"Identical" accounts on networked computers

[Tony Allen]

This past week there were a few replies posted here to messages regarding
the visibility of small (2-3 computers) , home networked "places" that
stated there "NEEDS/MUST" be "identical user accounts" on all systems in
order for the systems to 'see' each other.

I had a similar problem so I tried that suggestion - to no avail. I
deleted/removed the accounts back to a single user, non-passworded system.
The cure/answer to my particular issues was a service not starting.

What is all this about 'needing' identical accounts running on networked
computers? Obviously, it's NOT needed!

 

[Peter R. Fletcher]

I agree that you don't usually need to have an identical user account
on a second networked system to see a shared resource on that system,
provided that you are not attached to a Domain (i.e. you are using
Workgroup sharing). If you are attached to a Domain, I believe that
you can't see, let alone share, files on a system unless you are
either an individual user which the system recognises or a member of a
defined group of users that the system recognises. Even if you are not
attached to a Domain, you may have difficulty browsing to a networked
system that is in a different Workgroup, though you will usually be
able to address it "by name".

This past week there were a few replies posted here to messages regarding
the visibility of small (2-3 computers) , home networked "places" that
stated there "NEEDS/MUST" be "identical user accounts" on all systems in
order for the systems to 'see' each other.

I had a similar problem so I tried that suggestion - to no avail. I
deleted/removed the accounts back to a single user, non-passworded system.
The cure/answer to my particular issues was a service not starting.

What is all this about 'needing' identical accounts running on networked
computers? Obviously, it's NOT needed!

Please respond to the Newsgroup, so that others may benefit from the exchange.
Peter R. Fletcher

 

[Chuck]

This past week there were a few replies posted here to messages regarding
the visibility of small (2-3 computers) , home networked "places" that
stated there "NEEDS/MUST" be "identical user accounts" on all systems in
order for the systems to 'see' each other.

I had a similar problem so I tried that suggestion - to no avail. I
deleted/removed the accounts back to a single user, non-passworded system.
The cure/answer to my particular issues was a service not starting.

What is all this about 'needing' identical accounts running on networked
computers? Obviously, it's NOT needed!

Tony,

Network access to resources in Windows systems requires some type of
authentication. In most cases, this requires matching accounts / passwords.
When people complain of problems with network access, that is one of the easiest
diagnoses.

More about file sharing, between all different versions of Windows:
<http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...db-aef8-4bef-925e-7ac9be791028&DisplayLang=en>

You have posted here so many articles, it's hard to keep track of your problems.
Are you still having problems, or is everything resolved?

BTW, Tony, please don't contribute to the spread and success of email address
mining viruses. Learn to munge your email address properly, to keep yourself a
bit safer when posting to open forums. Protect yourself and the rest of the
internet - read this article.
http://www.mailmsg.com/SPAM_munging.htm

Cheers,
Chuck
Paranoia comes from experience - and is not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Tony Allen]

Everything solved.

Computer Browser service was not (for some unknown reason) starting from
'Manual'. I set it to Automatic and all is working.

My email address is as phony as a Bill Clinton $3.00 bill! And I change it,
and my UserName here about once a week!



--

 

[Chuck]

Everything solved.

Computer Browser service was not (for some unknown reason) starting from
'Manual'. I set it to Automatic and all is working.

My email address is as phony as a Bill Clinton $3.00 bill! And I change it,
and my UserName here about once a week!

Tony,

I'm glad that you solved your problem. The browser service, and subsystem, is
frequently a cause of network sharing problems.

Your email address may be phony, to you, but it is not polite. By posting with
your current address (an actual existing domain), you could be causing unwanted
email (spam) to hit the email servers at nbc [DOT] net currently. In its worst
form, it could become a DOS.

Also, the clueless, who do not know not to post their actual address, may see
you as an example. The clueless, who are also the ones who don't properly
defend their computers, then provide the next sets of hosts to further spread
unwanted email and other internet traffic.
http://members.aol.com/emailfaq/mungfaq.html
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2606.html

Cheers,
Chuck
Paranoia comes from experience - and is not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Star Fleet Admiral Q]

FYI - these are MS owned newsgroups, and even MS recommends using a munged
e-mail address, i.e. one that a human can unmunge if they wish to
communicate directly, but one that would be difficult or almost impossible
for a spam harvesting program to figure out.
Also, I wouldn't trust a single piece of posted information that is
disseminated via "aol.com" domain.

--

Star Fleet Admiral Q @ your service

*************************************************

Everything solved.

Computer Browser service was not (for some unknown reason) starting from
'Manual'. I set it to Automatic and all is working.

My email address is as phony as a Bill Clinton $3.00 bill! And I change
it,
and my UserName here about once a week!

Tony,

I'm glad that you solved your problem. The browser service, and
subsystem, is
frequently a cause of network sharing problems.

Your email address may be phony, to you, but it is not polite. By posting
with
your current address (an actual existing domain), you could be causing
unwanted
email (spam) to hit the email servers at nbc [DOT] net currently. In its
worst
form, it could become a DOS.

Also, the clueless, who do not know not to post their actual address, may
see
you as an example. The clueless, who are also the ones who don't properly
defend their computers, then provide the next sets of hosts to further
spread
unwanted email and other internet traffic.
http://members.aol.com/emailfaq/mungfaq.html
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2606.html

Cheers,
Chuck
Paranoia comes from experience - and is not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

This past week there were a few replies posted here to messages regarding
the visibility of small (2-3 computers) , home networked "places" that
stated there "NEEDS/MUST" be "identical user accounts" on all systems in
order for the systems to 'see' each other.

I had a similar problem so I tried that suggestion - to no avail. I
deleted/removed the accounts back to a single user, non-passworded system.
The cure/answer to my particular issues was a service not starting.

What is all this about 'needing' identical accounts running on networked
computers? Obviously, it's NOT needed!

Identical user accounts aren't needed to access shared
disks/folders/printers belonging to a computer running XP Home
Edition. XP Home allows all users to access its shared resources over
the network.

If you explicitly disable "simple file sharing" on a computer running
XP Professional, then anyone who wants to access your shared resources
over the network needs to log on with a user account that also exists
on your computer -- same user name and password. For full details:

Windows XP Professional File Sharing
http://www.practicallynetworked.com/sharing/xp_filesharing/index.htm
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

 

[Hans-Georg Michna]

This past week there were a few replies posted here to messages regarding
the visibility of small (2-3 computers) , home networked "places" that
stated there "NEEDS/MUST" be "identical user accounts" on all systems in
order for the systems to 'see' each other.

I had a similar problem so I tried that suggestion - to no avail. I
deleted/removed the accounts back to a single user, non-passworded system.
The cure/answer to my particular issues was a service not starting.

What is all this about 'needing' identical accounts running on networked
computers? Obviously, it's NOT needed!

Tony,

I see that you have already got very good answers. Let me just
reinforce one fundamental point.

When you access a Windows XP (or 2000 or NT) computer over the
network, you are always authenticated by username and password.
You can only access the computer with a valid username and the
matching password. There is absolutely no other way.

However, there is a joker. When the Guest account is enabled and
the authentication fails or is anonymous, the target computer
will attempt a second authentication through the Guest account,
which normally has no password. On Windows XP Home or on XP Pro
with Simple File Sharing enabled there is only this type of
Guest authentication.

Obviously anybody can log on that way, provided the Guest
account is enabled on both computers (not perfectly sure about
this), it has no password assigned, and there is no active
policy prohibiting this.

I wanted to mention and explain this only for the sake of
completeless and precision. Sometimes this is useful knowledge.

Hans-Georg

 

[Interrogative]

This past week there were a few replies posted here to messages regarding
the visibility of small (2-3 computers) , home networked "places" that
stated there "NEEDS/MUST" be "identical user accounts" on all systems in
order for the systems to 'see' each other.

I had a similar problem so I tried that suggestion - to no avail. I
deleted/removed the accounts back to a single user, non-passworded system.
The cure/answer to my particular issues was a service not starting.

What is all this about 'needing' identical accounts running on networked
computers? Obviously, it's NOT needed!

It ISN'T needed - that much is for sure. However, for easy to set up home
networking, that is the best way around it. Identical account names and
passwords on all machines.

 

[Interrogative]

If you explicitly disable "simple file sharing" on a computer running
XP Professional, then anyone who wants to access your shared resources
over the network needs to log on with a user account that also exists
on your computer -- same user name and password. For full details:

Wouldn't that be the usergroup has to have privileges in the
domain/workgroup?

Eg, Username John is in the same workgroup and that workgroup is authorised
on the first machine?

 

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

Wouldn't that be the usergroup has to have privileges in the
domain/workgroup?

Eg, Username John is in the same workgroup and that workgroup is authorised
on the first machine?

Simple file sharing only exists in a workgroup. It isn't available in
a domain. So my answer only applies to a workgroup.

There's no such thing as authorization for a workgroup. Workgroups
are a leftover from Windows 9x and serve no practical purpose in
Windows XP networking. A computer in any workgroup can transparently
access a computer in any other workgroup.

Only users (and groups of users) have authorization.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com