Hi.

I'd like to check whether security groups that are defined in Active are
used in files/folders security. Are there command line tools to search
folders recursively for security attributes (ACLs)?

Thanks for any hint/suggestion.

Vicne C.

Is this what your looking for:

for /f "skip=3 tokens=5*" %i in ('dir /a:d') do cacls "%i %j"

Note: The last line by the command will allways give this error:
C:\>cacls "free "
The system cannot find the file specified.


"Vince C." wrote:

> Hi.
>
> I'd like to check whether security groups that are defined in Active are
> used in files/folders security. Are there command line tools to search
> folders recursively for security attributes (ACLs)?
>
> Thanks for any hint/suggestion.
>
> Vicne C.
>
>

the last command only does directories. this does directories,
subdirectories, and files:

for /f "tokens=*" %%i in ('dir /a /s /b') do cacls "%%~dpnxi"


"Royce" wrote:

> Is this what your looking for:
>
> for /f "skip=3 tokens=5*" %i in ('dir /a:d') do cacls "%i %j"
>
> Note: The last line by the command will allways give this error:
> C:\>cacls "free "
> The system cannot find the file specified.
>
>
> "Vince C." wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > I'd like to check whether security groups that are defined in Active are
> > used in files/folders security. Are there command line tools to search
> > folders recursively for security attributes (ACLs)?
> >
> > Thanks for any hint/suggestion.
> >
> > Vicne C.
> >
> >

"Royce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:BB1A95B5-1662-4634-86D5-(E-Mail Removed)...
> the last command only does directories. this does directories,
> subdirectories, and files:
>
> for /f "tokens=*" %%i in ('dir /a /s /b') do cacls "%%~dpnxi"

Nice, but that does not do much that this does not do:

cacls *.* /t

.... unless you search the output of each cacls command looking for a
specific trustee name...


/Al

> "Royce" wrote:
>
> > Is this what your looking for:
> >
> > for /f "skip=3 tokens=5*" %i in ('dir /a:d') do cacls "%i %j"
> >
> > Note: The last line by the command will allways give this error:
> > C:\>cacls "free "
> > The system cannot find the file specified.
> >
> >
> > "Vince C." wrote:
> >
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > I'd like to check whether security groups that are defined in Active
are
> > > used in files/folders security. Are there command line tools to search
> > > folders recursively for security attributes (ACLs)?
> > >
> > > Thanks for any hint/suggestion.
> > >
> > > Vicne C.
> > >
> > >

Your absolutely right! Thanks Al, I apparently overlooked that.

"Al Dunbar [MS-MVP]" wrote:

>
> "Royce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:BB1A95B5-1662-4634-86D5-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > the last command only does directories. this does directories,
> > subdirectories, and files:
> >
> > for /f "tokens=*" %%i in ('dir /a /s /b') do cacls "%%~dpnxi"
>
> Nice, but that does not do much that this does not do:
>
> cacls *.* /t
>
> .... unless you search the output of each cacls command looking for a
> specific trustee name...
>
>
> /Al
>
> > "Royce" wrote:
> >
> > > Is this what your looking for:
> > >
> > > for /f "skip=3 tokens=5*" %i in ('dir /a:d') do cacls "%i %j"
> > >
> > > Note: The last line by the command will allways give this error:
> > > C:\>cacls "free "
> > > The system cannot find the file specified.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Vince C." wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to check whether security groups that are defined in Active
> are
> > > > used in files/folders security. Are there command line tools to search
> > > > folders recursively for security attributes (ACLs)?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for any hint/suggestion.
> > > >
> > > > Vicne C.
> > > >
> > > >
>
>
>

Le samedi 12 novembre 2005 à 12:08 -0700, Al Dunbar [MS-MVP] a écrit :
> "Royce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:BB1A95B5-1662-4634-86D5-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > the last command only does directories. this does directories,
> > subdirectories, and files:
> >
> > for /f "tokens=*" %%i in ('dir /a /s /b') do cacls "%%~dpnxi"
>
> Nice, but that does not do much that this does not do:
>
> cacls *.* /t
>
> ... unless you search the output of each cacls command looking for a
> specific trustee name...

Which is exactly what I want :-). Thanks Royce & Al.

Note the /t is said to *change* ACLS (cacls /?). Can it also be used to
just *list* recursively?

Vince C.

The /t alone will just list ACLs.

"Vince C." wrote:

> Le samedi 12 novembre 2005 Ã* 12:08 -0700, Al Dunbar [MS-MVP] a écrit :
> > "Royce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:BB1A95B5-1662-4634-86D5-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > the last command only does directories. this does directories,
> > > subdirectories, and files:
> > >
> > > for /f "tokens=*" %%i in ('dir /a /s /b') do cacls "%%~dpnxi"
> >
> > Nice, but that does not do much that this does not do:
> >
> > cacls *.* /t
> >
> > ... unless you search the output of each cacls command looking for a
> > specific trustee name...
>
> Which is exactly what I want :-). Thanks Royce & Al.
>
> Note the /t is said to *change* ACLS (cacls /?). Can it also be used to
> just *list* recursively?
>
> Vince C.
>
>

"Royce" <(E-Mail Removed)> a écrit dans le message de news:
BF14FFE2-20E9-4BFE-83DE-(E-Mail Removed)...
> The /t alone will just list ACLs.
>

Would be nice if the help mentionned that instead of just about the
"change". It's misleading.

Vince C.

"Royce" <(E-Mail Removed)> a écrit dans le message de news:
BB1A95B5-1662-4634-86D5-(E-Mail Removed)...
> the last command only does directories. this does directories,
> subdirectories, and files:
>
> for /f "tokens=*" %%i in ('dir /a /s /b') do cacls "%%~dpnxi"

This one is what I'm looking for. But the output of cacls is awful as it
can't be directly processed into Excel, for instance. It can't even be
treated like a space-separated list of values because spaces can occur in
file or folder names. Neither is there a common delimiter/position to each
"column".

Ok, it's more than nothing but I'd have expected an output format that is
easier to process. I think I'll have to write a custom script to transcode
to CSV.

Vince C.

"Vince C." <(E-Mail Removed)> a écrit dans le message de news:
(E-Mail Removed)...
> Ok, it's more than nothing but I'd have expected an output format that is
> easier to process. I think I'll have to write a custom script to transcode
> to CSV.

.... or use a windows port of GNU utilities. I think I've got it.

Thanks again.

Vince C.