Ownership permission - does it really matter if it is "administrator" or the actual user creator of the file/folder?
I was given a link to the following article on "Profile and Folder Redirection in win2003 server"
http://www.windowsnetworking.com/articles_tutorials/Profile-Folder-Redirection-Windows-Server-2003.html
The third paragraph under "Defining a roaming profile" says:
"When I define the NTFS permissions, I allow everyone to have read access to the PROFILES folder. I then create sub folders for each user. The sub folder’s name should match the user’s name. As you create each user’s individual folder, you will need to define some NTFS permissions. I recommend granting the Administrator and the user full control over the folder. You should also make the user the owner of the folder. After you have set these permissions, you should block parent permissions from propagating to the folder. Otherwise, everyone will be able to read anything in the user’s profile folder."
Why should I "make the user the owner of the folder"? Why can't I just leave it as the inherited administrator? What difference does it make anyway. Isn't the only purpose of "ownership" to give the administrator a means of reassigning permissions in a situation where the file is inaccessible?
http://www.windowsnetworking.com/articles_tutorials/Profile-Folder-Redirection-Windows-Server-2003.html
The third paragraph under "Defining a roaming profile" says:
"When I define the NTFS permissions, I allow everyone to have read access to the PROFILES folder. I then create sub folders for each user. The sub folder’s name should match the user’s name. As you create each user’s individual folder, you will need to define some NTFS permissions. I recommend granting the Administrator and the user full control over the folder. You should also make the user the owner of the folder. After you have set these permissions, you should block parent permissions from propagating to the folder. Otherwise, everyone will be able to read anything in the user’s profile folder."
Why should I "make the user the owner of the folder"? Why can't I just leave it as the inherited administrator? What difference does it make anyway. Isn't the only purpose of "ownership" to give the administrator a means of reassigning permissions in a situation where the file is inaccessible?
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Thanks guys. That was a great help.
Administrators still have control over everything