Is SMB 1 secure enough to use for a home server?

[Zecr]

I am wondering if it is worth it to enable SMBv1 despite the security risks so that I can use an old router as a NAS. Personal home use only. 

[fuzz0r]

If you're not allowing it outside your network, yeah should be fine.

[Alex Atkin UK]

5 minutes ago, Zecr said:

I am wondering if it is worth it to enable SMBv1 despite the security risks so that I can use an old router as a NAS. Personal home use only. 

The bigger issue will be how slow the router probably is at being a NAS.  Depending on your use case, it could be a pretty terrible experience.

 

Still if you already have it knocking around, it doesn't hurt to see if its sufficient for your needs.

[Electronics Wizardy]

Id say no. There are a lot of remote execution flaws with smb1 that can allow malware to easily spread. 

 

Also if your router only supports smb1, something tells me its not supported, and probably should be updated anyways.

[Thanatopsis]

1 hour ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Id say no. There are a lot of remote execution flaws with smb1 that can allow malware to easily spread.

This.  SMB 1 and 2 are not good options too use. If your network has a connection to the internet these protocols make your whole network less secure.

[Jarsky]

On 5/12/2020 at 6:38 PM, fuzz0r said:

If you're not allowing it outside your network, yeah should be fine.

You should never allow SMB/NFS/etc...outside of your network anyway.....

If you need remote access, you should be using a VPN or some sort of "cloud" service