«

Relax - what ever permissions are assigned to a folder determine whether or
not the contents(files) can be accessed - if you have access to the
folder - you have access to it's contents
-there are no "permissions" on the files.

By contrast NTFS permissions permit assigning permissions to individual
files.

"Jo" <> wrote in message
news:2AB139B3-E118-4225-BD38-...
> Hello All - Hello Michael:
>
> Again, I am at a loss to understand the difference between "folder" share
> permissions and NTFS share permissions. I understand that they are
> separate.
> However, I do not understand the ExamCram2 book which states on page 52,
> "share permissions only apply to shared folders; you cannot apply them to
> individual files." However, doesn't the permissions for the shared folder
> include "files" within that folder?
>
> Anybody got a link to a website that can clear this up? Thanks (cause my
> head is hurting trying to understand this).
> --
> Motochick

AJR said
> By contrast NTFS permissions permit assigning permissions to individual
> files.
So if I have access to a folder it's possible thru NTFS permissions that a
file in that
folder could be off limits to me..if that's NOT true, I don't understand
your statement.

Richard




"AJR" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Relax - what ever permissions are assigned to a folder determine whether
> or not the contents(files) can be accessed - if you have access to the
> folder - you have access to it's contents
> -there are no "permissions" on the files.
>
> By contrast NTFS permissions permit assigning permissions to individual
> files.
>
> "Jo" <> wrote in message
> news:2AB139B3-E118-4225-BD38-...
>> Hello All - Hello Michael:
>>
>> Again, I am at a loss to understand the difference between "folder" share
>> permissions and NTFS share permissions. I understand that they are
>> separate.
>> However, I do not understand the ExamCram2 book which states on page 52,
>> "share permissions only apply to shared folders; you cannot apply them to
>> individual files." However, doesn't the permissions for the shared
>> folder
>> include "files" within that folder?
>>
>> Anybody got a link to a website that can clear this up? Thanks (cause my
>> head is hurting trying to understand this).
>> --
>> Motochick
>
>

It is generally best to use NTFS permissions instead of share level
permissions to control access to shared resources over the network.
Share level permissions give you very limited control, less secure and
apply only to users connecting over a network. In the old days, we were
taught to SHARE Full Control and lock the files down with NTFS
permissions. With Windows XP when a computer is a member of a domain,
Simple File Sharing is disabled. With SFS enabled, it can only be
applied at the folder level, not files; which makes the files
vulnerable. Meaning if you have READ access to a folder with files in
it; the SHARE permission only extends to the folder, not the files. You
then use NTFS permissions to control access to the files. Therefore
Richard, you are correct.

Does that clear things up a little?



--
Michael D. Alligood
MCSA, MCDST, MCP, A+,
Network+, i-Net+, CIW Assoc.,
CIW Certified Instructor

http://www.yetanotherblog.typepad.com/theclassroom



"Richard" <> wrote in message
news:e1MLA$:

> AJR said
> > By contrast NTFS permissions permit assigning permissions to individual
> > files.
> So if I have access to a folder it's possible thru NTFS permissions that a
> file in that
> folder could be off limits to me..if that's NOT true, I don't understand
> your statement.
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
> "AJR" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > Relax - what ever permissions are assigned to a folder determine whether
> > or not the contents(files) can be accessed - if you have access to the
> > folder - you have access to it's contents
> > -there are no "permissions" on the files.
> >
> > By contrast NTFS permissions permit assigning permissions to individual
> > files.
> >
> > "Jo" <> wrote in message
> > news:2AB139B3-E118-4225-BD38-...
> >> Hello All - Hello Michael:
> >>
> >> Again, I am at a loss to understand the difference between "folder" share
> >> permissions and NTFS share permissions. I understand that they are
> >> separate.
> >> However, I do not understand the ExamCram2 book which states on page 52,
> >> "share permissions only apply to shared folders; you cannot apply them to
> >> individual files." However, doesn't the permissions for the shared
> >> folder
> >> include "files" within that folder?
> >>
> >> Anybody got a link to a website that can clear this up? Thanks (cause my
> >> head is hurting trying to understand this).
> >> --
> >> Motochick
> >
> >

Michael:

I went back to the Press Book and found the answer I needed. Yes, page 5-45
of the Press Book states "Shared folder permissions are in effect only when a
user connects to the shared folder across the network; they have no effect
when the user is accessing a resource when the user is logged on locally to
the computer. This is in contrast with NTFS permissions, which are in effect
both when the user logs on locally and when the user accesses the resource
across the network." I understand it now. Thanks again - this newgroup
thingie is great!!!
--
Motochick


"Michael D. Alligood" wrote:

> It is generally best to use NTFS permissions instead of share level
> permissions to control access to shared resources over the network.
> Share level permissions give you very limited control, less secure and
> apply only to users connecting over a network. In the old days, we were
> taught to SHARE Full Control and lock the files down with NTFS
> permissions. With Windows XP when a computer is a member of a domain,
> Simple File Sharing is disabled. With SFS enabled, it can only be
> applied at the folder level, not files; which makes the files
> vulnerable. Meaning if you have READ access to a folder with files in
> it; the SHARE permission only extends to the folder, not the files. You
> then use NTFS permissions to control access to the files. Therefore
> Richard, you are correct.
>
> Does that clear things up a little?
>
>
>
> --
> Michael D. Alligood
> MCSA, MCDST, MCP, A+,
> Network+, i-Net+, CIW Assoc.,
> CIW Certified Instructor
>
> http://www.yetanotherblog.typepad.com/theclassroom
>
>
>
> "Richard" <> wrote in message
> news:e1MLA$:
>
> > AJR said
> > > By contrast NTFS permissions permit assigning permissions to individual
> > > files.
> > So if I have access to a folder it's possible thru NTFS permissions that a
> > file in that
> > folder could be off limits to me..if that's NOT true, I don't understand
> > your statement.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "AJR" <> wrote in message
> > news:...
> > > Relax - what ever permissions are assigned to a folder determine whether
> > > or not the contents(files) can be accessed - if you have access to the
> > > folder - you have access to it's contents
> > > -there are no "permissions" on the files.
> > >
> > > By contrast NTFS permissions permit assigning permissions to individual
> > > files.
> > >
> > > "Jo" <> wrote in message
> > > news:2AB139B3-E118-4225-BD38-...
> > >> Hello All - Hello Michael:
> > >>
> > >> Again, I am at a loss to understand the difference between "folder" share
> > >> permissions and NTFS share permissions. I understand that they are
> > >> separate.
> > >> However, I do not understand the ExamCram2 book which states on page 52,
> > >> "share permissions only apply to shared folders; you cannot apply them to
> > >> individual files." However, doesn't the permissions for the shared
> > >> folder
> > >> include "files" within that folder?
> > >>
> > >> Anybody got a link to a website that can clear this up? Thanks (cause my
> > >> head is hurting trying to understand this).
> > >> --
> > >> Motochick
> > >
> > >
>
>