Linux - NetworkingThis forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Yes. My ISP blocks ip4 but not ip6 connections to the Windows/SMB/CIFS service ports. I think you can run Samba on another port. Two Linux boxes should be able to work around blocked ports but it might be harder to do this if Windows is on the other end.
While it is certainly POSSIBLE it is strongly recommended against, even by Microsoft. SMB/CIFS (used by Windows share and SAMBA) is not a secure protocol by modern standards, and opens you up to exploit of protocol vulnerabilities.
It is fairly easy to do limited sharing of files using https, sftp, or other secured protocols, but even better is to use free cloud services so that your LOCAL machine is not the one at risk.
Hello,
Thanks for all the replies.
I don't want this to be permanent. For a limited time only. I want to give the other party an address like MY_IP/Directory/File.zip and he\she can download the file. It does the same thing as a web server and FTP server do, but without the web server and FTP server.
Hello,
Thanks for all the replies.
I don't want this to be permanent. For a limited time only. I want to give the other party an address like MY_IP/Directory/File.zip and he\she can download the file. It does the same thing as a web server and FTP server do, but without the web server and FTP server.
The short answer is no, you can't do this. And you shouldn't even if you could.
As noted already, this protocol is not secure enough for the open internet. There are ways to secure it, via an encrypted tunnel or VPN or something, but these solutions will all be more complex than just a simple web server or (s)ftp server.
The big problem with trying to do this, as noted, is that most internet service providers will block the required port. The other party is also behind a router/firewall/service provider which will likely block the required port. There are ways to get around this, but it'll be way more complicated than just a simple web server or (s)ftp server.
As mentioned by everybody in this thread, opening samba to the world will bring trouble due to its weaknesses.
There is a way to transfer files and it is via scp.
Drop-box, OneDrive, Google Drive.
Teamviewer session and Transfer the file via Teamviewer
For a single file transfer? That's like getting a bulldozer to scrape a piece of gum off a sidewalk. And in the case of Google, the bulldozer driver wants to level your house instead because he wants to be the only one with houses. What happened to DIY and not relying on mega-corps?
For a single file transfer? That's like getting a bulldozer to scrape a piece of gum off a sidewalk. And in the case of Google, the bulldozer driver wants to level your house instead because he wants to be the only one with houses. What happened to DIY and not relying on mega-corps?
Have you got a DIY suggestion?
I made mention of a "simple" web server or (s)ftp server, but I only claimed that it was less complex than setting up a secure tunnel for using Samba.
But in truth, setting up a simple web server or (s)ftp server isn't entirely trivial either. I mean ... it can be, if you already have a linux server deployed out there somewhere. It can be easy as pie like that.
But if not, using someone else's web server (like Google's) can save a lot of headaches just for the occasional file transfer to/from a paying client.
For a single file transfer? That's like getting a bulldozer to scrape a piece of gum off a sidewalk.
Every other solution outside of 'sneaker net' is extremely risky because they involve opening ports and exposing a machine to the open internet. Not something I'd advise anyone to do, let alone someone who doesn't know how. And I mean, who doesn't have a gmail account these days?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayjwa
What happened to DIY and not relying on mega-corps?
For a single file transfer? That's like getting a bulldozer to scrape a piece of gum off a sidewalk. And in the case of Google, the bulldozer driver wants to level your house instead because he wants to be the only one with houses. What happened to DIY and not relying on mega-corps?
KISS method I believe still fine. Keep It Simple SysAdmin..
Of course, it's your preference on how things should be done.
Time is the most expensive resource here on earth. Once its gone, it's gone.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.