Search Results

Search found 4775 results on 191 pages for 'permissions'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 19/191 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • How to correctly setup home directories and permissions on a mounted partition.

    - by user36505
    I'm setting up a Fedora 12 server. I have a root (/) partition where the boot (/boot) partition is mounted and then a separate partition (/files) for separating home directories and shares away from the other partitions. The filesystem mounts fine and users can be created to have home directories in /files/home/[user] just fine. However, when I log in as one of those users, I get an error saying "Cannot chdir in to /files/home/[user]: permission denied". If I create a user under the default /home using the same process, everything works fine. The same goes for when I try and browse a share in windows; I can see the shares, but cannot access them. The permissions and owners on /files and /files/home are the same as /home. When the user is created, the user directory owner and permissions are also the same. How can I set the /files partition up so that it can be used as a home directory and for samba sharing rather than using the root (/) partition? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Changing read-write permissions on my external Seagate hard drive

    - by Anthony_JKenn
    I have an external hard drive (Seagate Free Agent) that I normally download files to. I have a dual boot Ubuntu 11.10 along with Windows 7-64 bit. I can read all of my files in my external HD perfectly, but when I attempt to do a download of a file to this drive, I get an "unable to write because of read only" disk error. When I attempt to change the permissions of the disk through the "Properties" bar, I still get an error that I don't have the proper permissions to change permissions. I have heard of "mounting" the disk, but I am afraid of mistakenly reformatting and destroying all the data that I have currently on that drive. How best should I safely change the permissions on that drive so that I can write and download files to the drive?? The drive is listed under /dev/sdc1.

    Read the article

  • Accessing or Resetting Permissions of a Mounted Registry Hive of a Different User / From a Different System

    - by Synetech
    I’m currently stuck using my backup system until I can replace my dead motherboard. In the meantime, I have put my hard-drive in this system so that I can access my files and keep working on the backup system. Fortunately, I don’t have a permission issues with the files (the partitions are FAT32). The issue I’m having is with the registry. I need to import some of my settings from the hives of my (old? normal?) installation of Windows into the one I’m currently using. Settings from the system hives (SYSTEM, SOFTWARE, etc.) are fine, but the user hive is giving me trouble. I’ve copied the NTUSER.DAT file from my other drive and mounted it with the reg command. Most of the keys (eg Software) are fine and I can access them without problem, but some of them (particularly the Identities key where Outlook Express settings are stored) complains that it cannot be opened. If I open the permissions dialog, I get an error about being unable to view the current permssions. If I then ignore it and try to take ownership of the key and it’s subkeys, I get an access-denied error. If I then add permissions for my user account on this system, I get an error, however I am then able to see the subkeys and values of the key. If I then try to access the subkeys, I get the same original errors. If I repeat the process for each subkey, I can see their values and subkeys, and so on, but of course this gets to be incredibly annoying and time-consuming (especially since the Identities key has a lot of subkeys). Is there an easier/temporary/more correct way to dump a key so that I can import it into my backup system?

    Read the article

  • What is "umask" and how does it work?

    - by Lekensteyn
    I believe that umask is something that controls file permissions, but do not fully understand it. After running umask 0644 in a terminal, I cannot read the files I create with the command-line text editor nano. I noticed that the permissions of that file are set to 0022 instead of the default 0755. How does umask work? I thought I could just remove the each digit in the umask from 0777, 7 - 6 = 1 and 7 - 4 = 3, so I expect the permissions to be 0133, but apparently, this is not the case. What is umask exactly? Explain it to me like I was a "Linux noob" How do I calculate with umask? What are use cases for umask?

    Read the article

  • Sign In With Facebook - Business Issues

    - by Joshiatto
    I've got an issue where this company wants to provide all sorts of whiz bang features to their users that require an insane number of facebook permissions for their FB app. Being that my name is going to be attached to this, I would rather give them a solution which allows for easy sign in and asks for the minimum permissions up front. This would give them a huge boost in registrations and activity publishing across the site with the potential to "go viral". If we ask for a ton of permissions up front I know for a fact we will not go viral and will probably incur much wrath from the blogosphere. What would you do?

    Read the article

  • forbidden foldername?

    - by j0h
    I have a little webserver i run to help me at work. in an effort to neaten up the internal bits, I made a forlder named "doc" for documents. When i try to navigate to that folder i get "You don't have permission to access /doc/ on this server." so then, i looked at the permissions. drwxrwxr-x 2 J0h J0h 4096 Nov 7 22:46 doc/ drwxrwxr-x 5 J0h J0h 4096 Nov 6 12:35 ece/ drwxrwxr-x 2 J0h J0h 4096 Nov 6 12:35 exe/ permissions of "doc" looks legit. ece/ and exe both work, and have the same permissions. So then I changed the name of the folder "doc" to "docs" and it works. So evidently the folder-name doc is a black listed folder name? is that right? what is going one here?

    Read the article

  • My user can't upload files to folders owned by www-data

    - by Thomas Gautvedt
    I think I have screwed up my permissions in Ubuntu. I am using my server to run PHP. I recently ran across a problem where PHP could not create directories in the var/www-directory, so I searched around on the internet. Now PHP can write and access anything like it should, but as a user, I can't create new folders or files anymore. Right now, the permissions for folders are like this: drwxrwsr-x 2 www-data www-data [Folders] This is the permissions when I upload using sftp: -rw-rw-r-- 1 gautvedt www-data [Folders] What have I done wrong and how can I change this?

    Read the article

  • How to bind old user's SID to new user to remain NTFS file ownership and permissions after freshly reinstall of Windows?

    - by LiuYan ??
    Each time we reinstalled Windows, it will create a new SID for user even the username is as same as before. // example (not real SID format, just show the problem) user SID -------------------- liuyan S-old-501 // old SID before reinstall liuyan S-new-501 // new SID after reinstall The annoying problem after reinstall is NTFS file owership and permissions on hard drive disk are still associated with old user's SID. I want to keep the ownership and permission setting of NTFS files, then want to let the new user take the old user's SID, so that I can access files as before without permission problem. The cacls command line tool can't be used in such situation, because the file does belongs to new user, so it will failed with Access is denied error. and it can't change ownership. Even if I can change the owership via SubInACL tool, cacls can't remove the old user's permission because the old user does not exist on new installation, and can't copy the old user's permission to new user. So, can we simply bind old user's SID to new user on the freshly installed Windows ? Sample test batch @echo off REM Additional tools used in this script REM PsGetSid http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897417 REM SubInACL http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=23510 REM REM make sure these tools are added into PATH set account=MyUserAccount set password=long-password set dir=test set file=test.txt echo Creating user [%account%] with password [%password%]... pause net user %account% %password% /add psgetsid %account% echo Done ! echo Making directory [%dir%] ... pause mkdir %dir% dir %dir%* /q echo Done ! echo Changing permissions of directory [%dir%]: only [%account%] and [%UserDomain%\%UserName%] has full access permission... pause cacls %dir% /G %account%:F cacls %dir% /E /G %UserDomain%\%UserName%:F dir %dir%* /q cacls %dir% echo Done ! echo Changing ownership of directory [%dir%] to [%account%]... pause subinacl /file %dir% /setowner=%account% dir %dir%* /q echo Done ! echo RunAs [%account%] user to write a file [%file%] in directory [%dir%]... pause runas /noprofile /env /user:%account% "cmd /k echo some text %DATE% %TIME% > %dir%\%file%" dir %dir% /q echo Done ! echo Deleting and Recreating user [%account%] (reinstall simulation) ... pause net user %account% /delete net user %account% %password% /add psgetsid %account% echo Done ! %account% is recreated, it has a new SID now echo Now, use this "same" account [%account%] to access [%dir%], it will failed with "Access is denied" pause runas /noprofile /env /user:%account% "cmd /k cacls %dir%" REM runas /noprofile /env /user:%account% "cmd /k type %dir%\%file%" echo Done ! echo Changing ownership of directory [%dir%] to NEW [%account%]... pause subinacl /file %dir% /setowner=%account% dir %dir%* /q cacls %dir% echo Done ! As you can see, "Account Domain not found" is actually the OLD [%account%] user echo Deleting user [%account%] ... pause net user %account% /delete echo Done ! echo Deleting directory [%dir%]... pause rmdir %dir% /s /q echo Done !

    Read the article

  • How can I reset the permissions of /bin /boot /etc and /dev to orignal owner, Ubuntu?

    - by Camsoft
    I accidentally changed the ownership of the /bin, /boot, /etc and /dev recursively to nobody:nogroup using chown when I misplaced a forward slash! How can I resort the original file ownerships? I've managed to get them all to root:root but I'm not sure if all the files should be owned by root and if this will break something? Is they are option to fix file permissions like there is in OS X? Help!

    Read the article

  • Backing up files on ubuntu for reinstall. Will there be problems with permissions?

    - by adam
    I have some very important files I want to backup before I reinstall my Ubuntu back to 9.04 from the 9.10 (its causing me all sorts of problems). The files total size is small so im just going to copy them over to Dropbox. Im wondering, when i reinstall Ubuntu and copy them back will there be any issues re the permissions of those files because my old user account which created them and the new user Ill setup on the new install will be different?

    Read the article

  • How do I preserve ownership permissions when copying to an external volume?

    - by Yitzchak
    When I upgrade or reinstall linux I backup my home folder by running sudo cp -pr /home/users/yitzchak /media/externalHDD/backups. When I do this I get errors saying that permissions could not be preserved and when I copy the folder back onto my local disk I see that ownership has been changed to root and I have to chown all of them back, which has to be done manually piecemeal because not all files have the same group. Is there any way around that?

    Read the article

  • How to (re)enable the "New" context menu items for an administrator when right-clicking in a folder and selecting New > X?

    - by Metro Smurf
    I just migrated from XP x86 to Win7 x64 (clean install). I had a couple of data drives in my XP x86 system that I physically moved to my Win7 x64 system. When browsing a directory in any of the transferred drives, the only option available in the 'new' context menu is "Folder", i.e., Right-Click inside a folder New Folder (this is similar behavior for Win7 when using the context menu in c:\Program Files): However, whenever creating a new folder within any of the directories, all the context menu new items are available within the new folder: Steps I've taken that have failed to add the new context menu items: Removing all security permissions from a directory and sub-directories. Replacing them with new permissions. As well as removing inheritable permissions from the parent. Taking explicit ownership of a directory and sub-directories. Combing the above two. Sample of Effective Permissions that do not work: Steps I've taken that have succeeded to add the new context menu items: Adding the "Everyone" group to the drive and giving the group explicit "Modify" privileges. Giving the "Everyone" group explicit privileges smells wrong. I'm an administrator on my system; why should I have to add the "Everyone" group as well? Adding my username to the drive and giving full permissions. Again, since I'm an administrator on my system and the administrators group already has full control of the drive/directories/folders, why should I have to explicitly add my user name to the security permissions? Finally, The Question: Is it possible to have the New Item context menu have all available options by default without having to explicitly add the everyone group or a specific user name to the security permissions? I'm suspecting that the option may not be available unless the username is explicitly added to the security permissions. Of note: I've seen the registry hacks for updating the new items context menu; my preference is to avoid such hacks and return the functionality to the expected behavior an administrator should have.

    Read the article

  • TFS 2010 Subfolder Permissions

    - by gmcalab
    I am a TFSAdmin and when I have a TFS project in which a subfolder needs specific permissions to deny some users. So, I right click on the folder in question hit Properties, and click the Security tab. There I select the Windows User or Group radio, then click Add. I put in the AD User that I want specific permissions for and hit Check Names. That resolves, so I click OK. Next, I select the permissions to Allow or Deny below in the Permissions for list. I hit OK. The permission are honored by TFS, this user no longer has PendChange permissions and I was expecting. The odd thing is, I was expecting to be able to go back into the Security tab and see that User in the list of Users and Groups and see the current state. But the list is always empty. Not sure why, but the permissions are definitely being honored, I can re-add the user with different permissions and those are also honored. Any ideas why the current users are not showing up in the Users and Groups list under the Security tab for a folder's properties? I also used the tf permission $\... to see if there were any permissions but it always returns There are no permissions set for this item (Inherit: Yes)

    Read the article

  • How to set root public folder permissions in Exchange 2010.

    - by DanieL
    I am currently running Exchange Server 2010 on Windows Server 2008 R2. I have a user that I would like to be able to create/delete public folders in the root public folder. How do I give this user permission to do this? So far I have tried adding the user to the Public Folder Management, Domain Admins, and Administrators groups, and running the following scripts in the powershell: Add-PublicFolderAdministrativePermission -Identity "\" -User "Username" -AccessRights AllExtendedRights -InheritanceType SelfAndChildren This appears to have done something, but the user still cannot create public folders in the root public folder. AddUsersToPFRecursive.ps1 -toppublicfolder \ -User "Username" -Permissions Owner This gives me an access denied error. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • The eval(base64_decode()) virus has infected a server. Would removing executable permissions help solve the issue?

    - by Bravo.I
    The eval(base64_decode()) has infected a server. This is a PHP virus that uses the eval function in PHP and replicates itself to all the PHP files on the system as far as I'm certain. Would removing executable permissions help solve the problem?! Please answer really fast, and also, if you've got any better ideas on how to stop this virus.. I'm all ears. The virus has replicated itself to several folders in the directory and most of the other folders are actually several other websites...

    Read the article

  • Unix users and permissions and how they interact with web files.

    - by Columbo
    Hello, When you issue the command ls in Linux you get this sort of thing: drwxr--r-- 1 fred editors 4096 drafts -rw-r--r-- 1 fred editors 30405 file1.php -r-xr-xr-x 1 fred fred 8460 file2.php I know that the rwxrwxrwx are the read, write and execute permissions for the current user. And I think I know that 'fred' is the user who owns the file. So I assume fred can write to file1 but no one else can. But what is the extra bit 'editors' and what is the difference between file1 and file2 with respect to one having an ownership of 'fred editors' and the other 'fred fred'? Also if a web user connects to one of the files, what is their user name and where is this decided? If the server decided that user connecting from the web was going to be fred, does this mean any web user could write to file1? Any information welcomed, I am resaerching this but just getting confused. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to hide folders/subfolders from users based on permissions?

    - by Uwe Keim
    Having a Windows Server 2008 R2 that has a share with lots of nested folders, I want to be able to only show certain folders to certain AD users/AD user groups. Is it possible to configure the permissions on single folders, so that clients that connect with Windows XP/Windows 7 to the share on the Windows 2008 R2 server only see those folders for which they have "view" permission? Other clients should not see the folders at all in Windows Explorer. I was told that this seems to be a standard feature on Novell networks.

    Read the article

  • Easy way to restrict permissions in an elementary school computer lab?

    - by Andrew
    I'm putting together an elementary school computer lab. I have nine winxp pro machines that are not networked and do not have internet access (no money to do either). I've created separate student and admin accounts, and have the students set as limited users. However, I'm interested in further restricting their permissions. I want to make it such that they cannot: -delete any files, even just from their own profile -rename any files -move around the icons on the desktop -change any display settings -access a usb device without a password (they bring in their own from home which are chock-full of viruses) Oh, one last thing, they still have to be able to save word documents. Is this even possible? I can download software, but, like I said: no internet, no server.

    Read the article

  • How do I force specific permissions for new files/folders on Linux file server?

    - by humble_coder
    I'm having an issue with my install of Ubuntu 9.10 (file server) and its samba permissions. Logging in and reading works fine. However, creation of new directories by users restricts access for other users. For instance, if Bob (Windows user who maps the drive) creates a folder in the directory, Jane (Mac user that simply smb mounts) can read from it, but can't write to it -- and vice versa. I then must go CHMOD 777 the directory for everyone to be happy. I've tried editing the "create/directory mask", and "force" options in the smb.conf file but this doesn't seem to help. I'm about to resort to CRONTABing a recursive chmod routine, although I'm sure this isn't the fix. How do I get all new items to always be 777? Does anyone have any suggestions to fix this ever-occurring situation? Best

    Read the article

  • Is giving read permissions on /etc/shadow to apache user a wise decision from security point of view?

    - by Czar
    I have to use PAM authentication for DAV SVN, but when everything is configured as specified in mod_auth_pam documentation, authentication does not work. After some research I realized, that for this to work, httpd should be running under root user (which I don't like and won't implement) or apache user (under which httpd is running by default) should have permissions to read /etc/shadow file. So there is a pair of questions connected to each other which I want to ask: Is giving this permition to apache user a wise decision from security point of view? If answer to the first question is "yes", what is the correct way to do so? For now I've done following: groupadd shadow usermod -G shadow apache chmod g+r /etc/shadow Another way I can come up with is using acl: setfacl -m u:apache:r /etc/shadow Note: OS is Fedora 14 x86_64 (kernel: 2.6.35.11) httpd v2.2.17 mod_auth_pam v1.1.1

    Read the article

  • On Windows Server 2003, permissions are not propagating to a group that is a member of a group

    - by Joshua K
    Windows Server 2003 on i386. FTP server is running as the SYSTEM user/group. Some files we want served (read and write) are owned by the group 'ftp.' ftp has full read/write/whatever permissions on those files and directories. SYSTEM can't read/write those directories. So, I added SYSTEM to the 'ftp' group. Windows happily complied, but even after restarting Filezilla, it still could not read/write those files. Is there any way to do what we want without "re-permissioning" all those files? Running the ftp server as 'ftp' isn't really an option because it also serves files that are owned by SYSTEM (And not ftp). Sigh... :) Any insights?

    Read the article

  • Recursively apply ACL permissions on Mac OS X (Server)?

    - by mralexgray
    For years I've used the strong-armed-duo of these two suckers... sudo chmod +a "localadmin allow read,write,append,execute,\ delete,readattr,writeattr,readextattr,writeextattr,\ readsecurity,writesecurity,chown" sudo chmod +a "localadmin allow list,search,add_file,add_subdirectory,\ delete_child,readattr,writeattr,readextattr,\ writeextattr,readsecurity,writesecurity,chown" to, for what I figured was a recursive, and all-encompassing, whole-volume-go-ahead for each and every privilege available (for a user, localadmin). Nice when I, localadmin, want to "do something" without a lot of whining about permissions, etc. The beauty is, this method obviates the necessity to change ownership / group membership, or executable bit on anything. But is it recursive? I am beginning to think, it's not. If so, how do I do THAT? And how can one check something like this? Adding this single-user to the ACL doesn't show up in the Finder, so… Alright, cheers.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >