"James Rankin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/09/2008 09:51:23 AM:
> I've always found fileacl to be a bit more reliable than subinacl is > now...I think the comment earlier on about broken versions of > subinacl is dead right.... Perhaps. But this is the latest version of SubInACL; I have verified (twice) that I have downloaded the latest and supposedly "non-broken" version. I'll go poking around FileACL, then. Thanks. ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
