Bill Kendrick said: > On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 01:58:45PM -0700, Richard Crawford wrote: >> A user came to me today and told me that he was unable to open or edit >> a couple of his files. I went in to look and saw that the permissions >> on the files in question were set to 000, so that the directory entry >> looked like this: >> >> ---------- 1 joe webdev 152 Aug 13 15:27 img1.jpg >> ---------- 1 joe webdev 152 Aug 13 15:28 img2.jpg >> >> I went ahead and reset the permissions to 766 but I'm puzzled as to >> what could have caused this change to happen in the first place. > > Err, shouldn't that be "644" or "664" for these files? > > 766 would mean: > > Owner: Read/Write/Exec > Group: Read/Write > Other: Read/Write > > Exec doesn't make much sense for a JPEG. And Read/Write for Other is > probably not a good idea. For Group, it depends on if others in > 'webdev' want to be able to edit the file (which I'm guessing is true). > > > I'd also check the permissions of the directories these files are in > ("ls -ld .") > > Sensible permissions would be 755, 775, 700, or 770, depending on the > situation. (The first two make sense for stuff you want people to see > over the web, so that your webserver process can read them. The second > two make sense for more private stuff. And, as before, the group > permissions depend on the situation, and the group ownership of the > file/dir in question.) > > Hope I'm not telling you a bunch of junk you already know, simply due to > a typo, or something. ;)
Heh. Yeah, my brain was elsewhere. I'm using 775. I'm still curious as to why the permissions were mysteriously changed. -- Sláinte, Richard S. Crawford (AIM: Buffalo2K) http://www.mossroot.com http://www.stonegoose.com/catseyeview "You cannot trust your judgement if your imagination is out of focus." --Mark Twain _______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech