Bug 88263

Summary: incorrect info displayed in auth window for smb
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: Thomas M Steenholdt <tmus>
Component: gnome-vfs2-extrasAssignee: Alexander Larsson <alexl>
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 9CC: mitr
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2003-08-06 09:59:41 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Thomas M Steenholdt 2003-04-08 11:24:36 UTC
Description of problem:

When connecting to a samba server from nautilus using the uri smb://server/share
an auth window pops up, asking for credentials.

This authentication window has a warning message that says "Your password will
be transmitted unencrypted" however this can't be the case as the connection
succeeds and that would not have happened with clear-text password.
Also, having skimmed the code, the cli_session_setup() function that appears to
be handling the setup of this deviceless connection has a password field as well
as an NTpassword fiels, which suggests to me that one is used for clear-text and
one for encrypted passwords. 
I'm not a samba developer and i only skimmed the code as i got worried because
of the dialog...

So tell me, isn't the password actually encrypted during this or what?



Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:

Always


Steps to Reproduce:
1. enter smb://server_name/share_name and hit enter in nautilus
2. watch the screen carefully :)

    
Actual results:
displays an auth dialog with a warning on it

Expected results:
displays an auth dialog without a warning on it


Additional info:

Comment 1 Alexander Larsson 2003-08-06 09:59:41 UTC
The message is completely unrelated to what is going on in reality.
See upstream bugzilla for this:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=119175