On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 15:55, Beast wrote: > * Andrew Bartlett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> menulis: > > > > 1. In which tools we trust the output? pwdump or rpc vampire? why > > > the output is different? > > > > Well, I understand how 'net rpc vampire' functions, and as it makes > > *exactly* the same calls that an NT BDC makes, I consider it to be > > the'correct' output. > > Just a wishes, is it possible to get pwdump.exe version of net rpc > vampire? so we can get hashses output without installing full blown of > samba and *script? > It then up to administrator what to do with the output, this is the > cleanest soulution if you already have existing account in ldap.
'net rpc samdump' should do what you need > Also, net rpc vampire has few advantage over pwdump, it can retrieve > groups where pwdump can not. pwdump was a quick hack, from what I understand... > > > > I have not looked at the pwdump source, nor had any experience using > > it, so I don't know why it's output would differ. > > > > > 2. Is this mean I can not use 3.0.2 or 3.0.2a if I don't have > > > LANMAN hash? > > > > This is correct. > > > > Sorry for asking again here, can I use samba 3.0.3pre1? sincei can't > use older version of samba. Just to make sure... You can. Andrew Bartlett -- Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student Network Administrator, Hawker College [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org http://build.samba.org http://hawkerc.net
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
