If I want a nix share to be used by windows and other nix boxes should I just use smb for everything or should I use nfs aswell just for the nix boxes?

closed as primarily opinion-based by Panther, Eric Carvalho, Pilot6, Thomas, David Foerster Jul 15 at 10:05

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    That is your decision, and will be made by your needs. I use nfs by choice, and use samba for more restricted (as in limited) access, so I use both as I find it fits my needs. There are a lot of things I found a hassle on samba (so I'd go the nfs route for sure), but your use will likely differ to my own. – guiverc Jul 10 at 6:32
  • you are asking for an opinion and the answer is that it is good to have choices and both have advantages. Personally, although NFS works with windows, I prefer samba in a mixed windows / linux environments. I agree with @guiverc , samba feels more secure / restricted access. – Panther Jul 10 at 7:06
  • essentially it's my network storage share that I want to be accessible for all systems on my network. it's just bulk raw data. offline install files and so on. I have a mixture on Windows and Linux systems and while it's probably lazy I just like to have a common dumping ground for everything so I can always access it from any system. its sounding like SMB is the way to go so all my ADDS GPO's work no matter what system i'm on. – RandomOzzy Jul 11 at 0:11
up vote 1 down vote accepted

You should use SMB if you need to differentiate access rights for different users or user groups, and at the same time need to give sudo right at least for some users.

Under NFS, a sudo-capable user can use sudo su to impersonate any other user with the known name, gaining potentially unauthorized access (or, say, write access when only read access should be granted). While the root squash prevents from impersonating the root, it does not prevent from impersonating just another user.

NFS may be easier to setup and its limitations are not always relevant (say if all have read access for all content that is written or updated not via NFS). However as you need to use SMB anyway, it may be simpler to have everything SMB only. This may also help later against the argument to ditch all Linux workstations as "insecure".

  • I don't agree .. you should use NFS under Linux/Unix if you want seamless integration with user / group / access rights. If users has sudo rights, tthey can remount the SMB shares with the rights they want. – Soren A Jul 10 at 8:02
  • Hopefully not if they do not have sudo rights on the SMB server. – h22 Jul 10 at 8:08
  • I have a mixture on Windows and Linux systems and while it's probably lazy I just like to have a common dumping ground for everything so I can always access it from any system. its sounding like SMB is the way to go so all my ADDS GPO's work no matter what system i'm on. – RandomOzzy Jul 11 at 0:13

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.