Sonos support for SMB 2.0 protocol

  • 18 September 2016
  • 274 replies
  • 43879 views


Show first post
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.

274 replies

Good idea jump to something else just a couple months from when Sonos has the chance to start improving things that were not fixable under the Legacy memory limit.

They had years of time! And is not the first incident I feel f...ed up with Sonos! And they just tried again with obsoleting the “old” stuff.

But hey, we can sell some more contracts with music services, so we don’t have to care about paying customers.

By the way charging hundreds of dollars, euros or whatever and then keeping memory so damn small, that even a simple software update isn’t working is REAL customer care!

Go wake up!

 

Userlevel 7
Badge +21

They had years of time! And is not the first incident I feel f...ed up with Sonos! And they just tried again with obsoleting the “old” stuff.

But hey, we can sell some more contracts with music services, so we don’t have to care about paying customers.

By the way charging hundreds of dollars, euros or whatever and then keeping memory so damn small, that even a simple software update isn’t working is REAL customer care!

Go wake up!

 

They had years of time? How do you figure that? Once the devices are manufactured the memory can’t be changed. There is no way Sonos in 2020 can go back in time and change the installed memory in a manufactured in 2005 device.

The whole point of obsoleting the old stuff was to remove the memory limitation that was frustrating Sonos attempts to update features like SMB and others locked in by their antique but fitting in the available memory footprint of the old stuff.

Selling contracts with music services? That sounds really interesting, do you have any links to articles describing that?

Again you are missing a bit of information on Sonos and memory, the limited memory is only in the oldest Sonos devices. Newer Sonos have far more memory and once the requirement to keep the older gear integrated ends in May (Legacy/Modern split) Sonos will have far more memory to work with and should be able to start adding features once the migration to a newer Linux kernel is finished. We may even get lucky and find SMB, STP and a bunch of other stuff just works on the latest version as it is part of the kernel.

They are billing a Ferrari and delivering a Lada!

And if they say, it’s technically impossible to support XYZ it means: “we don’t want to!“

It was the same thing with iPad gen1 controller which they dropped saying it it impossible to support it and then one single man did the impossible and wrote an iPad first gen controller. (No it wasn’t me)

It’s the same if they say, they have to break all integrations to support XYZ…. I say no it’s not, it’s just the cheapest way to get two more cents out of the paying customer.

They are lying or simply dump, neither of these two alternatives makes me happy to pay more money for this company.

I already head thousands of dollars go down the drain with this “NO SUPPORT” company!

 

Updating some Sonos to SMB v3 while leaving others at v1 would be a user support nightmare. Sonos has resisted the multiple firmware branches for years but tried to do what they could (like library indexing) within that.

I won’t call this a nightmare, too, since there are many different Sonos model out there with different features, like Alexa support or more which support guys can handle, too for sure.

Userlevel 7
Badge +21

Adding Alexa support did not require a different and much larger version of the Linux operating system to support it. SMB v3 does and legacy devices have no memory for the new Linux.

I’m hanging on for the S2 release and we’ll see where that gets us.

And I’d be cautious about expecting it in the first version of S2. There may be other priorities that cause that particular change to come later. Or not at all. We just don’t know for sure yet, if it will happen, or when. We have hopes. 

Userlevel 7
Badge +21

I’m optimistic, if Sonos goes to the new Linux kernel they would actually have to do extra work to disable the newer SMB version support.

You have more knowledge than I in that regard. I’m just urging caution that we can’t expect ‘all’ upgrades possible in the first release, due to both code effort, and QA time involved. There’s a lot of work in updating a kernel, I’d be happy to wait for some feature to be sure it all works each time. 

Userlevel 7
Badge +21

I’m sure not everything will be in the first or other early release, some things may actually be there but not announced too.

For Linux folks it is interesting to look at what is available in the antique Sonos kernel versus what is available in a recent kernel. Many things that have been frustrating are no longer issues as the Linux system has fixed them and by using the newer kernel and the matching core utilities you get the fixes by default and would have to do extra work to keep them invisible.

I think a lot of the existing FAQs and past posts here will be valuable to Legacy system users but no longer apply to folks moving to S2. While I’m looking forward to it, I see a big learning curve as well as the need to see which OS folks are running to give the right answer to questions and problems.

Fun times.

I’m sure not everything will be in the first or other early release, some things may actually be there but not announced too.

...

I think a lot of the existing FAQs and past posts here will be valuable to Legacy system users but no longer apply to folks moving to S2. While I’m looking forward to it, I see a big learning curve as well as the need to see which OS folks are running to give the right answer to questions and problems.

Fun times.

I’m hopeful that many little issues are fixed like having RSTP instead of legacy STP for networking.  So many things come stock in newer kernels and IP stacks that we can hope, right?  

Userlevel 1

Sonos S2, still No SMBv2

 I’m just urging caution that we can’t expect ‘all’ upgrades possible in the first release, due to both code effort, and QA time involved. There’s a lot of work in updating a kernel, I’d be happy to wait for some feature to be sure it all works each time. 

Worth repeating this comment. 

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

 I’m just urging caution that we can’t expect ‘all’ upgrades possible in the first release, due to both code effort, and QA time involved. There’s a lot of work in updating a kernel, I’d be happy to wait for some feature to be sure it all works each time. 

Worth repeating this comment. 

Fair point but this isn't about"all upgrades" - it's about fixing a massive security flaw thhat'sbeen around for years. S2 is over 6 months since anounce, expecting this to be fixed isn't some unreasonable expectation imo.

Agreed. Doesn’t change the fact that adding “all potential upgrades” in a single release makes no sense. 

Userlevel 5
Badge +9

Agreed. Doesn’t change the fact that adding “all potential upgrades” in a single release makes no sense. 

But this is a  well known, multi years old security flaw that should be fixed years ago-  not new upgrade to functionality.

Sure, but we’ve concluded that the reason it wasn’t previously updated was that the Linux kernel that they were restricted to due to available memory didn’t allow the update, correct? As a software developer, how many eggs are you wanting to juggle in a completely new release? I’m willing to give them some time to allow this new build to settle, and then expect that fairly significant change in an upcoming release. For me, the first release of a new platform is rarely a time for new features, it’s ensuring all the previous ones work. Once that is out, they can work out how to make those incremental changes, of which the SMB update is one. That Sonos has never promised, it has only been an assumption on our, the user’s part. 
 

 

Userlevel 7
Badge +21

Looking at the Sonos GPL page I’m seeing v2, 3 and 4 kernels, no mention of v5.

I’m not able to poke my Sonos to get a response that would identify the kernel used in S2.

Userlevel 1

Sure, but we’ve concluded that the reason it wasn’t previously updated was that the Linux kernel that they were restricted to due to available memory didn’t allow the update, correct? As a software developer, how many eggs are you wanting to juggle in a completely new release? I’m willing to give them some time to allow this new build to settle, and then expect that fairly significant change in an upcoming release. For me, the first release of a new platform is rarely a time for new features, it’s ensuring all the previous ones work. Once that is out, they can work out how to make those incremental changes, of which the SMB update is one. That Sonos has never promised, it has only been an assumption on our, the user’s part. 

 

I agree if this would be a feature, but this is a major problem. Its not exactly a security flaw on Sonos side as the client is not vulnerable but it compels me to open one on the serverside to make it work.

This topic exists for more than three years and there are alot of other topics. This can’t be ignored. 

If there is a problem with kernels or what so ever I expect them to be transparent.

 

I agree if this would be a feature, but this is a major problem. Its not exactly a security flaw on Sonos side as the client is not vulnerable but it compels me to open one on the serverside to make it work.

This topic exists for more than three years and there are alot of other topics. This can’t be ignored. 

If there is a problem with kernels or what so ever I expect them to be transparent.

 

So you want them to be transparent about a supposed security flaw and reveal its causes?  Why not set up a “Hackers Welcome!” sub-forum while they are at it?  

Userlevel 1

 

I agree if this would be a feature, but this is a major problem. Its not exactly a security flaw on Sonos side as the client is not vulnerable but it compels me to open one on the serverside to make it work.

This topic exists for more than three years and there are alot of other topics. This can’t be ignored. 

If there is a problem with kernels or what so ever I expect them to be transparent.

 

So you want them to be transparent about a supposed security flaw and reveal its causes?  Why not set up a “Hackers Welcome!” sub-forum while they are at it?  

 

The world knows about it for years....so why not being transparent about why this hasn’t been fixed already. The flaw and cause is known.

You should really learn what the SMB1 flaw is about.

Userlevel 6
Badge +15

Looking at the Sonos GPL page I’m seeing v2, 3 and 4 kernels, no mention of v5.

I’m not able to poke my Sonos to get a response that would identify the kernel used in S2.

 

I haven’t upgraded to S2 yet, since I haven’t replaced my ZP100, but scanning my current S1 devices with Nmap reveals this:

Connect (recentish): 2.4

Port : 3 (guessing 3.2 - 3.16)

Move: 3 or 4  (3.2 - 4.9)

 

Now, nmap can be wrong, but it’s usually frighteningly accurate.  When I get a chance I’ll update to the latest version of Nmap and scan again. EDIT: I’m already running the latest version, 7.8.

 

Userlevel 7
Badge +21

Interesting, I ran nmap against a Beam, got no OS result. I’ll have to try it against some of my other gear and see if it finds something.

Userlevel 6
Badge +15

What options did you use?

Userlevel 7
Badge +21

I went with the basic “nmap -A” but forgot to run it as root. Looks like my version of nmap isn’t issuing a warning about that with the -A option but does with the -O option.

After S2 Update:

Play 1: Linux 3.2 - 3.8

One SL: Linux 3.2 - 3.8

Play 3: No exact OS matches

Play 5 (gen 2): Linux 3.2 - 3.8

Beam: Linux 3.11 - 4.1

Sub: No exact OS matches

Boost: Linux 2.6.32

It would be interesting to see the results of any of these on pre-S1 and on S1 Sonos gear.

Userlevel 6
Badge +15

All S1:

ZP100 - Linux 2.4.18 - 2.4.35 (my first device, just recently replaced with a Port)

Play: 1 A101 - Linux 2.6.17 - 2.6.36

Play: 1 A200 - Linux 3.2 - 3.16 

Play:3 - Linux 2.6.17 - 2.6.36 (devices purchased several years apart)

Play:5 Gen 2 - Linux 3.2 - 3.16

Connect (later gen) C100  - Linux 2.4.18 - 2.4.35