On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 04:52, Chris Chabot wrote:
> > but that suggests mounting everything umask=0, which, if I understand
> > it, makes everything world readable and writable. I would like something
> > just a *little* bit more secure than that.
>
> The problem is that vfat has no group/user knowledge, so there is no easy
> way (that i know of) to use all the security features you are used to when
> using ntfs (under nt/2000/xp) or unix file systems (ext2/3,xfs,jfs,etc).
> vfat is a 'legacy' file system that dates back a long time and was optimised
> for speed & restrictions at the time rather then advanced features.
But, the kernel can "emulate" those features by passing arguments either
to `mount' or by putting them in `/etc/fstab'. That's what umask, fmask,
and dmask do. My problem was that I was misunderstanding the octal
values those are given. See Michael's reply to my original and my reply
to Michael.
> G'luck & please include a thanks for ppl who take the time to help please,
> they'll apreciate it ;-)
I was always try to, and try to repay the help I get on mailing lists
and newgroups by being helpful when I can. For some reason, however,
many of my posts to this list have simply disappeared into the aether -
neither bouncing back or ever appearing on the list.
Thanks for the help!
Best, Darren
--
=====================================================================
D. D. Brierton darren@xxxxxxxxxxx www.dzr-web.com
Trying is the first step towards failure (Homer Simpson)
=====================================================================
