Preventing other users from seeing my files

Hi,
I'm not exactly a UNIX person but the below folder:
drwx------ 8 myfolder staff 272 Dec 27 17:34 myid
Should only be readable by myself (myid) right? I see no group permissions. So why are other users able to navigate into this folder and see its contents?
Thanks,
Brandon
Message was edited by: bmm727

Done - but it doesn't seem to be that different.
togoshis-MacBook-Pro:~ myid$ ls -ladeO myfolder
drwx------ 8 myid staff - 272 Dec 27 17:34 myfolder
I did notice that other folders which MacOS sets up as not readable by other users (e.g. - folders in the user directory) have a permission more like this:
drwx------+
I'm not sure what the trailing '+' represents.
Oh and Happy New Year all.

Similar Messages

  • Cannot lock the page to prevent other users from editing it. Please try again later. Error with ASP pages

    Cannot lock the page to prevent other users from editing it.
    Please try again later.
    I get t his error when I try to edit ASP pages on my web
    server, I have all admin rights, anyone know a fix for this?

    App Store support. There is troubleshooting and a contact link.
    Support

  • DNS "A" Record Preventing Networked Users from Seeing Own Website

    I just set up a DNS "a" record in Server Admin to point "mail.xyz.com" to my server's internal ip (10.0.1.1).
    I did this so users could stay on the network with sending and receiving mail, as opposing to going out onto the web to do so. (I have MX records on Network Solutions point "mail.xyz.com" to my server's external ip.) All of their mail clients list "mail.xyz.com" as the mail server, instead of the server's internal ip.
    Trouble is, when users on the network try to access our website, "xyz.com," their browsers now return an error, saying they cannot find the server.
    Any idea?
    Lost count   Mac OS X (10.4.9)  

    Steve and David --
    This works. I am using Server Admin. To reiterate, I
    added a zone "mysite.com" and a primary server "mail"
    and pointed it at my server's internal ip so my users
    can stay "inside" while checking mail.
    Then, to follow your suggestion, I added a machine
    named "www" to zone "mysite.com" pointed to my
    server's external ip.
    Some questions: How can I be sure the client's
    machines are going interally to the server for mail?
    (When I dig it in terminal, "mail.mysite.com" returns
    an "a" record for the server's internal ip -- I
    suppose that is sufficient.)
    Yep!
    Should the primary name server for the zone be "mail"
    with "www" as an added machine, or vice versa?
    The primary name server just identifies the machine which is responsible for holding records for that zone (domain). Add www as a 'machine' - think of each 'machine' as a specific IP address which identifies a host, hence IP / Name partnership. Any other hostname on same IP is an 'alias' (which becomes a CNAME record in the dns file).
    You say I have to do this with "any record hosted in
    my public dns as a mirror." I am running three
    websites from my server, all with public dns pointed
    at my server. (I use the same mail
    server--mail.mysite.com--for all three.) Do I need to
    set up a "www" record for each website? I have no
    problem accessing the sites from internal client
    machines.
    the basic issue is that any zone (domain) defined in your own dns becomes 'authoritative' for that domain. So when clients ask your internal dns about any zone (domain) which is defined in it, and your server does not have that record, it will respond with "no such record" and your clients must take that on face value.
    Therefore, you only need to mirror records for domains which you have defined in your own dns. If you have external www.domain1.com and www.domain2.com but only have domain1.com established on your internal dns, then you only need that domain's www record mirrored. Your server will therefore not be authoritative for domain2.com and will pass all requests out to whichever external dns is authoritative for it.
    -david

  • When I logoff & click close button for OWA , I don't get message w/ IE. "To complete logoff process & prevent other users from opening your mailbox, you must close all browser windows and exit browser application." Result is - I don't logout.

    Mozilla Firefox 4.o Beta 3
    Windows XP SP3

    Clear the cookies from that website to get logged off.
    Remove Cookies, use the search bar or click the [[Site Identity Button]] on the location bar and go to "View Cookies" via the More Information button in the pop-up.
    * Tools > Options > Privacy > Cookies: "Show Cookies"
    You are running an old Firefox 4.0 beta 3 version.<br />
    Any reason why you haven't installed the Firefox 4.0 release?
    * http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html

  • How to prevent the User from loading more than one seq file?

    Hi,
    I would like to prevent the tester operator from loading more than one test sequence.  Any ideas how to do it?
    Thanks
    Rafi

    Hi Marty,
    Marty_H wrote:
    Hello mhousel,
    Testexec.exe by default loads the sequence files that were last open when it runs.  It is often desired behavior to have multiple sequence files load automatically. 
    [Mark Housel] Maybe for some but certainly not for me. 
    This should be easily handled by TestStand without any problems.  What do you mean by "chaos ensues"? 
    Certainly Teststand doesn't care a bit how many sequences are open.  But, when my sequences open they initialize HW of the ATE associated with
    that sequence file during the sequenceFileLoad callback.  e.g. I allocate TELNET handles to a terminal
    server that connects to multiple console within the system and als for
    the UUT.
    If a second sequence opens it knows nothing about the other sequence and again tries to open a TELENT session to the same port of the
    terminal server and obviously fails, so my sequence reports that it
    can't properly initialize the ATE HW.  Bad juju!
    Are your sequence files set to run automatically when they are loaded?
    I guess so.  Other than the trick of logging in as the special noExecution user and having special code in my sequence and modified Process Model I have no idea how to prevent a sequence fronm "runnin" when opened.
    If you want to prevent Testexec.exe from loading multiple files, you should be able to close out one of the open files when it loads and that sequence file should not load in the future.  I hope that helps.
    The trick I read somewhere else of modifying the Testexec.uir file to never re-load a sequence file automatically seemes to have covered up solved the problem.
    Thanks,
    Mark

  • I'm using "window.open()" to show one Calendar in a popup window. I can see that the popup is re-sizable. How can I prevent the user from re-sizing the popup?

    I'm using "window.open()" to show one Calendar in a popup window. I can see that the popup is re-sizable. How can I prevent the user from re-sizing the popup? I have tried "resizable=yes|no|1|0" and that seems to be not working.

    You can't prevent users from resizing a pop-up.
    *https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/window.open

  • How to prevent other users to send mails from SAP?

    Hi,
    Our test system is a copy of the prod.  We could not deactivate the mail job because it is also used by solution manager.  So how can we prevent other users to send mails from SAP? 
    thanks,
    krbas

    Hi K Bas,
    Then I will suggest trying this option out. In SCOT select the node for SMTP (depending on if you are using standard SAP node). Double click and a push button will come Now in the pop you will have option for Internet with a push button SET besides. Please go there. In the next screen you will find a filed for Address area. Now in this field give the value as *.sap.com
    Using address area you can decide to which e-mail addresses is the mail sent to. Since the OSS message will go to <abc>@sap.com that is why I have suggested to use *.sap.com
    I mean if you want that mails should be sent via SAP only yahoo mail accounts then you will give value as *.yahoo.com only. Same thing needs to be applied for SAP.
    Try this out and let me know.
    Please award points if solved.
    Regards.
    Ruchit.

  • Prevent Mac users from opening a PDF form in Preview

    When I create an AcroForm, it does not behave the same when someone fills it out in Preview, and when I receive the completed form back from them, some of the information in the form fields is missing.
    Is there a way to prevent Mac users from opening the form in Preview? Or to give them a message that the form needs to be filled out using Reader?

    You can't stop them doing it (except by standing next to their computer with a heavy stick).
    You could consider having a large field on the page warning that the file is not to be used (or whatever), which is hidden using Acrobat JavaScript.
    Be aware that we are now dealing with a very large set of PDF readers.
    Included with computers: Mac OS Preview, Windows Reader.
    Included with browsers: Chrome, Firefox.
    Included with portable devices.
    Anyone who gets a computer these days in fact gets a PDF viewer which is bad with forms. You need to give them a compelling reason to download extra software. (Or, frankly, give up on PDF forms. I think their day has passed for a general audience who could fill in a browser form).

  • How do i prevent the user from entering a RETURN/ENTER key into their username?

    Hello,
    i am currently trying to make a login system where the
    username will obviously enter their username.
    I have made my user input box editable and set up variables
    to accept the user input and store them into variables, along with
    error prevention for blank fields.
    However i cannot prevent the user from hitting the
    "enter"/"return" key. When i hit "enter" the user input box box
    gets larger as the type curser moves onto the next line and when
    the username is stored in a variable it is stored as "theuser
    RETURN" so when variable is passed to the next frame and is
    recalled by another text box to display the username, the user name
    has a carriage return.
    I want to prevent this, anyone got any suggestions? or know
    of any websites i can visit which will explain this to me nicely??
    Thank you

    suggestion:
    don't make the edit field editable right from the start.
    rather attach a behaviour to the field/text-sprite like:
    property mySprite, myMember
    on beginsprite me
    Sprite = me.spritenum
    -- this is the channel-number of the editbox
    myMember = mySprite.member.number
    -- this is the field/text-member
    member(myMember).editable = FALSE
    end beginsprite
    on mouseup me
    -- when i get clicked for editing, then set me editable
    member(mymember).editable = TRUE
    the keydownscript = "MyKeyhandler"
    -- this sets the keyhandler to YOUR keyhandler, see below
    end mouseup
    You would then need to have YOUR keyhandler in any mociesript
    and there you
    would block any unwished key, while editing
    on MyKeyhandler
    case the key of
    RETURN:
    stopevent;
    otherwise
    pass;
    end case
    end MyKeyhandler
    in the end you would attach a behaviour to any
    "Submit"-button (this is the
    one that "gets" the userinput" and performs further action
    according to your
    wishes and decisions)
    on mouseup
    the keydownscript = EMPTY
    -- this resets to normal
    user-ID = member("Whatever the number or name of your
    editfield
    is").text
    member("Whatever the number or name of your editfield
    is").editable
    = FALSE
    -- any further actions to make in your project
    -- to get along with the entered User-ID
    end mouseup
    something like this, I guess
    Peter

  • How to prevent certain users to see only certain resource objects

    Hello OIM Experts,
    How to prevent certain users to see only resource objects request-able based on their user profile
    Employees :
    Employee A: Finance staff
    Employee B: IT staff
    Resource Objects :
    Resource Object 1 : Oracle E business suite
    Resource Object 2 : Payment Gateway
    Resource Object 3 : Server X
    Resource Object 4 - 10 : Customer Service Applications.
    Expected :
    Employee A only see and able to request Resource Object 1 & Resource Object 2, while employee B only see and able to request Resource Object 3.
    And they are not able to see and request Resource Object 4 - 10.
    Can that be done, if so please suggest some ways, appreciate the help.
    Regards,

    Hey, you can do this through Organizations. Follow the following steps:
    1) Create an Organization say 'Finance Staff' and put all the users for this category in this organization.
    2) In the similar fashion create another Organization say 'IT staff' and put all the users for this category in this organization.
    3) Now open Organization details for above two and select the 'Permitted Resources' drop down frm additional details.
    4) Assign the resources as per your requirements for these two oragnizations.
         Finance Staff -> 'Permitted Resources' -> 'Oracle E business suite' and 'Payment Gateway'
         IT Staff -> 'Permitted Resources' -> 'Server X' and '10 : Customer Service Applications'
    5) Also remember to de-select the 'Allow All' check box in the respective resources above to discourage everyone from requesting and making a decision for allowing the user to create requests through organizations.
    You are done.
    regards
    Sunny
    Edited by: rajsunny on Oct 13, 2009 11:27 PM

  • Prevent a user from modifying

    Hi,
    Is thr any way to prevent a user from performing DML Operation?

    you need to make sure the user has the correct privileges. for DML you separately GRANT the following privileges SELECT, UPDATE, INSERT, DELETE. They can then be granted to a user either directly or to a role that is granted to the user.
    for further details see the DBA Administration Guide, section users, grants , privileges
    regards

  • How to prevent multiple users from updating the same data in coherence

    Hi,
    I have a Java Web Application and for data cache am using coherence 3.5. The same data maybe shared by multiple users which maybe in hundreds. Now how do I prevent multiple users from updating the same data in coherence i.e. is there something in coherence that will only allow one user a time to update. If one user is in a process of updating a data in coherence and some other user also tries to update then the second user should get an error.
    Thanks

    I have a question on the same line. How can I restrict someone from updating a cache value when I a process is already working on it. I tried locking the cache key but it does not stop other process to update it , it only does not allow other process to get lock on it.

  • Prevent multiple users from editing/approving the same form SPD 2013,SP 2013

    Hello all, I have a workflow with a to do task, the task is assigned to a group so any of the users in that group can go in and do a quality check on form data and approve it.  How do I prevent multiple users from working on the
    same form? do I just require check out? or is there a way to notify the rest of the group that a user has already started the quality check.

    The "Require Checkout" option is your best bet.  You can also enable the auto checkout on edit option to allow minimal effort on the side of the user.  Other users will then get the error message stating the item is checked out, if they try to
    edit it.
    If you'd like, you could add a workflow to the task list that triggers when something is changed.  That workflow can check if the item is checked out and if so, email the other users assigned to the task.
    I trust that answers your question...
    Thanks
    C
    |
    RSS |
    http://crayveon.com/blog |
    SharePoint Scripts | Twitter |
    Google+ | LinkedIn |
    Facebook | Quix Utilities for SharePoint

  • Prevent multiple users from updating coherence cache data at the same time

    Hi,
    I have a web application which have a huge amount of data instead of storing the data in Http Session are storing it in coherence. Now multiple groups of users can use or update the same data in coherence. There are 100's of groups with several thousand users in each group. How do I prevent multiple users from updating the cache data. Here is the scenario. User logs-in checks in coherence if the data there and gets it from coherence and displays it on the ui if not get it from backend i.e. mainframe systems and store it in coherence before displaying it on the screen. Now some other user at the same time can also perform the same function and if don't find the data in coherence can get it from backend and start saving it in coherence while the other user is also in the process of saving or updating. How do I prevent this in coherence. As have to use the same key when storing in coherence because the same data is shared across users and don't want to keep multiple copies of the same data. Is there something coherence provides out-of-the-box or what is best approach to handle this scenario.
    Thanks

    Hi,
    actually I believe, that if we are speaking about multiple users each with its own HttpSession, in case of two users accessing the same session attribute in their own session, the actually used cache keys will not be the same.
    On the other hand, this is probably not what you would really like, you would possibly like to share that data among sessions.
    You should probably consider using either read-through caching with the CacheLoader implementor doing the expensive data retrieval (if the data to be cached can be obtained outside of an HTTP container), or side caching with using Coherence locks or entry-processors for concurrency control on the data retrieval operations for the same key (take care of retries in this case).
    Best regards,
    Robert

  • How to prevent a user from entering characters into a number field

    How do you prevent a user from entering characters like A or B into a field that is defined as a numeric field?
    Please note that
    - we use block validation (for other reasons)
    - we are not able to convert these numeric fields to character fields
    We want to avoid a user being hasseled with the FRM-40209 ... message.
    This message is
    - not very helpfull because it does not inform us what the problem field is
    - not suppressable
    Any hints ?

    I went back to the drawing board on this one.
    You are absolutely right : the message can be catched !
    By writing an on-error trigger you can check for the error number. Sadly enough my first attempt on this used the on-message trigger which never fired hence my desperation.
    Anyway, the on-error trigger in combination with :SYSTEM.CURRENT_ITEM or :SYSTEM.TRIGGER_ITEM enables me to display a more meaningfull message to my users.
    Thanks for the hint.

Maybe you are looking for