Hiding shares with no permissions?

[dkraut]

How come Netware can do this but Windows cannot? A Netware zealot, I mean consultant! was in the other day telling me how much better Netware was than Windows. The only thing he had me on was that Netware shares are not even visible to the end user unless thay have rights to them. i.e, You share a folder named "Share" and under "Share", you have a Finance, IT, HR, Exec and Admin folder. These subfolders are only given rights to users in the respective groups. In Windows, an HR user will still see all other folders but in Netware they will only see the HR folder. I agree that this is a much cleaner and secure way to distribute share-points but it's hard for me to believe that Windows cannot do this?

Anyone?

 

[lmoe]

Put a $ at the end of the share name.

LMC
IT/MIS
"Never stop learning.

 

[bfralia]

As Imoe says, put a $ on the end of the sharename i.e., sharename$ and it becomes invisible. However, it's invisible regardless of whether the user has access or not. If you have access you have to know it's there to access it.

I use it specifically to hide non public folders like a users home folder. When you browse the computer in Network Neighborhood, you only see the more public shares.

 

[dkraut]

I knew someone was going to recommend the $ but that really isn't the same thing as what Netware does. The share$ will completely hide the share to everyone. What Netware does is different and better IMHO. It automatically hides the share from those that do not rights to it. Thx. Dave

 

[RobBentley]

Maybe submit this one to Microsoft, maybe a possible feature for longhorn? Visit Microsofts feedback website
at:

https://www.windowsserverfeedback.com/

Robert Bentley

SynergyworksHosting.co.uk
"reliable services at realistic prices

 

[Davetoo]

They still make Netware?

;-)

I'm Certifiable, not certified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

 

[RobBentley]

Netware? I don't understand your reply?
I was suggesting if you want the netware feature in
Windows Server, suggest it to M/S for a future server
version - such as longhorn.

Robert Bentley

SynergyworksHosting.co.uk
"reliable services at realistic prices

 

[Davetoo]

I wasn't responding to your post Robert, but rather to the OP.

I'm Certifiable, not certified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

 

[RobBentley]

Sorry, my mistake - im new to this!

Robert Bentley

SynergyworksHosting.co.uk
"reliable services at realistic prices

 

[dkraut]

They still make Netware?"

Yes and although 6.5 is slightly improved over 4.x, it still sucks but we have an IT Director that has lost all touch with reality. It's like Dilbert here, only worse!

 

[Davetoo]

lol. They had a Netware network running when I took over the network. If I remember correctly, it took me all of a day to discard Netware entirely and drop in a W2K Server in its place.



I'm Certifiable, not certified.
It just means my answers are from experience, not a book.

 

[mlichstein]

Microsoft has never had this feature, and I highly doubt they ever will. Security by obscurity is not security at all.

Hiding folders that users dont have access to is also highly inefficient. The system would need to scan the ACL of every file and folder in a share to determine if the user should see it or not. Since this would have to occur before the user even tries to access a file or folder, it would slow down file access.

 

[Clarksville]

Netware file sharing beats Windows in 3 areas.
1. is as mentioned in this posting where folders where a user has no access are invisible
2. the Netware Salvage utility, which is like an undelete utility for files on the server. Windows requires a third-party add-on product for this.
3. Netware made it easier to see a user or group's "effective" file permissions anywhere in the folder structure whether they were inherited from high level folders, obtained from group membership, or etc..

I do like the Volume copy shadow service in W2003 though.