Author: jelmer Date: 2005-04-26 07:21:19 +0000 (Tue, 26 Apr 2005) New Revision: 643
WebSVN: http://websvn.samba.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi?view=rev&root=samba-web&rev=643 Log: Remove some outdated docs (some parts of these have been moved into the HOWTO before). /smbfs/ still needs updating Removed: trunk/docs/sambay2k.html trunk/docs/security.html Modified: trunk/docs/index.html Changeset: Modified: trunk/docs/index.html =================================================================== --- trunk/docs/index.html 2005-04-25 20:21:50 UTC (rev 642) +++ trunk/docs/index.html 2005-04-26 07:21:19 UTC (rev 643) @@ -111,9 +111,6 @@ <li><a href="SambaIntro.html">An Introduction to Samba</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.samba.org/cifs/docs/what-is-smb.html">What is SMB?</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.samba.org/cifs/">What is CIFS?</a></li> - <li><a href="security.html">Some notes about Win95 and WfWg security</a></li> - <li><a href="/samba/smbfs">smbmount and the smbfs filesystems</a></li> - <li><a href="sambay2k.html">Samba Year 2000 (Y2K) issues</a></li> </ul> <h4>Translation projects</h4> Deleted: trunk/docs/sambay2k.html =================================================================== --- trunk/docs/sambay2k.html 2005-04-25 20:21:50 UTC (rev 642) +++ trunk/docs/sambay2k.html 2005-04-26 07:21:19 UTC (rev 643) @@ -1,87 +0,0 @@ -<!--#include virtual="/samba/header.html" --> - -<H2 align="center">Year 2000 Issues</H2> - -<BR><p> -We are starting to get a lot of Y2K compliance questions. The answer -is an unqualified "yes". Samba has no difficulty with dates from now -until well into the next century. However, since Samba is nearly -always used with many other pieces of software to create an SMB -filesharing network it is important to understand the issues. - -<H2>Server Issues</H2> - -<p>Firstly, <b>Samba does not have any Y2K problems</b>. Dates are stored -internally in the standard Unix 32 bit time since-1970 format (known -as time_t format). Samba has to manipulate dates in other formats but -these other formats (those that SMB uses) do not have a Y2K problem -either. This is true no matter what platform Samba is running on, even -if the platform does not understand time_t at all. - -<p>At least one person has run a Y2K compliance tester over Samba. The -only problem found was that the date format logged in the debug logs -used a strftime() macro which produces a 2 digit year. This didn't -really matter as these logs are never read by a program, they are just -there for humans to read if they want to know who logged in when. This -problem has been fixed in the current release - please don't report -it again! - -<p>Secondly, <b>the SMB protocol that Samba uses does not have a Y2K -problem.</b> None of the date formats in SMB (and there are several) -are ASCII and none suffer from Y2K rollover. There are lots of other -problems with SMB date handling but Y2K isn't one of them. In some -ways this is just pure luck as date handling is one of the worst -aspects of the SMB protocol (it is truly horrendous!). These other -problems are the same for all implementations of SMB, such as Windows -NT, OS/2 etc. - -<p>However, <b>the operating system that you run Samba on <em>may</em> -have a Y2K problem.</b> Samba runs on around 40 operating systems from -nearly as many different vendors, from Fujitsu to IBM to -Siemens-Nixdorf and so on. We have no way of knowing what the -behaviour of all of these operating systems will be in the year 2000, -although all users should be trying to find out now. Samba might fail -on some of these systems due to the failure of some essential -underlying service (networking, printing subsystem etc). On Unix (and -most Samba sites run Unix) can take some comfort in the knowledge that -nearly all Unix system utilities do what Samba does and use time_t -date formats which are safe in Y2K. - -<p>Even under Unix there are some exceptions though, but there is no way -that the Samba Team can know what operating system you are running or -what weird utilities you use that may cause problems. All users should -be making sure that their operating systems and utilities are known to -be Y2K-safe. There are some very intensive efforts going on in the -free software community to make sure that open source products do not -have any problems. With operating systems like Linux, OpenBSD, FreeBSD -and others you can run compliance testers yourself and be as sure as -it is possible to be that your server is safe. - -<h2>Client Issues</h2> - -<p>Regardless of how Y2K-safe the server is, <b>the clients you use to -access Samba may have problems.</b> This is in fact the most likely -source of difficulties. If the clients do have a problem then it won't -matter which server you are using (Samba, Windows NT, Syntax etc), you -will hit the same problems. It is likely that any problems you do hit -won't have anything to do with the SMB subsystem in your client, but -it is certainly not guaranteed. - -<p>The problems are most likely to be in the operating systems that -the clients are using. The most common clients are Windows 3.1, -Windows 95, DOS and Windows NT machines, and there is a lot of -literature to read on their behaviour in Y2K. Macintosh, OS/2 and -other clients should be checked as well, of course. - -<h2>Documenting Y2K Compliance for Samba-Related Software</h2> - -<p>Over time it should be possible to build a table of software used in -Samba installations and indicating whether it has been checked, and if so -what the result was. - -<p><b>I would greatly appreciate it if people who run Y2K tests involving -Samba could please forward the results to <a -href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a>, -and note whether you will allow the results to be published on this web site.</b> - -<!--#include virtual="/samba/footer.html" --> Deleted: trunk/docs/security.html =================================================================== --- trunk/docs/security.html 2005-04-25 20:21:50 UTC (rev 642) +++ trunk/docs/security.html 2005-04-26 07:21:19 UTC (rev 643) @@ -1,25 +0,0 @@ -<!--#include virtual="/samba/header.html" --> - -<H2 align="center">Client Security Patches</h2> - -<p>If you use Windows 95 or Windows for Workgroups you may want to -check these articles from Microsoft: - -<h2>Password File Updates</h2> -<ul> - <li><A href="http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q132/8/07.asp"> - Enhanced Encryption for Windows 95 Password Cache</A> - <li>WFWG: No word of an update for workgroups yet, but you might want to read - <A href="http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q92/5/88.asp">WFWG: - Password Caching and How It Affects LAN Manager Security</A> -</ul> - -<h2>File Sharing Updates</h2> -<ul> - <li> - <A href="http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q128/0/79.asp">Windows 95</A> - <li> - <A href="http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q136/4/18.asp"> Windows for Workgroups Patch</A> -</ul> - -<!--#include virtual="/samba/footer.html" -->