Was there an alternative then? But yes, being able to play owned music anywhere in the home is a big draw to the minority that still enjoys that feature and I am one of such people. I am on S1 and these Sonos moves don’t bother me.

I’m not sure what marketing material you’re looking at, but the marketing material I’ve seen doesn’t really talk about airplay, bluetooth, TV, or Aux sources either….and those aren’t going away.  

I would also like to understand how library access is going to work going forward. For example, if old search is being discontinued without incorporating library searching into new search, then that will make S2 harder to use with a NAS music library. 

There will always be issues with laws like GDPR and others regarding accessing your personal music library from a ‘cloud’ situation. I suspect there must be a huge amount of care given by the folks writing any code there. 

I had a pop up message on my Sonos app that in a couple of months time in a new version of the S2 app the ability to have a NAS music library was going to be discontinued permanently because of security concerns about SMB V1. I can’t find out any more detail on the Sonos web site or these forums. It’ll be very disappointing as I have versions of songs I haven’t found on music services. I’m sure others do too.

Do any of the learned guys on this forum know any more about this?

This is a surprise. Did you take a screen cap? 
 

Can anyone with Sonos clarify please? 

Screenshot or Sonos confirmation would be needed; and if yes, why would the same concern not apply for using this feature via S1?

It came up separately on my phone and iPad. I didn’t think to take a screen capture. I just wanted to remember the contents. Had two buttons under it. One was to learn about music services. 

It has been reported elsewhere with a shot - on the announcement of a new all dancing UI thread.

I took this to mean that they are dropping support for SMBv1, not local libraries altogether. It probably could’ve been worded better if that’s the case.

I think this would be a problem for S1 owners only, because S1 does not allow for SMBv2 to be used. S2 useres should not be affected by this as S2 does SMBv2.

That's such a confusing message.  It mentions specifically the removal of support for SMB1 on S2 products.

What , specifically, is being removed in the coming months for S2 products?

I agree the wording is confusing. On a first read it implies the whole music library feature is going to be removed. In light of the posting above a second read could be only those protocols are going to be removed. A little too vague. Should have been more specific. I was about to have a heart attack at the thought music libraries might be removed. The posted pop up above is exactly what I saw. I was going to screenshot it if it came up again but no need now. 

S2 still supports smbv1 so likely this will mean you must have a nas that supports smbv2. IIRC there was at least one smbv2 Sonos bug that affected indexing with some devices (needed to switch to smbv1 to index), hopefully this is fixed. 

To me it is quite clear that http and SMBv1 support are going to be removed form S2 because of safety concerns. SMBv2 is not mentioned, so no changes there. How is this unclear?

I saw a pop up, too, and didn’t get a screencap. But my takeaway--which may or may not be accurate--was that Sonos was discontinuing system access to a library on a computer because of security concerns. Instead, only NAS libraries were going to be supported. Did I dream this?

I emailed the CEO of Sonos, Patrick Spence.  Below is what I wrote.

Dear Patrick,

I wish to protest at the recent announcement by Sonos to end support for SMBv1 and (HTTP) which appeared in the Sonos app this weekend.  (See screenshot at end of email.)

I have two NAS devices, both of which are so old, they only support SMBv1.  One device holds a digitised copy of my music collection (for use with my Sonos system), the other holding files, family videos and photographs etc.

Although I agree that both SMBv1 and HTTP protocols are less secure than their successor technologies, the decision to use them rests with the customer and not with Sonos.  The use of SMBv1 poses no risk to Sonos, only to me, and that’s my decision.  Sonos is not the judge, jury, and executioner of how I choose to access my own music via my Sonos system in my own home.

I do not use music streaming services, so any change that renders SMBv1 unavailable to me effectively renders my whole Sonos system obsolete.  By all means warn the user that SMBv1 and HTTP are dated, less secure,  and “may” pose a security risk, but do not prevent their use. 

As a recently retired, 68 year old, I don’t have the money to simply purchase something for the sake of it, especially when the NAS devices in question are still perfectly serviceable.  Unless Sonos would like to reimburse me for the 10 Sonos devices I currently use in my home, or buy me a new NAS device so I may continue to enjoy my music, I suggest you rethink an ill-conceived draconian policy that will not win you any support, and alienate some of your existing customer base.

@nsd3 excellent and well made points, but I doubt it will have much effect, seeing that you are a vanishingly small part of the user base.

I still do not know if this will affect me, using S1 as I do for listening to my music in my NAS. If I stop taking anymore updates for S1, I don’t suppose it can, but what if I do let in these updates to S1 in future?

@Corry P - any reaction to the questions above?

The reason it's not clear is due to points raised above and you yourself saying this will only be a problem for S1 users when these users are not mentioned in the message in the App.  You also mentioned that S2 uses SMBv2 so should not be affected which is obviously not correct otherwise there would be no need for the App’s popup. S2 still supports SMBv1 that some users rely on.

Been playing today with my large (35k tracks) local library and tried to change to SMBv2 on my ASUS router and got the usual failure to index messages so this is not fixed. Removing SMBv1 will render my system useless to me unless this can be resolved. Is this just a ASUS issue and if so does anyone have any suggestions?

Since most messages here are about people owning a NAS that needs very specific commands to allow SMBv1 because of the exact same safety concerns Sonos voices in the update message, I had not realised there are people still using NAS device that only do SMBv1.

Nome NAS drives require jumping through a lot of hoops in order to re-enable SMBv1.

Thread below provides some context for the Sonos bug that Ninjabob describes above. 
 

I have my 40 Gb music library on my Dell laptop that stays in the house all the time. The message I got was similar to the ones already posted but mine said that the support for having the library on a PC (with the S2 controller) was being withdrawn because of security risks and that I would have to go to a NAS drive with SMBv2 or SMBv3. I didn’t think to capture the screen :-(

I just spoke with Sonos Support and the person I spoke to had to go and ask somebody else who also seemed not to have all the information. Something was said about it being discontinued and I would have to use the “Web App” that was going to be announced next week? He didn’t want to say any more about it; but I just got an email from him that said “So after the update you will still be able to use the Music Library stored on your laptop by using the desktop app that you already have”.

So, not quite sure what is going on.

Unless Sonos can somehow keep these unsecure protocols enabled without actually supporting them, I don’t see how that work exactly.  If the feature is there, Sonos sort of has to guarantee that it works as described and doesn’t pose a risk to your system.  They would also need to provide bug support if some issues is found.  So, as much as you might feel that it isn’t Sonos responsibility, it may very well be.

That said, the fact that it remains enabled on S1 makes me wonder if S2 isn’t going to remove the feature, but they won’t provide any support for it.  Again, I’m not sure if they can do that realistically and legally.