rdowling
asked on
share-level security without drive mappings
I would like to utilize a password protected share on a Win95 machine (from a NT4W) by copying a file directly to the appropriate UNC name. This is necessary because a couple of dozen such processes will be running concurrently and I would quickly run out of drive mappings. Though this would work fine if the shares weren't password protected, I can't seem to find the correct syntax for submitting the password. Can this be done? If not, any other ideas on how to get around the drive mapping limitations?
P.S. - Please don't answer with "this can't be done". Such an answer is entirely useless. An working substitute is desired. Thanks.
P.S. - Please don't answer with "this can't be done". Such an answer is entirely useless. An working substitute is desired. Thanks.
ASKER
Actually, I am very much aware that it may be the correct answer to the initial question. However, In the last sentence, I asked for alternative solutions if that were the case. I was just trying to keep some jerk from locking the question by telling me that it couldn't be done. I would not consider that an answer worthy of awarding points since I am looking for a solution; not a "yes" or "no".
ASKER
Actually, I am very much aware that it may be the correct answer to the initial question. However, In the last sentence, I asked for alternative solutions if that were the case. I was just trying to keep some jerk from locking the question by telling me that it couldn't be done. I would not consider that an answer worthy of awarding points since I am looking for a solution; not a "yes" or "no".
I don't know the answer to your question one way or the other. It may be possible, maybe not.
I just think it's bad form for a questioner to say "I won't accept no for an answer."
I just think it's bad form for a questioner to say "I won't accept no for an answer."
You can create an account on NT that would have the same username as the account logged on interactively on Windows 95 and synchronize their passwords. That may do the trick.
I can't do that. But ther is a solution if you have a NT server or Netware Server:
on the win95 machine, go to network settings/"Access Control" tab. Select "User-Level Access control" then write your domain or server name in the field.
after restarting your win95 computer, you can select groups/users and their access rights for the appropriate shares.
on the win95 machine, go to network settings/"Access Control" tab. Select "User-Level Access control" then write your domain or server name in the field.
after restarting your win95 computer, you can select groups/users and their access rights for the appropriate shares.
You can do it with net use \\computername \user:domainname\username password
Type net use /? for information.
Mario
Type net use /? for information.
Mario
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Each "net use ..." will occupy one drive mapping. Will it be problem to you, rdowling?
ASKER
Beautiful! I was not aware of this. This allows me to authenticate to the system without wasting a mapping. The batch file resides on my personal workstation in a secured area so placing passwords in it is not an issue.
I have make the same comment Tim exept that I don't have say to map the IPC$
Mario
Mario
You're right Mario - it establishes an IPC connection anyway !
Lermitte should get the points !
You presuppose that every question has a positive answer. This is not the case and often "it cannot be done" _IS_ the correct answer!