• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Share permissions vs. Local permissions

S

scott0482

Member
ok.. i want to know what does what...

server 2003 / winXP environment

for example share permissions are read, write, and full.. this doesn't give me much flexibility.. local permissions give 8 or so options. edit, read, write, modify, delete, etc...

so how do they work? i have a directory.. and i want someone to have read access to that directory, then inside that directory i want them to have more access to the subdirectory.. the only way i can see doign this is to give them "write" permission to the main shared directory.. then set a local permission disallowing them to be able to do anything but read.. then i have to set the subdirectory to not inherit permissions from the parent directory.. then i can set the permissions in there how i want.. but i don't really even know how well it works. i guess i need to just test it as a restricted user.. but that requires me to log off... this just gets too complicated though.. is there a way to get a more comprehensive set of share permissions so i dont' have to worry about local permissions at all?

thanks

scott
 
have you tried looking at the 'security' tab? there's a whole bunch of options there.
just give them read-only permission to the shared directory and then override the security settings for each folder inside it that you are allowing them to have more relaxed settings. that should do it.
 
Generally you should just ignore share permissions, set them to Everyone (or authenticated users) full and set the real rights on the files, otherwise you'll just end up confusing yourself and the more boxes you get the more work you'll generate for yourself.

 
The share permissions are basically the initial gates, where the file level permissions are what really does the work.

Example:

If you set a share to read only, then no writing can take place through that share.
If you set a share to read&write, then you still can only write to the files that you have permission to write to.

Setting the share permissions to give all valid users full access saves headaches later when you try to figure out why you can't write to a directory you know you should be able to write to.
 
ok.. so i guess my main question was whether or not the local permissions could even function on a shared drive.. i just need to map it all out otherwise i will confuse myself..

thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top