T
Tom Rodman
How can we "zip up" or tar
users' directories to a single archive file. We
do NOT want to limit the access rights end users can assign to their
objects. After archiving the objects into to a single
tar or zip file we want to be able to restore them preserving
original ownership and ACLs.
We've tried granting ourselves the right to
"backup files and directories"
"restore files and directories"
The show-stopper has been "Permission denied" errors on files
for which we have no access rights - these could not be added to
the tar archive.
We're looking for a no cost solution using our free open source tools. My
guess is the solution involves granting the process
creating the backup file archive the proper rights.
Clearly ntbackup can do this- but it only archives to tapes;
if ntbackup could archive/restore to/from a file that would be
fine - but it can not.
why we do not want to restrict the permissions our end
users assign to their own objects:
o eventually there will be users that violate the rules, and or insist
that they be allowed to do so. This can get
political - you can not / will not always win political skirmishes.
System admins are not always treated like gods by management.
o IMHO users may have a valid reason for *not* granting the administrators
access to an object. Why should they be forced to? Our users are software
developers, perhaps they need to have very strict permissions for code test
cases. End users deserve respect, they pay for us with their work.
o This attitude that user's should not be able to permissions to objects
they own to what ever they want is IMHO arrogant, arrogant consistent
with the worst of "Microsoft culture". In contrast UNIX has no such
constraints - tools exist for "root" to backup all objects to a non-tape
archive regardless of their permissions or acls.
o I can give you a specific example where a production database requires a
all objects below a given directory have an explicit ACL value
that does *not* include system or administrators. If an object is
changed to include either of the above groups, then the application
will not work- at some point it will self repair by resetting all
the permissions on the tree so that these groups are removed.
o another example is cygwin's ssh client, for each ssh end user, their
$HOME/.ssh/ dir should be set for access *only* by the user, no access - not
even read or execute to anyone else. I may not be entirely correct
on this one, but I know the permissions on ~/.ssh/ are quite strict
by design (it's a "secure shell" after all).
o NTFS has an incredibly rich permissions capability - more so than UNIX.
To insist that administrators or system have full control to every object
"dumbs down" this richness and seems to contradict it's design.
Any help would be appreciated; pls post *and* also e-mail me.
thanks/regards,
users' directories to a single archive file. We
do NOT want to limit the access rights end users can assign to their
objects. After archiving the objects into to a single
tar or zip file we want to be able to restore them preserving
original ownership and ACLs.
We've tried granting ourselves the right to
"backup files and directories"
"restore files and directories"
The show-stopper has been "Permission denied" errors on files
for which we have no access rights - these could not be added to
the tar archive.
We're looking for a no cost solution using our free open source tools. My
guess is the solution involves granting the process
creating the backup file archive the proper rights.
Clearly ntbackup can do this- but it only archives to tapes;
if ntbackup could archive/restore to/from a file that would be
fine - but it can not.
why we do not want to restrict the permissions our end
users assign to their own objects:
o eventually there will be users that violate the rules, and or insist
that they be allowed to do so. This can get
political - you can not / will not always win political skirmishes.
System admins are not always treated like gods by management.
o IMHO users may have a valid reason for *not* granting the administrators
access to an object. Why should they be forced to? Our users are software
developers, perhaps they need to have very strict permissions for code test
cases. End users deserve respect, they pay for us with their work.
o This attitude that user's should not be able to permissions to objects
they own to what ever they want is IMHO arrogant, arrogant consistent
with the worst of "Microsoft culture". In contrast UNIX has no such
constraints - tools exist for "root" to backup all objects to a non-tape
archive regardless of their permissions or acls.
o I can give you a specific example where a production database requires a
all objects below a given directory have an explicit ACL value
that does *not* include system or administrators. If an object is
changed to include either of the above groups, then the application
will not work- at some point it will self repair by resetting all
the permissions on the tree so that these groups are removed.
o another example is cygwin's ssh client, for each ssh end user, their
$HOME/.ssh/ dir should be set for access *only* by the user, no access - not
even read or execute to anyone else. I may not be entirely correct
on this one, but I know the permissions on ~/.ssh/ are quite strict
by design (it's a "secure shell" after all).
o NTFS has an incredibly rich permissions capability - more so than UNIX.
To insist that administrators or system have full control to every object
"dumbs down" this richness and seems to contradict it's design.
Any help would be appreciated; pls post *and* also e-mail me.
thanks/regards,