We are writing summer 2019 and still Sonos only supports SMB version 1 for the Music Library share.
This is not acceptable.
A file share running SMB1 is extremely vulnerable to all the variants of cryptolocker virus that exists today. File share servers (NAS, Windows, Apple OS) can only support one version of SMB - so you cannot from the same box have one file share (for Sonos) using SMB1 and the other file shares using SMB2 or SMB3. This way Sonos puts each and every file share at serious risc - just because they don’t update their file share protocol to comply with this century.
And for the record - the “solution” through PLEX is not a solution. Unstable at best.
Page 3 / 12
Userlevel 1
You can still force samba to work with Sonos by editing the smb.conf file and adding
client min protocol = NT1
server min protocol = NT1
ntlm auth = yes
to the global section of that file.
I only had to add
server min protocol = NT1to get it to work. However, #disappointed
I was hopeful the S2 OS (12.0) would support this out of the box, but it appears not.
Shame, as I still cannot access my music library from Sonos it’s back to Plex/MacMini for me. That combination works extremely well.
Userlevel 1
Even with S2, Sonos does NOT support SMB2. This is very disappointing! I would like to know the reasons from a Sonos representative!
You can still force samba to work with Sonos by editing the smb.conf file and adding
client min protocol = NT1
server min protocol = NT1
ntlm auth = yes
to the global section of that file.
I only had to add
server min protocol = NT1 to get it to work. However, #disappointed
I have a small plug device with smb exposed just for Sonos library. Was going mad after I upgraded packages this week (including samba) and could not figure out why Sonos did not detect the share, server min protocol setting did the trick.
Also #disappointed
I had come across the SMB1 issue and the fact Sonos only support SMB1 a long time ago so I am shocked that apparently even the new S2 software still requires it.
Apparently Sonos have a workaround for their Windows app in that it uses http as per https://en.community.sonos.com/setting-up-sonos-228990/smb2-or-smb3-support-must-be-supported-now-6826700?postid=16341722#post16341722
That message does not give any details and Sonos have pretty much been totally silent about this entire SMB issue for years.
I would not regard NFS as a solution and AFP even less so, however what about WebDAV? This is basically http/https and without any details on how their PC share via http works it could be they are close to doing this already.
At least some if not all NAS boxes have built-in WebDAV support.
Whilst I feel it is absolutely necessary for Sonos to fix this themselves another approach I have not seen mentioned in this thread would be to run a VM on a NAS purely for the purposes of operating the SMB1 share. It would then not require additional hardware, would use the content already on the NAS, would allow the NAS itself to leave SMB1 turned off but would make the music accessible via ugh! SMB1.
I find it insane that this still an issue and there has been no official response from Sonos. I am sure we have all invested a good deal of money into our systems.
Has anybody opened a support ticket to get an official response?
Very disappointed in Sonos. I have just updated all my older speakers to support S2 and still they are running a version of SMB known to be insecure SMB V1, even on the new S2 APP. This version of SMB was superseded over 3 years ago. Come on Sonos Sort this out, stop putting our systems at risk.
Please sort it out as I can’t backup to my NAS drive as the OS on those systems won’t backup to NAS with v1. So I’m stuck and have to have a special NAS drive for Sonos with old school stuff on it.
Userlevel 7
+22
You can easily create a NAS to SMB v1 gateway on most any computer so that you don’t have to run v1 on your NAS.
This is specifically for a Pi but the same basic settings should work about anywhere.
https://stan-miller.livejournal.com/357.html
Waiting / asking for a newer version has not been productive, I’ve been waiting since v2 came out in 2006.
wow, that seems complicated and I’m on a mac :(
Userlevel 7
+22
Having the newer options available would be noce, many of us had hoped to see them with the S2 release and were disapointed they didn’t make the cut.
The setup isn’t too bad, really just a few edits to existing files. Another option is to just use the Pi as your Sonos Music Library which is what I do here. A Pi Zero-W (you need the W, not just the Zero) will do the job and is often available for $5.00 just add a USB power supply and a micro SD card and you are good.
https://stan-miller.livejournal.com/650.html
Pi is cheaper elsewhere but Amazon is easy to link to. You’d want this kit and a SD card that is shown below the Pi section.
https://smile.amazon.com/CanaKit-Raspberry-Wireless-Official-Supply/dp/B071L2ZQZX/ref=sr_1_7
think i’ll just buy a $50 NAS drive on eBay and leave it as that
Userlevel 7
+22
That may or may not work, many NAS devices today refuse to support SMB v1 due to the security issues, others will if you can find the proper settings.
Even if a device supports v1 now that may be removed if it is updated.
A bigger concern for me would be if Sonos want to stop supporting local file servers completely. Sonos is under a lot of pressure from the cloud crowd to focus only on Amazon music, Spotify, Google Play, Soundcloud, etc, etc…
There is a lot of money and politics involved. No big business want you to play your files from home. Not a single company thinks this is good for their bottom line. Myself I have been running local file servers with my Sonos farm since 2006, and this is the one reason I have stuck with Sonos. If Sonos ditched local file support I might just as well use my Echo Dots and get some cheap amps for those in listening locations.
But I realize I might be a dying minority that don't pay a monthly fee to listen to the music I have already bought.
That’s interesting. Given that they don’t make any money from any streaming service’s monthly subscription, I’m not sure I would understand any real pressure, other than that of supporting what people are doing generally. But I too would be distressed if they were to remove that capability.
That’s interesting. Given that they don’t make any money from any streaming service’s monthly subscription, I’m not sure I would understand any real pressure, other than that of supporting what people are doing generally. But I too would be distressed if they were to remove that capability.
Plenty of effort and probably considerable political maneuvering has been spent on supporting Alexa integration (and lately Google support.)
When you are talking to your Sonos One you are unable to request your local music, but have to request Amazon music. Coincidence? What do you think Amazon would like you to play, in return for all the generous support they spent on helping with the Sonos/Alexa integration? There are Alexa skills for turning random stuff on and off around your house, for crying out loud. Do you think the built-in Alexa capability *really* couldn't tell your Sonos to play Rammstein from your local library if they wanted that to happen?
So as a user group we find support for our local music libraries being in the background. We are on a deprecated file system. We have no support for voice integration. And all the big guys are trying to push Sonos over to their echo systems. Our days might be numbered.
Userlevel 7
+22
Tick me off too, a fair amount of what I like to listen to isn’t available from streaming sources.
Userlevel 6
+13
That’s interesting. Given that they don’t make any money from any streaming service’s monthly subscription, I’m not sure I would understand any real pressure, other than that of supporting what people are doing generally. But I too would be distressed if they were to remove that capability.
That’s true historically right, but do we know the current state? Maybe they’ve sold out with S2 and we dont know it lol. Also Have they monetized their data collection? - I know they don’t sell my personal data, but what about aggregate? Don’t forget about Sonos radio, they’ve monetized that!.
This doesn’t lead me to thinking they will drop local music support. But they’ve been neglecting this for a long time, besides the smb issue, real lack of new features added to local playback, so maybe
Just pure baseless speculation on my part.
That’s true historically right, but do we know the current state? Maybe they’ve sold out with S2 and we dont know it lol. Also Have they monetized their data collection? - I know they don’t sell my personal data, but what about aggregate? Don’t forget about Sonos radio, they’ve monetized that!.
I don't think you need to worry about data collection from Sonos for streaming services. There is nothing left to collect. Amazon, Google or Spotify is already collecting everything with surgical precision every time you play a track, since these services handle everything for Sonos.
I don't think you need to worry about data collection for playing your local library either. If data collection was their intent they would have been a lot more eager to support local services….
Userlevel 6
+13
That’s true historically right, but do we know the current state? Maybe they’ve sold out with S2 and we dont know it lol. Also Have they monetized their data collection? - I know they don’t sell my personal data, but what about aggregate? Don’t forget about Sonos radio, they’ve monetized that!.
I don't think you need to worry about data collection from Sonos for streaming services. There is nothing left to collect. Amazon, Google or Spotify is already collecting everything with surgical precision every time you play a track, since these services handle everything for Sonos.
I don't think you need to worry about data collection for playing your local library either. If data collection was their intent they would have been a lot more eager to support local services….
I’m not worried about data collection, could care less!
I’m not worried about data collection, could care less!
I was responding to your comment “I know they don’t sell my personal data, but what about aggregate”
It is not very likely that they do, as there isn't anything left to sell.
Curious as to how they’ve monetized Sonos Radio. I’m not paying a subscription fee to Sonos, so far….or to anyone else. Unless you mean the same advertising as terrestrial radio already has.
A bigger concern for me would be if Sonos want to stop supporting local file servers completely.
……….
But I realize I might be a dying minority that don't pay a monthly fee to listen to the music I have already bought.
Same here… I’ve tried out a few subscription services, but I’d have to buy into multiple services simply to access the range of music that I already ‘own’.
I haven’t automatically accepted any updates since 5.x, when (from my point of view) they messed up the interface, and currently lock down everything tight unless I have a real need to open anything up. Usually updating costs me money - e.g. yet another perfectly capable device is obsolete, from a Sonos point of view.
I think that we just have to accept that we are no longer the target audience, and take whatever steps are necessary to be able to use our kit in the way that we want to, until it dies. I feel much happier now that suitable alternatives are available - and not only much cheaper but more capable. I speak as someone, though, who has no need for multi-room in sync playing, so my options are perhaps more open than some.
Userlevel 7
+23
A bigger concern for me would be if Sonos want to stop supporting local file servers completely.
Sonos could simply delete SMB support tomorrow (which would be the most secure option), and those of us using PCs or Macs to host music files would still be fine, as SMB is not required for those platforms any more.
If NAS users want a solution, they just need to get the http server running on those NASs, which would take a few hours of work. However there has been zero interest expressed in this work to date.
Sonos have the telemetry to know how many users rely on file servers, and how many of those use NASs and need SMB support. One can only assume the numbers are small enough for them to not be too concerned about that demographic.
Sonos could simply delete SMB support tomorrow
Yes they could.
(which would be the most secure option)
Because HTTP is secure and SMB is insecure? Or are you referring to the issue that is only affecting Windows?
If NAS users want a solution, they just need to get the http server running on those NASs, which would take a few hours of work. However there has been zero interest expressed in this work to date.
Are you saying that that I could get this to work over HTTP with a few hours of work? Care to share?
Sonos have the telemetry to know how many users rely on file servers
You mean from the thing most advanced users turn off when they set up their system?
Page 3 / 12
Reply
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.