Administrator can't access user files on network share
- From: "K. Abit" <sendtothegrouponly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 11:05:12 -0700
I hope this is the best group for this issue. I can't see any better ones.
So I'm the administrator on the DC. I created a share folder "S" for
employees on a small network, using 2003 Server DC. Employees are using
2000 Pro and XP Home and XP Pro. Each has a user account on the server, of
course, but obviously the XP Home machines are not joined to the domain
because XP home can't do that.
Certain users were allowed into certain folders, and I did not change the
Administrators group inheritance settings.
But somehow users would copy files to those folders, or make new subfolders,
and suddenly I couldn't access them when I was logged in as an administrator
on the server itself (same with using a client with an admin group logon).
I know that I could take ownership of the files, but I don't want to do that
as it might affect those users' future permissions and abilities with those
files.
I just want to understand what inheritance thing I should or shouldn't so
that I don't get locked out of files. I've tried all kinds of things but
only just made a big mess so I don't even know what settings to tell you I
have in place right now. I just want to learn what settings I should have
in place so I don't get locked out of users' files and folders.
Example folder structure:
S (the folder name being shared)
Billing (only the billing staff group + Admins should have access)
Sales (only the sales group + Admins)
So when user John Smith, who is in the billing group, adds files and folders
inside his "S:\Billing" path, then I get an access denied error when I click
on them from the server. I need to make sure I have access for all future
files and folders he creates.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Data information on name conflict ID 4319
- Next by Date: Our high end SQL server cluster is maxed out, how else to expand? Will it help to move tables off of the cluster onto other clusters or will that just create processing bottleneck on the cluster running SQL server?
- Previous by thread: Data information on name conflict ID 4319
- Next by thread: Our high end SQL server cluster is maxed out, how else to expand? Will it help to move tables off of the cluster onto other clusters or will that just create processing bottleneck on the cluster running SQL server?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
