Re: Sample security Code is not working!

I have not taken a look at the sample code.

However, I have my own logic to manipulate security descriptors (See my exchange package - but the version on the net (0.95) is flawed - it will not order the security descriptor correctly when groups are added).

I have fixed that in the current version. The thing is - currently, I am ordering the anonymous group together with normal users - that is, it may end up between two groups.

Up to now, I haven't ran into any issues with the systems manager.

Best regards,
Henning Krause

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my website: http://www.infinitec.de
Exchange access library - http://www.infinitec.de/software/nettoolbox/infinitec.exchange.aspx


"Raj" <Raj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:23E27345-C7C5-4E2C-9391-A71482683182@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Henning,

I also had the same feeling but why sample security code is breaking ESM if
there are valid DLs as members!
I think, the format used by sample security code is like this

User1: Allow
User1: Deny
User2: Allow
User2: Deny
DL1: Allow
DL2: Allow
DL3: Allow
Anonymous : Allow
DL1: Deny
DL2: Deny
DL3: Deny
Anonymous : Deny
EveryOne: Allow

Correct me if I am wrong. Is it possible for you to check what really
happening in your end with sample code.


Thanks

Rajesh



"Henning Krause" wrote:

AFAIK, well known groups (albeit the Everyone and Anonymous) are handled
equally to normal groups.

Best regards,
Henning Krause

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my website: http://www.infinitec.de
Exchange access library -
http://www.infinitec.de/software/nettoolbox/infinitec.exchange.aspx


"Raj" <Raj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1C66D931-0A7E-4821-895A-036743785AFF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi Henning,
>
> Please check for me. Thanks...
>
> also I tried this and working fine
>
> User1: Allow
> User1: Deny
> User2: Allow
> User2: Deny
> Anonymous : Allow
> Anonymous : Deny
> DL1: Allow
> DL2: Allow
> DL3: Allow
> DL1: Deny
> DL2: Deny
> DL3: Deny
> EveryOne: Allow
>
> I dont know how to order other well-know groups?(if any exists)
>
> Thanks again
> Regards
>
> Rajesh
> "Henning Krause" wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> well, if it does not break ESM, then it is certainly correct :-)
>>
>> I will look into this this evening...
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Henning Krause
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Visit my website: http://www.infinitec.de
>> Exchange access library -
>> http://www.infinitec.de/software/nettoolbox/infinitec.exchange.aspx
>>
>>
>> "Raj" <Raj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:49BDB5AA-2C52-461A-8086-AA3D3D4E8D85@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > HI Henning,
>> >
>> > odd and even means same
>> > DL1: Allow
>> > DL2: Allow
>> > DL3: Allow
>> > DL1: Deny
>> > DL2: Deny
>> > DL3: Deny
>> >
>> > but what about anonymous? If i consider anonymous as a DL, ESM >> > breaks!
>> > Sample security code do the same isnt it?
>> >
>> > So I cahnged ordering like this
>> >
>> > Anonymous : Allow
>> > Anonymous : Deny
>> > User1: Allow
>> > User1: Deny
>> > User2: Allow
>> > User2: Deny
>> > DL1: Allow
>> > DL2: Allow
>> > DL3: Allow
>> > DL1: Deny
>> > DL2: Deny
>> > DL3: Deny
>> > EveryOne: Allow
>> >
>> > Is that right?
>> >
>> > Thanks for the response
>> >
>> > Rajesh
>> > "Henning Krause" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> what do you mean with odd mask and even mask?
>> >>
>> >> DL must be ordered first by allow mask and then deny mask
>> >>
>> >> User1: Allow
>> >> User1: Deny
>> >> User2: Allow
>> >> User2: Deny
>> >> DL1: Allow
>> >> DL2: Allow
>> >> DL3: Allow
>> >> DL1: Deny
>> >> DL2: Deny
>> >> DL3: Deny
>> >> EveryOne: Allow
>> >>
>> >> Best regards,
>> >> Henning Krause
>> >>
>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> Visit my website: http://www.infinitec.de
>> >> Exchange access library -
>> >> http://www.infinitec.de/software/nettoolbox/infinitec.exchange.aspx
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Raj" <Raj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> news:B3C8564B-DE29-4680-9033-845687356761@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > Please help me on this. I am not able to move forward . If Dls >> >> > are
>> >> > members
>> >> > of
>> >> > the folder, I can update folder but getting 'Window handle
>> >> > exception'
>> >> > when
>> >> > try to add/update folder permission using ESM. This is format I >> >> > use
>> >> > to
>> >> > write
>> >> > user, groups and well know groups
>> >> >
>> >> > 1. Sort First Users Second Groups and Alias, third others(well
>> >> > knowns)
>> >> > and
>> >> > last '/Everyone'
>> >> > 2. Clean Masks
>> >> > 2. Create user's SD for each mask
>> >> > 3. Create Group, Alias, and Well know groups(except 'everyone') >> >> > SD
>> >> > for
>> >> > each
>> >> > even mask
>> >> > 4. Create Group, Alias, and well know groups(Except 'everyone') >> >> > SD
>> >> > for
>> >> > each
>> >> > odd mask
>> >> > 5. Create SD for 'Every one' for all mask...
>> >> >
>> >> > Any problem in that ordering?
>> >> >
>> >> > Please help.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks in Advance
>> >> >
>> >> > Rajesh
>> >> >
>> >> > "Raj" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> After updating a folder member (only DL ) using sample code
>> >> >> provided
>> >> >> in
>> >> >> Exchange SDK, tried to update the same folder using ESM and got
>> >> >> WIndows
>> >> >> handle exception!. If no group present in the folder, i am able >> >> >> to
>> >> >> update
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> folder member without any issue! any one face same issue? what
>> >> >> might
>> >> >> be
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> problem?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Could you please send me Latest LoadSaveDacl.js file and
>> >> >> Security.js
>> >> >> file
>> >> >> ....
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Rajesh
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>



.

Loading