Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wren337]

Been tinkering around, here is where I am at.  Please tell me if this is as designed.
1. Reset Network Access List
2. Anonymous sharing of the root folder is R/W
3. Add shares, RW or RO, of any folder or subfolder, so long as it's ALL ACCOUNTS, and we're still good.
4. Add any share, RW or RO, that specifies a user or group, and all of the ALL ACCOUNTS shares break.  No more anonymous access.
5. Remove the share from step 4, and the ALL ACCOUNTS shares are still broken.  Only step #1 brings back ALL ACCOUNTS access.

I've heard some people discussing firmware 1.0, do share permissions work in that firmware, and is it available?  Any downsides to the 1.0 firmware?  I don't use any of the bells and whistles, I just need a NAS with some basic access controls.

[r!ng0]

I believe "ALL ACCOUNTS" doesn't include anonymous. ...but only after any account is created

[wren337]

There was a post in the beta forum ehich explained that.  the current firmware only supports anonymous access when it's in an implicit "OPEN" mode.  The "All Users" checkbox does not mean Anonymous, and there is no explicit support for anonymous shares.  So it's not a complete SMB implementation. 

In the HTML, the ALL ACCOUNTS checkbox html element is named "guest" - so I'm left wondering if the current firmware has wandered away from the intention of the original design.  It's funny to have a checkbox that's essentially a shortcut to add all users (which could be handled by a group if someone needed it), which is internally named "guest", and not to have any support for anonymous access, usually referred to as "guest" access in SMB documentation.

[gunrunnerjohn]

What's the current status?  I've read all through this thread, and I see a lot of double-talk coming from D-Link, but no actual date when this will be fixed!  I just ran across this today, which is why I'm here. 

What amazes me is, the DNS-323 has this working properly, and this is just a spinoff of that device.  How difficult is this to fix, the code base for these two have to be REAL similar!

Is this or is this not going to be fixed, it's a real simple question!

Is there ANY way to allow anonymous access to some folders on the DNS-321 and still keep some of them with password protected access?

[wren337]

Does anyone know, do anonymous shares work in the 1.0 firmware?  Or any older firmware?

[gunrunnerjohn]

Well, it seems they're going backwards with both of them!  Now you can't mix anonymous shares with password protected shares!  What a PITA, pretty soon you won't be able to have more than one share!

[wren337]

65 posts and 5100 views on this thread. 

When the average user sits down at the DNS-321 and tries to use the "All Accounts" checkbox, they assume the behavior they're seeing is a bug.  Calling it your design doesn't make it better.

[gunrunnerjohn]

Quite frankly, IMO it is a bug!  Why is it so difficult for D-Link to understand that it's logical, and probably very common, to want password protected shares mixed with anonymous shares?

Knock...knock...  Hello, anybody in there?

[bengoerz]

Was this issue fixed in the new Firmware 1.03?

[gunrunnerjohn]

No.

[wren337]

Was this issue fixed in the new Firmware 1.03?

The 1.03 forums say that it's the same as b13, so no, it's still working to the "new design" (no anonymous shares mixed with secured shares).  As a workaround I use anonymous read-only shares and do updates via FTP.  It won't work for all of my needs, but it covers some so I didn't return it.  I means I can't migrate off my old NAS though until I buy another NAS with a more conventional design.

[D-Link Multimedia]

The current design isn't neccessarily the end function. We are open for changes and were already in discussion regarding next changes but at some point we do need to come out with firmwares to fix other pending issues even if this one affects some people.

[gunrunnerjohn]

That's all true, I just don't understand why this was changed from the operation that most of us think is "proper" to how it works now, which IMO is "broken".  Can you explain the rational behind the change?

[D-Link Multimedia]

The basis for the change was due to changes in Windows Samba support. While this may note have been noticable on XP, Vista and Win7 both had some changes to the way they interact over samba with storage devices. For those of us that have multiple shares on the same nas with different authentication for each share, Vista and Win7 can be a nightmare using Open mode. While I will agree the function released has more to be desired, what we did release was a good base to build on and improve for better samba support in the future.

[gunrunnerjohn]

I hope that the behavior will be revisited for the next release of the firmware.   I'd really like to have  that back...