is also known as a "null session". Googling should bring back ample results. It is an attempt at accessing a computer or resource with a null username and no password. As I ponder this situation further, Anonymous access doesn't seem to be relevant to my situation. So here's what I think I'll do. If I enable the guest account, I can enumerate all shares on the server (side note: that baffles me how I can enumerate file shares on XP of Vista even though the guest account is disabled... %-| ). However, for the guest account to actually access anything it needs to be explicitly allowed, so I'll set NTFS permissions appropriately on the shares that all folks need to get to. I'd prefer to restrict even the listing of shares to only the ones that guests can access, but that might be too much to ask. >> BTW, I think with SFS users ONLY authenticate as Guest. So whoever they are. I don't hink it's like , they try to authenticate as themselves and if it fails they do so as Guest. They just do so as Guest. << My understanding of the difference between SFS and AFS is that it merely obscures or reveals the guts of file sharing to the user who is attempting to share something. With SFS you only have two options: To share or not to share, and wether or not to allow people to modify resources. AFS exposes the three levels of share permissions, all of the NTFS permission scheme, as well as the ability to apply different levels of permission to different users and groups. It has nothing to do with wether or not another user on the network accesses your share first with a local account and then with a guest account or only with a guest account. In fact, it couldn't have any effect on that since the option is only modifying your computer's behaviour and not other computer's. This looks like a good article on the topic: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/honeycutt_august13.mspx Thanks for your input. Does anyone else out there have anything to contribute concerning this whole file sharing thing? I'd love to grasp Window's concept of permissions and network access better, but fear I'd lose my mind if I try to trace every loose end back to its origin. :-/ Thanks
Guest jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk Posted May 30, 2008 Posted May 30, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users On May 28, 3:11 am, Nonapept...@gmail.com wrote: <snip> > > and if they are in Win XP. 'cos I have win xp. > >> In Win XP, I would say it sounds like you are set to SFS << > > I think essentially it is. This post explains it rather cogently:http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/12009443/m/9570069... > interesting.. Good forum, I hadn't thought of that forum for windows / non-hardware, but good to know. > Look for the last message on the list from a user called Bluenote. > It's basiclaly what you told me to do. > he mentions another option which is potentially interesting.. Accounts: Guest Account Status <-- enabled > >> Where are these logs.. Do they exist inWindowsXP? << > > It's just standard event viewer. You can navigate to it in the Admin > Tools folder or open up the run box and type 'eventvwr'. You must > first turn on both "audit account logon events" and "audit logon > events" from the following local policy: Local Computer Policy >> > Computer Configuration >>WindowsSettings >> Security Settings >> > Local Policies >> Audit Policy. > fantastic.. I will turn these on now and analyse what I see - when I can! in win xp.. ctrl panel..administrative tools..local security settings..local policies..audit policies > Then access network resources on your machine from another machine. > You should see logon/logoff events in the Security log in event > viewer. > thanks > >> I have never heard of that. Are you sure? << > > Pretty sure I'm sure. > > >> Is this retry a second later? << > > It's not even a second later. It's so quick that it shows both logon > events at the exact same second. > > >> you say you "have theserverin client mode"? That is absolute > > nonsense. Like saying you have the dart board acting as an arrow. > > I think you mean Classic.. As in users authenticate as themselves. << > > Yep. Just a typo. > > >> Out of interest.. Where did you see the terminology of calling XP a > > client OS? << > > It's just a common way of talking about OSs that are not explicitly > designed to handle being dedicated servers. Of course, client machines > can serve things and have software installed on it that in effect > makes the client os aserver(IIS on XP comes to mind). It's just a > matter of semantics. > > >> What is an anonymous account? << > > An anonymous user or an anonymous access attempt is also known as a > "null session". Googling should bring back ample results. It is an > attempt at accessing a computer or resource with a null username and > no password. As I ponder this situation further, Anonymous access > doesn't seem to be relevant to my situation. > > So here's what I think I'll do. If I enable the guest account, I can > enumerate all shares on theserver(side note: that baffles me how I > can enumeratefileshares on XP of Vista even though the guest account > is disabled... %-| ). However, for the guest account to actually > access anything it needs to be explicitly allowed, so I'll set NTFS > permissions appropriately on the shares that all folks need to get to. > Here's a stab in the dark, maybe part of the answer is there's a difference between the Guest account being disabled, and that option of Account: Guest Account Status Though I suppose that just complicates things further and doesn't answer your question. > I'd prefer to restrict even the listing of shares to only the ones > that guests can access, but that might be too much to ask. > anyone? <snip> > My understanding of the difference between SFS and AFS is that it > merely obscures or reveals the guts offilesharingto the user who is > attempting to share something. With SFS you only have two options: To > share or not to share, and wether or not to allow people to modify > resources. AFS exposes the three levels of share permissions, all of > the NTFS permission scheme, as well as the ability to apply different > levels of permission to different users and groups. It has nothing to > do with wether or not another user on the network accesses your share > first with a local account and then with a guest account or only with > a guest account. In fact, it couldn't have any effect on that since > the option is only modifying your computer's behaviour and not other > computer's. > > This looks like a good article on the > topic: >http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/honeycutt_august13.mspx No.. My test is conclusive.. Change the network access setting, between Guest and Classic. And it changes file sharing mode between AFS and SFS. And Vice Versa. I am using Win XP and If you have a Win XP machine, you can see for yourself.. Tools...Folder Options...View... scroll down to the bottom Now look if SFS is checked or not Checked is SFS. Unchecked is AFS. Note down. in your short term memory, or notepad. Let's say it is SFS. Now. Look at that setting about Network Access: about how users authenticate. You will see it is set to Guest. Now do tools..folder options..view... Uncheck it. So it is set to AFS Now go back to look at that setting about Network Access You will see it has changed from Guest to Classic. Now change it from Classic to Guest, and then go to tools..folder options..view. You will see that that setting has now changed to AFS. I actually said this in probably my first reply to you.. I guess you overlooked it! That only covers a bit of what you mentioned about the access though. I look forward to checking the logs. I don't know about the file permissions.. <snip>
Guest jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users On May 27, 12:25 am, Nonapept...@gmail.com wrote: > I have a Windows Server 2003 file server in a workgroup environment > that needs to allow anyone who plugs into the network to browse its > file shares without being prompted for a username and password. > Ideally it would behave just like a Windows XP machine that has a file > share. A simple UNC path like this: \\ServerName\ should reply with > the available file shares to anyone who asks. > > What is the option to get this behaviour? I can't seem to find the > local policy to get this to work. > > Thanks bunches, You mentioned that you are puzzled as to how win xp enumerates shares with Guest disabled. I had found that it doesn't.. - BUT I know that with advanced file sharing, with an account on the remtoe machine the same as the currently logged in account on the local machine. Then it will go in automatically. So in that instance , it will Maybe the situation you ran into with xp, was that one. I haven't tested this, but maybe that happens if you are logged on as Administrator on the local machine.? I guess you'd need a non blank password on it.. (otherwise windows might not let you do it) And since you're not logging in as Guest. Then that may help you with your permissions goal. You can always check your win xp machines for this duplicate account thing. And the logs must give it away. It should show it logging in as e.g. user1 , and you know user1 exists on the remote machine. I can't imagine it logging in as user1 and user1 not existing. I know that above probably won't help, or you tried it 'cos I kind of half mentioned.. But I thought i'd have another look at your post 'cos I tried the log thing you mentioned.. and made a small finding I posted on arstechnica http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/12009443/m/282004192931?r=880000292931#880000292931 , which corrects or updates some of the things I said here not directly related to your problem. My findings did correlate quite nicely with what you wrote. (though not related to solving your prob!). But I thought maybe the duplicate account thing had been overlooked.. I cannot see any other way that your win xp machines could see each others' shares when the Guest account is disabled. did you come any closer to solving it?
Guest jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Re: Allowing file share browsing for un-authenticated users On Jun 19, 6:21 am, "jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk" <jameshanle...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: <snip> and I meant to mention... another promising option was mentioned in that arstechnica thread - the one i just mentioned.. http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/12009443/m/282004192931?r=880000292931#880000292931 one a reply to the question I asked, somebody posted a response.. it wasn't the solution but it is relevant to your problem Control Panel > User Accounts > Advanced > Manage Passwords (or in win xp - ctrl panel..user accounts..[click whichever user account]..manage my network passwords) Then you can add usernames and passwords, and a server to connect to.. I haven't tested it but it looks like this would give you some good control over how you log in. (prob wouldn't even need "duplicate accounts")
Recommended Posts