Selfhosted

60967 readers

925 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

Be civil.
No spam.
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
Submission headline should match the article title.
No trolling.
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

curbstickle@anarchist.nexus

curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world

Why allow "everyone" to have read write permission? (kb.synology.com)

submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by hardful9856@programming.dev to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://kb.synology.com/en-global/DSM/tutorial/Docker_container_cant_access_the_folder_or_file#x_anchor_idcd3f1170a3

Why allow "everyone" to have read write permission to shared folders in order to run container manager? Wouldn't this be insecure?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

To add to this, SMB implementations on Linux today simply respect the archaic model MS developed for LAN Manager (Windows 3.1, 1980's), before Windows had local user permissions (NT 3.51 mid 90's).

MS saw share permissions as a mechanism to provide admins some level of control for the small networks.

Once NT became the standard in business, we started ignoring share permissions and just letting file system permissions manage everything (since that could be managed via domain credentials).

It's a whole lot easier and more secure to manage Groups in the Domain than a bunch of share permissions, and they're lots more granular.

So we're stuck with share permissions though they're not all that useful - so most people (everyone?) simply ignore them and use just file system perms, which you have to manage even without shares.

TL:DR Share perms are a legacy thing and can simply be set to everyone read/write