Re: Still Read-only
From: Roger Abell (mvpNOSpam_at_asu.edu)
Date: 10/23/03
- Next message: Drew Cooper [MSFT]: "Re: write-protection"
- Previous message: Drew Cooper [MSFT]: "Re: Ctx_WinStation_API_service"
- In reply to: Thrasy: "Re: Still Read-only"
- Next in thread: KC: "Still Read-only"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 18:45:31 -0700
"Thrasy" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:011201c398c1$1916caa0$a401280a@phx.gbl...
> Thank you Roger.
>
> After reading your last post and playing a bit, I see and
> understand what's going on now. Thanks for your help and
> patience in explaining it!
>
No problem.
This one seems to mislead and confuse many ;-)
Thanks for not misunderstanding "that is how it is"
as simply a smart-a** wisecrack.
--ra
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >You did nothing wrong, and nothing you do during
> >or after an install of XP or W2k3 will make things
> >turn out any differently.
> >
> >That is how XP and W2k3 are.
> >Having this checkbox behave that way does not
> >imply anything other than that the system is behaving
> >as it was designed to behave.
> >
> >The checkbox in the properties of XP and W2k3
> >folders that says Read-Only does not control the
> >read-only attribute of the folder. It is a switch
> >that can be used to set or unset the attribute on the
> >files contained within the folder.
> >
> >The NT family of operating systems does not use
> >the Read-only attribute for much, but it does
> >obey its meaning. In the NT family most access
> >is controlled by use of permissions within the
> >NTFS filesystem. File attributes, like read-only,
> >are inherited from earlier DOS based systems.
> >NT family mostly only uses attributes for marking
> >system and hidden system files. File attributes
> >and file permissions are different things. If you
> >have security concerns it is the permissions that
> >you should be dealing with.
> >
> >If you want to get at the read-only attribute of
> >folder objects, you must use the old attrib command
> >in a cmd prompt.
> >--
> >Roger Abell
> >Microsoft MVP (Windows Server System: Security)
> >MCSE (W2k3,W2k,Nt4) MCDBA
> >"Thrasy" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message
> >news:05b301c3985b$90079dd0$a601280a@phx.gbl...
> >> "That is how it is" really doesn't help me understand
> how
> >> it got that way, how to change it, or what else that
> >> having the system in this condition might imply.
> >>
> >> I am obviously concerned about the system's security
> and
> >> understanding what change in permissions or policy
> >> settings could possibly cause this type of behavior
> would
> >> further shed light on the security implications related
> >> to this behavior.
> >>
> >> Since my original post, I have had discussions with
> >> several people who, in the process of taking interest
> in
> >> my post, discovered similar behavior on their own
> >> installations. Yet, none of these people could give any
> >> reason that this behavior exists or should exist. They
> >> merely noted that it didn't seem to cause them
> problems.
> >>
> >> Of all of my concerns, the most interesting to me right
> >> now is how have these settings survived multiple
> >> reformatings and reinstallation, even on seperate
> >> partitions.
> >>
> >> I do not recall there being any option in the XP Pro
> >> installation that would allow me to come even close to
> >> creating this kind of thing.
> >
> >
> >.
> >
- Next message: Drew Cooper [MSFT]: "Re: write-protection"
- Previous message: Drew Cooper [MSFT]: "Re: Ctx_WinStation_API_service"
- In reply to: Thrasy: "Re: Still Read-only"
- Next in thread: KC: "Still Read-only"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
