[Samba] Share Permissions vs. Security
Marco Shmerykowsky
marco at sce-engineers.com
Sat Feb 6 02:56:58 UTC 2021
On 2/5/2021 10:23 AM, Stephen Atkins wrote:
> On 2/4/2021 3:15 PM, Marco Shmerykowsky via samba wrote:
>> Under "Setting up a Share Using Windows ACL's" in the
>> Sambawiki it states "You should only need to makes changes
>> to the Security Tab" and that the "Share Permissions
>> Tab should be set to Everyone:Full-Control,Change,Read.
>>
>> On my previous setup I had set the "Share Permissions"
>> to the MS Security Group that was allowed access to
>> the share. Everything seemed to work.
>>
>> Can someone explain the difference between the two
>> settings?
>>
>
> This is something I've been curious about also. Really wish Windows
> security settings where as easy as Linux was.
>
From what I've read today, I'm gathering that the
Security Tab allows for more nuanced settings with
respect to the permissions. Further it provides
"local" and "network" based settings/restictions
I guess a tangential question is whether there is a technical
reason for why the Sambawiki recommends setting the share
permissions to "Everyone:Full-Control,Change,Read"
It would seem if 1) you restricted a share to a single
security group, 2) there was never an intent to create
a "sub-share" and 3) there is effectively no "local"
access, then setting the "Share Permission"
would seem equally acceptable.
More information about the samba
mailing list