password x for read, password y for write

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Hi,

I would like to set up a bunch of shares as follows:
1) readable/writable by everyone
2) readable by everyone, but only a select few can write
3) only a select few can read and write

I have a mixture of windows XP professional (my "server") and windows XP
home (my "clients").

I tried to follow the instructions for disabling SFS and setting up groups
and users, but this doesn't seem to work.

1) I setup a share which should only be readable by everyone, but is
writable by a select few, and yet I can log into a test account which isn't
in the access list and modify the contents of the folder.
2) I setup a share which should only by readable/writable by a single
person, but if I log in using the same user/pass on the client I can't access
this share. I tried to change the location when adding the user name such
that it would be from the client computer but only the server computer
appeared in the locations list. I seem to be able to access my client just
fine.

I have been reading these posts for a few hours on and off, and the more I
read the more frustrated I become. It seems like windows 95/98 were so much
easier to set up and use than windows xp. It was really simple to decide
which shares you wanted to be open to everyone, which shares you wanted to
protect with a read password, and which shares you wanted to protect with a
write password. With windows XP I have to do all kinds of funky work
arounds. Why would microsoft take a step backward with ease of use? I am
dumbfounded as to the reason.

BTW, buying MS server is not an option. The heck if I am going to pay over
$350 for something I could get for free before. I'll invest my time and
energy into a linux solution before I shell out $350 for a 5 user license.

Sorry for the flame.
 
Hi,

I would like to set up a bunch of shares as follows:
1) readable/writable by everyone
2) readable by everyone, but only a select few can write
3) only a select few can read and write

I have a mixture of windows XP professional (my "server") and windows XP
home (my "clients").

I tried to follow the instructions for disabling SFS and setting up groups
and users, but this doesn't seem to work.

1) I setup a share which should only be readable by everyone, but is
writable by a select few, and yet I can log into a test account which isn't
in the access list and modify the contents of the folder.
2) I setup a share which should only by readable/writable by a single
person, but if I log in using the same user/pass on the client I can't access
this share. I tried to change the location when adding the user name such
that it would be from the client computer but only the server computer
appeared in the locations list. I seem to be able to access my client just
fine.

I have been reading these posts for a few hours on and off, and the more I
read the more frustrated I become. It seems like windows 95/98 were so much
easier to set up and use than windows xp. It was really simple to decide
which shares you wanted to be open to everyone, which shares you wanted to
protect with a read password, and which shares you wanted to protect with a
write password. With windows XP I have to do all kinds of funky work
arounds. Why would microsoft take a step backward with ease of use? I am
dumbfounded as to the reason.

BTW, buying MS server is not an option. The heck if I am going to pay over
$350 for something I could get for free before. I'll invest my time and
energy into a linux solution before I shell out $350 for a 5 user license.

Sorry for the flame.
Click to expand...

Windows XP is based on Windows NT and 2000, not on Windows 95 and 98.
As you've discovered, control of shared file access works differently
in NT/2000/XP than in 95/98:

1. Windows XP doesn't have passwords for shared files.

2. XP Professional controls access based on permissions that you
define and on the user name and password of the person who requests
access.

3. Permissions can only be defined for local user accounts that exist
on the XP Professional computer. If a user account on another
computer matches a local user account, it gets the permissions for the
local account.

XP Professional's shared file access control is much more flexible and
powerful, but harder to set up, than Windows 95/98. Have you seen the
web site that Ron Lowe and I wrote? It has full details and
illustrated examples of creating shares, defining share permissions,
and accessing shares from other computers:

Windows XP Professional File Sharing
http://www.practicallynetworked.com/sharing/xp_filesharing/index.htm

I'll be happy to answer questions about it.
 
Thank you very much for the walk through. I think that what was messing me
up was the "everyone". I had set full access for a particular user, but
instead of simply removing the "Everyone" I had just set it to deny
everything. I guess that XP pro looked at the ACL, saw that everyone was
denied and that my blessed user was a member of everyone, and so denied
access. When I removed the "Everyone" but left the blessed user everything
started to work correctly.

I agree that Windows XP professional is much more powerful than 95/98, it is
just frustrating to figure out everything all over again. Thank goodness for
all of you folks who take time to anser questions from the masses!

Dave
 
Thank you very much for the walk through. I think that what was messing me
up was the "everyone". I had set full access for a particular user, but
instead of simply removing the "Everyone" I had just set it to deny
everything. I guess that XP pro looked at the ACL, saw that everyone was
denied and that my blessed user was a member of everyone, and so denied
access. When I removed the "Everyone" but left the blessed user everything
started to work correctly.

I agree that Windows XP professional is much more powerful than 95/98, it is
just frustrating to figure out everything all over again. Thank goodness for
all of you folks who take time to anser questions from the masses!

Dave
Click to expand...

You're welcome, Dave! I'm glad that you got everything to work.
 
Back
Top