|
Posted by Anthony [MVP] on April 1, 2008, 9:02 pm
Please log in for more thread options
I agree,
Anthony,
http://www.airdesk.co.uk
> We typically permit folders to groups where the folder name is either that
> of the group or something quite arbitrary. If we were going to acquire
> company ABC, a folder as suggestive as "Imminent Acquisition of ABC" might
> exist, but would most likely be placed within a folder permitted to allow
> only those authorized to see it.
>
> Our typical user does not realize that he can determine the access rights
> of others to files he maintains on a share. Why anyone would create such a
> sensitively named folder in a folder in which others may see some of the
> contained folders, I have no idea.
>
>
> /Al
>
>> Its a good question. It is one of those things that has been the case for
>> a long time. I guess it is really only a problem if you use folder names
>> like "Imminent Acquisition of ABC". I am guessing it uses a lot of
>> resources to enumerate the access before displaying the tree,
>> Anthony,
>> http://www.airdesk.co.uk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> That sure looks like it will do the job. I wonder why MS doesn't just
>>> include it as part of the OS.
>>>
>>> Todd
>>>
>>>> Hi Todd,
>>>> That's Access Based Enumeration, ABE.:
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/techinfo/overview/abe.mspx
>>>> Anthony,
>>>> http://www.airdesk.co.uk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> We recently migrated from a Netware environment and are having some
>>>>> issues with the differences between how Netware and Windows handle
>>>>> file and folder permissions. We have a top level folder that everyone
>>>>> has access to, and subfolders with restricted permissions. In
>>>>> Netware, if there were 50 subfolders, but you only had access to 2 of
>>>>> them, when you browsed to the subfolder level, you would only see 2
>>>>> folders. In Windows, even though you may not be able to open the
>>>>> files inside, you still see all 50 folders. Is there any way to
>>>>> configure permissions in Windows to get behavior more like we had in
>>>>> Windows?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
|