Re: Default NTFS permissions too liberal on newly created volumes
- From: "BerkHolz, Steven" <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:21:54 -0500
A rule of thumb that I use is when making a new folder off the root of the drive, to be used as a share, I remove the inheritance
flag and set the permissions as I want.
--
--
Steven
May you have the peace and freedom that come from abandoning all hope of having a better past.
--- - --- - - - - - - - -- - - - --- - ------ - - --- - - -- - - - -- - - -
"Mike M" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:OxMXcj8HGHA.140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Windows 2003 SP1 server here...
>
> I created a folder called "public" under the z:\ drive, shared it as "public", and verified that all users in my department had
> read-only permissions via a certain group. All seemed well until I saw legit data folders popping up in this shared folder that
> was allegedly read-only save for the admins. The user was able to create folders and files in the public share that was supposed
> to be read-only!!!
>
> Well...
>
> It seems to me that configuring a secondary volume, named as Drive Z:, brings liberal permissions to the root of the drive for the
> USERS group. Drilling down into the advanced security settings window shows 3 separate entries for the local-server\USERS group:
>
> --Read & Execute, This folder, subfolders and files
> --Create Folders/Append Data, This folder and subfolders
> --Create Files / Write Data, Subfolders only
>
> I looked at the other servers that we've built and all have the same all-too-liberal permission settings for the USERS group. It
> seems to me that USERS can do everything but delete files by default.
>
> Why is Microsoft allowing the USERS group such liberal permissions by default? It was a no-brainer to remove the EVERYONE group
> to tighten things up, but this issue seems to make things more difficult to lock-down security on file servers. Am I missing
> something???
>
>
> TIA,
> Mike
>
>
>
.
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Windows Server 2003 Security Guide 2.0
- Next by Date: Suggestions
- Previous by thread: Re: Default NTFS permissions too liberal on newly created volumes
- Next by thread: DoS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|