XP network file appears with no owner

[Elko Tchernev]

Sometimes files I create/edit in a shared folder appear to have no
owner when accessed from other computers on the network. When this
happens, the files can be seen from the other computers, but cannot be
accessed/copied - the message that comes up is "access denied... etc.".
On the original computer, where the files reside, I can see no
difference between them and the other files - everything looks the same
- permissions, owners, attributes, etc. The difference manifests itself
only when accessing them from the network.
Copying the file on the local computer fixes the problem - the copy
can be accessed from the network, the original can't. Thus, it is not a
major problem but is highly annoying. What could be the reason for this,
and how to fix it?
My network is set-up as a workgroup, all computers use simple
file-sharing, some shared folders are read-only others are read-write
(makes no difference to the problem), the network settings are:

File and printer sharing - NWLink IPX/SPX/Netbios
Client for MS networks - NWLink IPX/SPX/Netbios and TCP/IP
NetBios over TCP/IP - enabled

(And no, don't even try to suggest to bind file sharing to TCP/IP - I
will NOT do that, ever).

Thanks for reading, and if you have any suggestions.

 

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

Sometimes files I create/edit in a shared folder appear to have no
owner when accessed from other computers on the network. When this
happens, the files can be seen from the other computers, but cannot be
accessed/copied - the message that comes up is "access denied... etc.".
On the original computer, where the files reside, I can see no
difference between them and the other files - everything looks the same
- permissions, owners, attributes, etc. The difference manifests itself
only when accessing them from the network.
Copying the file on the local computer fixes the problem - the copy
can be accessed from the network, the original can't. Thus, it is not a
major problem but is highly annoying. What could be the reason for this,
and how to fix it?
My network is set-up as a workgroup, all computers use simple
file-sharing, some shared folders are read-only others are read-write
(makes no difference to the problem), the network settings are:

File and printer sharing - NWLink IPX/SPX/Netbios
Client for MS networks - NWLink IPX/SPX/Netbios and TCP/IP
NetBios over TCP/IP - enabled

(And no, don't even try to suggest to bind file sharing to TCP/IP - I
will NOT do that, ever).

Thanks for reading, and if you have any suggestions.

Using more than one network protocol can cause problems with file
sharing. I can't imagine why you're so adamant about using IPX/SPX
instead of TCP/IP, but since you are, unbind TCP/IP from both "File
and Printer Sharing" and "Client for Microsoft Networks" on all
computers.

Try un-sharing and re-sharing the troublesome folder.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

 

[Elko Tchernev]

Using more than one network protocol can cause problems with file
sharing. I can't imagine why you're so adamant about using IPX/SPX
instead of TCP/IP, but since you are, unbind TCP/IP from both "File
and Printer Sharing" and "Client for Microsoft Networks" on all
computers.

Try un-sharing and re-sharing the troublesome folder.

Thanks for the suggestion, I will try it and disable all bindings
to TCP/IP. It will take a while to see if it works, because it happens
only rarely, and I'm not sure I know what sequence of actions causes it
- if any.
I didn't expect that more than one protocol might cause problems -
if that's the case, why did they allow more than one to be bound to a
service to begin with?

 

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

Thanks for the suggestion, I will try it and disable all bindings
to TCP/IP. It will take a while to see if it works, because it happens
only rarely, and I'm not sure I know what sequence of actions causes it
- if any.

You're welcome.

I didn't expect that more than one protocol might cause problems -
if that's the case, why did they allow more than one to be bound to a
service to begin with?

It might have had some useful purpose in Windows 95 and earlier
versions. In my experience, it can cause network access problems in
Windows XP.

BTW, Microsoft has dropped support for IPX/SPX in Windows Vista.
TCP/IP is the only available protocol for File and Printer Sharing.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

 

[Elko Tchernev]

You're welcome.

Except it didn't work. This time I paid attention, so the sequence
was as follows: I downloaded a file from a web site, by clicking on a
"download" link and then selecting Save (instead of Open). (The browser
was Firefox). The resulting file appeared to have no owner when observed
from another network computer, and could not be accessed from the
network. Other files, downloaded by the same browser, but saved from
direct links with a right click and choosing "save as", are perfectly OK
and can be accessed without problem. Could this be a Firefox problem,
and not a Win network problem? What could Firefox do differently in the
two cases? Again, on the computer where they reside, there is no
apparent difference between the attributes of the two kinds of files.

BTW, Microsoft has dropped support for IPX/SPX in Windows Vista.
TCP/IP is the only available protocol for File and Printer Sharing.

Argh. One of the several reasons I use IPX/SPX for file sharing is
that it doesn't go across the cable modem at home, and doesn't go across
the routers at work, so I don't have to reconfigure the network settings
on the laptop every time. That will no longer be the case in a
TCP/IP-only environment, notwithstanding the fact that some of my home
computers are still Win95 and 98, don't have a firewall, and would be
protected by a single defense only - the broadband router's firewall.

 

[Steve Winograd [MVP]]

Except it didn't work. This time I paid attention, so the sequence
was as follows: I downloaded a file from a web site, by clicking on a
"download" link and then selecting Save (instead of Open). (The browser
was Firefox). The resulting file appeared to have no owner when observed
from another network computer, and could not be accessed from the
network. Other files, downloaded by the same browser, but saved from
direct links with a right click and choosing "save as", are perfectly OK
and can be accessed without problem. Could this be a Firefox problem,
and not a Win network problem? What could Firefox do differently in the
two cases? Again, on the computer where they reside, there is no
apparent difference between the attributes of the two kinds of files.

What does "file appeared to have no owner" mean? What exactly do you
see that indicates that?

Perhaps the Firefox support forum can help:

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewforum.php?f=38

Argh. One of the several reasons I use IPX/SPX for file sharing is
that it doesn't go across the cable modem at home, and doesn't go across
the routers at work, so I don't have to reconfigure the network settings
on the laptop every time. That will no longer be the case in a
TCP/IP-only environment, notwithstanding the fact that some of my home
computers are still Win95 and 98, don't have a firewall, and would be
protected by a single defense only - the broadband router's firewall.

If you use a broadband router, TCP/IP doesn't go across the cable
modem. Your computers have non-routeable private IP addresses, so
they're not accessible by other Internet users via TCP/IP.

I think its fine to protect Win95 and 98 computers with just the
broadband router's firewall. The 9x versions don't have the attack
surface and vulnerabilities that the NT versions do. For example, 95
and 98 don't run the services that the Blaster worm can exploit in
unpatched 2000 and XP computers.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional Program
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com