|
Home > Archive > i-NET+ > December 2000 > Simple Q...
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
|
| 1 Q. Which is more restrictive:
A. share-level access
B. user-level access
Thanks...
[This message has been edited by Sol (edited 12-04-2000).] | |
|
| quote:
Originally posted by Sol:
Q. Which is more restrictive:
A. share-level access
B. user-level access
Thanks...
Going out on a limb here but i'll say
B. User-Level Access
MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, A+, NET+
| |
|
| quote:
Originally posted by hand:
Going out on a limb here but i'll say
B. User-Level Access
MCP, MCP+I, MCSE, A+, NET+
Most definitely right. Share level is an all or nothing deal: you have full control or you get zip.
User-level will give you the two afore-mentioned options, but also Read, Change, Delete, Execute, etc...
------------------
Freak, MA, M.Ed., Net+,I-Net+, MCP+I, MCSE, MCT
http://www.mcsefreak.com
Industry News - Free Prep Tests - Study Guides - Exam Drill - Choices - Forum
WebMaineacs.com
Web Hosting - web design - Web Strategies - Networking - hosting from only $8 a month! | |
|
| Not too acurate there Freak. Share level and User level are both secure, they are just used in different situations. User level requires a server, where share level is used in peer to peer networks. User level will does give more options, but that does not alter the security of the read only option, and if a user does not have a password, they cannot access the file via the network. Keep in mind, both user and share protection only work accross the network. If the user logs on locally and the partition is formated in FAT, there is no protection what so ever. The only way to give local security is to use NTFS (for windows ) or use EXT2 or similar format for Linux/Unix. |
|
|
|
|