Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 Apr 2004 15:14:16 -0400
From:      Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
To:        Bart Silverstrim <bsilver@chrononomicon.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: OS X and FreeBSD: What could be a good setup
Message-ID:  <407AEA88.90401@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <E6F31F15-8954-11D8-A222-000A956D2452@chrononomicon.com>
References:  <E6F31F15-8954-11D8-A222-000A956D2452@chrononomicon.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
[ ... ]
> I'm looking at using FreeBSD on a server (web, mail, file server) with 
> OS X, Windows, and probably Linux clients.  I'd like the FreeBSD server 
> to handle authentication, but that may be a pipe dream to accomplish 
> across platforms easily :-/

LDAP would be the way to go given the platforms you mention, although NIS 
would work for everything but Windows and would be much easier to set up.

[ ... ]
> That would leave SMB/CIFS, meaning SAMBA, but I haven't found anyone 
> able to tell me if CIFS is secure "over the wire".  I seem to recall a 
> utility that would sniff network packets and if NFS is used, it can 
> capture the files as they're travelling over the network; can this 
> happen with CIFS?

Oh, yes: unless you use an encrypted tunnelling protocol like a VPN or an SSH 
tunnel, pretty much all filesharing protocols are vulnerable to subnet-local 
sniffing.  Using strong encryption when using wireless is a fine idea.  :-)

SMB/CIFS is a reasonably good choice of filesharing protocol if you're dealing 
with Windows or Mac systems using HFS+ due to case-insensitivity.  For a 
pure-Unix setup, NFS (or NFS+NIS) would be a better choice.  Modern Unices 
handle SMB about as well as they handle NFS.

-- 
-Chuck



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?407AEA88.90401>