CREATOR OWNER is a special role more than an actual account, and the reason it is usually blank is because the actual "account" doesn't own anything or have control of anything, but is a proxy for the actual creator or owner.
A common example is a user folder where you set the following rights: EVERYONE - MODIFY CREATOR OWNER - FULL CONTROL If Joe creates a document, and you check the ACL, it will look like: EVERYONE - MODIFY CREATOR OWNER - blank, as you noted JOE - FULL CONTROL and OWNER I may be glossing this a bit, but that's the basic gist. -- Durf On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 12:43 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've had some exposure/experience with Unix and linux, so this is very > puzzling to me... > > Why is it that, for file/folder permissions in my XP Pro systems, there is > this critter, "CREATOR OWNER", who has no permissions? From what I've > read at TechNet, "C/O" has full permissions for a number of folders, > including "Program Files" and "Documents and Settings" (the complete > sub-path for each of them) as well as some others. > > Anyway, could someone please explain to me Microsoft's conception of > "owner"? > > Either this is something completely different from "owner" in x-nix > systems, or all permissions are unchecked because "C/O" already has full > permsissions and so the boxes need not be checked. (If this is the case, > then, why are they checked for Administrators?) > > Thanks! > -------------------------------------- > Richard McClary, Systems Administrator > ASPCA Knowledge Management > 1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL 61802 > 217-337-9761 > http://www.aspca.org > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > -- -------------- Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks! ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
