Mixing
why can't i have permission in that group which i already in?
I am already a member of the group "aid_sdcard_rw":
android@localhost:~$ whoami
android
android@localhost:~$ groups
android aid_radio ...... aid_sdcard_rw ......
you can see that i am already in group aid_sdcard_rw. Then, when i
access directory /storage/sdcard0 :
android@localhost:~$ ls /storage/sdcard0/
ls: cannot open directory '/storage/sdcard0/': Permission denied
but:
android@localhost:~$ ls -l /storage/
total 8
d---rwxr-x 17 android aid_sdcard_rw 8192 1月 1 1970 sdcard0
doesn't group "aid_sdcard_rw" members have read permission?
why is this Permission denied happened?
The system i run is an ubuntu 16.04 and running in my android phone using
an app called Linux Deploy, and my phone have external sd card inserted :
Welcome to Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (GNU/Linux 3.4.5 armv7l)
* Documentation: https://help.ubuntu.com/
Ubuntu 16.04 LTS [running via Linux Deploy]
The directory /storage/sdcard0 is my external sd card mount directory(see the last line below):
android@localhost:~$ cat /etc/mtab
/dev/loop1 / ext4 rw,relatime,data=ordered 0 0
proc /proc proc rw,relatime 0 0
sys /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
tmpfs /dev tmpfs rw,nosuid,relatime,mode=755 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts rw,relatime,gid=5,mode=620 0 0
tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs rw,relatime 0 0
/dev/block/vold/179:97 /storage/sdcard0 vfat rw,dirsync,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1015,fmask=0702,dmask=0702,allow_utime=0020,codepage=cp437,iocharset=iso8859-1,shortname=mixed,utf8,errors=remount-ro 0 0
I have tried umount /storage/sdcard0 and remount it with option -o umask=0000 , but command ls -l /storage get same result as above.
ubuntu permissions mount
edited Jan 8 at 13:29
Kusalananda
127k16239394
asked Jan 8 at 12:19
zeyang yuezeyang yue
211
add a comment |
I am already a member of the group "aid_sdcard_rw":
android@localhost:~$ whoami
android
android@localhost:~$ groups
android aid_radio ...... aid_sdcard_rw ......
you can see that i am already in group aid_sdcard_rw. Then, when i
access directory /storage/sdcard0 :
android@localhost:~$ ls /storage/sdcard0/
ls: cannot open directory '/storage/sdcard0/': Permission denied
but:
android@localhost:~$ ls -l /storage/
total 8
d---rwxr-x 17 android aid_sdcard_rw 8192 1月 1 1970 sdcard0
doesn't group "aid_sdcard_rw" members have read permission?
why is this Permission denied happened?
The system i run is an ubuntu 16.04 and running in my android phone using
an app called Linux Deploy, and my phone have external sd card inserted :
Welcome to Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (GNU/Linux 3.4.5 armv7l)
* Documentation: https://help.ubuntu.com/
Ubuntu 16.04 LTS [running via Linux Deploy]
The directory /storage/sdcard0 is my external sd card mount directory(see the last line below):
android@localhost:~$ cat /etc/mtab
/dev/loop1 / ext4 rw,relatime,data=ordered 0 0
proc /proc proc rw,relatime 0 0
sys /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
tmpfs /dev tmpfs rw,nosuid,relatime,mode=755 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts rw,relatime,gid=5,mode=620 0 0
tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs rw,relatime 0 0
/dev/block/vold/179:97 /storage/sdcard0 vfat rw,dirsync,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1015,fmask=0702,dmask=0702,allow_utime=0020,codepage=cp437,iocharset=iso8859-1,shortname=mixed,utf8,errors=remount-ro 0 0
I have tried umount /storage/sdcard0 and remount it with option -o umask=0000 , but command ls -l /storage get same result as above.
ubuntu permissions mount
edited Jan 8 at 13:29
Kusalananda
127k16239394
asked Jan 8 at 12:19
zeyang yuezeyang yue
211
add a comment |
I am already a member of the group "aid_sdcard_rw":
android@localhost:~$ whoami
android
android@localhost:~$ groups
android aid_radio ...... aid_sdcard_rw ......
you can see that i am already in group aid_sdcard_rw. Then, when i
access directory /storage/sdcard0 :
android@localhost:~$ ls /storage/sdcard0/
ls: cannot open directory '/storage/sdcard0/': Permission denied
but:
android@localhost:~$ ls -l /storage/
total 8
d---rwxr-x 17 android aid_sdcard_rw 8192 1月 1 1970 sdcard0
doesn't group "aid_sdcard_rw" members have read permission?
why is this Permission denied happened?
The system i run is an ubuntu 16.04 and running in my android phone using
an app called Linux Deploy, and my phone have external sd card inserted :
Welcome to Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (GNU/Linux 3.4.5 armv7l)
* Documentation: https://help.ubuntu.com/
Ubuntu 16.04 LTS [running via Linux Deploy]
The directory /storage/sdcard0 is my external sd card mount directory(see the last line below):
android@localhost:~$ cat /etc/mtab
/dev/loop1 / ext4 rw,relatime,data=ordered 0 0
proc /proc proc rw,relatime 0 0
sys /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
tmpfs /dev tmpfs rw,nosuid,relatime,mode=755 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts rw,relatime,gid=5,mode=620 0 0
tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs rw,relatime 0 0
/dev/block/vold/179:97 /storage/sdcard0 vfat rw,dirsync,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1015,fmask=0702,dmask=0702,allow_utime=0020,codepage=cp437,iocharset=iso8859-1,shortname=mixed,utf8,errors=remount-ro 0 0
I have tried umount /storage/sdcard0 and remount it with option -o umask=0000 , but command ls -l /storage get same result as above.
ubuntu permissions mount
edited Jan 8 at 13:29
Kusalananda
127k16239394
asked Jan 8 at 12:19
zeyang yuezeyang yue
211
I am already a member of the group "aid_sdcard_rw":
android@localhost:~$ whoami
android
android@localhost:~$ groups
android aid_radio ...... aid_sdcard_rw ......
you can see that i am already in group aid_sdcard_rw. Then, when i
access directory /storage/sdcard0 :
android@localhost:~$ ls /storage/sdcard0/
ls: cannot open directory '/storage/sdcard0/': Permission denied
but:
android@localhost:~$ ls -l /storage/
total 8
d---rwxr-x 17 android aid_sdcard_rw 8192 1月 1 1970 sdcard0
doesn't group "aid_sdcard_rw" members have read permission?
why is this Permission denied happened?
The system i run is an ubuntu 16.04 and running in my android phone using
an app called Linux Deploy, and my phone have external sd card inserted :
Welcome to Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (GNU/Linux 3.4.5 armv7l)
* Documentation: https://help.ubuntu.com/
Ubuntu 16.04 LTS [running via Linux Deploy]
The directory /storage/sdcard0 is my external sd card mount directory(see the last line below):
android@localhost:~$ cat /etc/mtab
/dev/loop1 / ext4 rw,relatime,data=ordered 0 0
proc /proc proc rw,relatime 0 0
sys /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
tmpfs /dev tmpfs rw,nosuid,relatime,mode=755 0 0
devpts /dev/pts devpts rw,relatime,gid=5,mode=620 0 0
tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs rw,relatime 0 0
/dev/block/vold/179:97 /storage/sdcard0 vfat rw,dirsync,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime,uid=1000,gid=1015,fmask=0702,dmask=0702,allow_utime=0020,codepage=cp437,iocharset=iso8859-1,shortname=mixed,utf8,errors=remount-ro 0 0
I have tried umount /storage/sdcard0 and remount it with option -o umask=0000 , but command ls -l /storage get same result as above.
ubuntu permissions mount
ubuntu permissions mount
edited Jan 8 at 13:29
Kusalananda
127k16239394
asked Jan 8 at 12:19
zeyang yuezeyang yue
211
edited Jan 8 at 13:29
Kusalananda
127k16239394
asked Jan 8 at 12:19
zeyang yuezeyang yue
211
edited Jan 8 at 13:29
Kusalananda
127k16239394
edited Jan 8 at 13:29
Kusalananda
127k16239394
edited Jan 8 at 13:29
Kusalananda
127k16239394
127k16239394
asked Jan 8 at 12:19
zeyang yuezeyang yue
211
asked Jan 8 at 12:19
zeyang yuezeyang yue
211
asked Jan 8 at 12:19
zeyang yuezeyang yue
211
211
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
If the user that owns the file or directory is explicitly denied access to the file or directory through the permissions, then that user can not access the file or directory. It does not matter if the owner is a member of the group that has access.
Or in other words, to access the file or directory as the owner, it has to allow access to the owner.
In your case, you have a directory without x permissions for the owner. The owner can therefore not access the directory.
To fix this, use
chmod u+x /storage/sdcard0
If the owner additionally needs to be able to list the contents of the directory, also give the owner r permissions. To create or delete files or subdirectories, you will need w permissions.
You should be able to set the permissions on the directory with the card unmounted. When mounting the SD card, the permissions on the mount point should be inherited from the directory permissions.
answered Jan 8 at 13:23
KusalanandaKusalananda
127k16239394
add a comment |
The android user is also the owner of the directory, owner that has no rights (even if android user is member of a valid group). The solution would be to change the owner of the directory with chown or try it with another user (that belongs to a valid group).
answered Jan 8 at 12:33
DaselDasel
4497
You first said "even if android user is member of a valid group". Why would it then change anything if it was a different user belonging to a valid group? Also, why change the owner of the directory, when OP is the owner of the directory? Also, as you can see, the "others" entity also has read and execute permissions, so anyone on that system should be able to read that directory.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 13:00
2
@Larry because the file permission bits state that the owner does not have read, write or execute permissions on the directory. It seem like unusual permissions for the directory but that's what the permission bits are set to. A more suitable set of permissions would be 775
– Torin
Jan 8 at 13:22
@Torin: I see, thanks. But doeschownalso change the permissions that apply to the target user on the file? Otherwise, the other use will still be explicitly denied read permission.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 14:21
2
@Larri: chown changes the owner and group of the file/directory but does not affect to the permissions; if the permissions are 075, after the execution of chown they will keep same, but the permision 0 will affect to the new owner instead of to the "old" one.
– Dasel
Jan 8 at 14:28
2
@Larrychown-ing is one way to 'solve' the problem, but then the new owner has the issue that they can't access the directory (as long as they aren't root).chmod-ing would instead allow all users of the group, including the owner to have full permissions on the directory which is probably closer to solving it.
– Torin
Jan 8 at 14:38
|
show 1 more comment
File permissions have a precedence order:
- User permissions affect the owner of the file.
- Group permissions affect everyone in the file's group.
- Other permissions affect everyone else.
The permissions aren't merged -- they're tested in order. This means the group permissions don't affect the owner, and other permissions don't affect the owner and group. This then permits the situation where wider sets of users can have more permissions than more specific ones -- this is occasionally useful when you have a file or directory that should generally be accessible, but you want to exclude a specific user or group.
However, this is mostly ineffectual when it comes to excluding a user. The owner of a file also has permission to change its permissions, so the owner can do
chmod u+rwx /storage/sdcard0
However, if the user is in a restricted environment where they can't use chmod, this can be effective.
answered Jan 8 at 17:33
BarmarBarmar
7,0131223
add a comment |
Try to execute like this:
newgrp aid_sdcard_rw
ls /storage/sdcard0/
answered Jan 8 at 12:30
Romeo NinovRomeo Ninov
5,92332028
2
sorry, but this doesn't work. still get permission error. I guess @Dasel is right. when you are owner of an directory, then it will first apply that rule and ignore others.
– zeyang yue
Jan 8 at 13:16
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f493211%2fwhy-cant-i-have-permission-in-that-group-which-i-already-in%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If the user that owns the file or directory is explicitly denied access to the file or directory through the permissions, then that user can not access the file or directory. It does not matter if the owner is a member of the group that has access.
Or in other words, to access the file or directory as the owner, it has to allow access to the owner.
In your case, you have a directory without x permissions for the owner. The owner can therefore not access the directory.
To fix this, use
chmod u+x /storage/sdcard0
If the owner additionally needs to be able to list the contents of the directory, also give the owner r permissions. To create or delete files or subdirectories, you will need w permissions.
You should be able to set the permissions on the directory with the card unmounted. When mounting the SD card, the permissions on the mount point should be inherited from the directory permissions.
answered Jan 8 at 13:23
KusalanandaKusalananda
127k16239394
add a comment |
If the user that owns the file or directory is explicitly denied access to the file or directory through the permissions, then that user can not access the file or directory. It does not matter if the owner is a member of the group that has access.
Or in other words, to access the file or directory as the owner, it has to allow access to the owner.
In your case, you have a directory without x permissions for the owner. The owner can therefore not access the directory.
To fix this, use
chmod u+x /storage/sdcard0
If the owner additionally needs to be able to list the contents of the directory, also give the owner r permissions. To create or delete files or subdirectories, you will need w permissions.
You should be able to set the permissions on the directory with the card unmounted. When mounting the SD card, the permissions on the mount point should be inherited from the directory permissions.
answered Jan 8 at 13:23
KusalanandaKusalananda
127k16239394
add a comment |
If the user that owns the file or directory is explicitly denied access to the file or directory through the permissions, then that user can not access the file or directory. It does not matter if the owner is a member of the group that has access.
Or in other words, to access the file or directory as the owner, it has to allow access to the owner.
In your case, you have a directory without x permissions for the owner. The owner can therefore not access the directory.
To fix this, use
chmod u+x /storage/sdcard0
If the owner additionally needs to be able to list the contents of the directory, also give the owner r permissions. To create or delete files or subdirectories, you will need w permissions.
You should be able to set the permissions on the directory with the card unmounted. When mounting the SD card, the permissions on the mount point should be inherited from the directory permissions.
answered Jan 8 at 13:23
KusalanandaKusalananda
127k16239394
If the user that owns the file or directory is explicitly denied access to the file or directory through the permissions, then that user can not access the file or directory. It does not matter if the owner is a member of the group that has access.
Or in other words, to access the file or directory as the owner, it has to allow access to the owner.
In your case, you have a directory without x permissions for the owner. The owner can therefore not access the directory.
To fix this, use
chmod u+x /storage/sdcard0
If the owner additionally needs to be able to list the contents of the directory, also give the owner r permissions. To create or delete files or subdirectories, you will need w permissions.
You should be able to set the permissions on the directory with the card unmounted. When mounting the SD card, the permissions on the mount point should be inherited from the directory permissions.
answered Jan 8 at 13:23
KusalanandaKusalananda
127k16239394
edited Jan 8 at 13:37
answered Jan 8 at 13:23
KusalanandaKusalananda
127k16239394
answered Jan 8 at 13:23
KusalanandaKusalananda
127k16239394
answered Jan 8 at 13:23
KusalanandaKusalananda
127k16239394
127k16239394
add a comment |
add a comment |
The android user is also the owner of the directory, owner that has no rights (even if android user is member of a valid group). The solution would be to change the owner of the directory with chown or try it with another user (that belongs to a valid group).
answered Jan 8 at 12:33
DaselDasel
4497
You first said "even if android user is member of a valid group". Why would it then change anything if it was a different user belonging to a valid group? Also, why change the owner of the directory, when OP is the owner of the directory? Also, as you can see, the "others" entity also has read and execute permissions, so anyone on that system should be able to read that directory.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 13:00
2
@Larry because the file permission bits state that the owner does not have read, write or execute permissions on the directory. It seem like unusual permissions for the directory but that's what the permission bits are set to. A more suitable set of permissions would be 775
– Torin
Jan 8 at 13:22
@Torin: I see, thanks. But doeschownalso change the permissions that apply to the target user on the file? Otherwise, the other use will still be explicitly denied read permission.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 14:21
2
@Larri: chown changes the owner and group of the file/directory but does not affect to the permissions; if the permissions are 075, after the execution of chown they will keep same, but the permision 0 will affect to the new owner instead of to the "old" one.
– Dasel
Jan 8 at 14:28
2
@Larrychown-ing is one way to 'solve' the problem, but then the new owner has the issue that they can't access the directory (as long as they aren't root).chmod-ing would instead allow all users of the group, including the owner to have full permissions on the directory which is probably closer to solving it.
– Torin
Jan 8 at 14:38
|
show 1 more comment
The android user is also the owner of the directory, owner that has no rights (even if android user is member of a valid group). The solution would be to change the owner of the directory with chown or try it with another user (that belongs to a valid group).
answered Jan 8 at 12:33
DaselDasel
4497
You first said "even if android user is member of a valid group". Why would it then change anything if it was a different user belonging to a valid group? Also, why change the owner of the directory, when OP is the owner of the directory? Also, as you can see, the "others" entity also has read and execute permissions, so anyone on that system should be able to read that directory.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 13:00
2
@Larry because the file permission bits state that the owner does not have read, write or execute permissions on the directory. It seem like unusual permissions for the directory but that's what the permission bits are set to. A more suitable set of permissions would be 775
– Torin
Jan 8 at 13:22
@Torin: I see, thanks. But doeschownalso change the permissions that apply to the target user on the file? Otherwise, the other use will still be explicitly denied read permission.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 14:21
2
@Larri: chown changes the owner and group of the file/directory but does not affect to the permissions; if the permissions are 075, after the execution of chown they will keep same, but the permision 0 will affect to the new owner instead of to the "old" one.
– Dasel
Jan 8 at 14:28
2
@Larrychown-ing is one way to 'solve' the problem, but then the new owner has the issue that they can't access the directory (as long as they aren't root).chmod-ing would instead allow all users of the group, including the owner to have full permissions on the directory which is probably closer to solving it.
– Torin
Jan 8 at 14:38
|
show 1 more comment
The android user is also the owner of the directory, owner that has no rights (even if android user is member of a valid group). The solution would be to change the owner of the directory with chown or try it with another user (that belongs to a valid group).
answered Jan 8 at 12:33
DaselDasel
4497
The android user is also the owner of the directory, owner that has no rights (even if android user is member of a valid group). The solution would be to change the owner of the directory with chown or try it with another user (that belongs to a valid group).
answered Jan 8 at 12:33
DaselDasel
4497
answered Jan 8 at 12:33
DaselDasel
4497
answered Jan 8 at 12:33
DaselDasel
4497
answered Jan 8 at 12:33
DaselDasel
4497
4497
You first said "even if android user is member of a valid group". Why would it then change anything if it was a different user belonging to a valid group? Also, why change the owner of the directory, when OP is the owner of the directory? Also, as you can see, the "others" entity also has read and execute permissions, so anyone on that system should be able to read that directory.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 13:00
2
@Larry because the file permission bits state that the owner does not have read, write or execute permissions on the directory. It seem like unusual permissions for the directory but that's what the permission bits are set to. A more suitable set of permissions would be 775
– Torin
Jan 8 at 13:22
@Torin: I see, thanks. But doeschownalso change the permissions that apply to the target user on the file? Otherwise, the other use will still be explicitly denied read permission.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 14:21
2
@Larri: chown changes the owner and group of the file/directory but does not affect to the permissions; if the permissions are 075, after the execution of chown they will keep same, but the permision 0 will affect to the new owner instead of to the "old" one.
– Dasel
Jan 8 at 14:28
2
@Larrychown-ing is one way to 'solve' the problem, but then the new owner has the issue that they can't access the directory (as long as they aren't root).chmod-ing would instead allow all users of the group, including the owner to have full permissions on the directory which is probably closer to solving it.
– Torin
Jan 8 at 14:38
|
show 1 more comment
You first said "even if android user is member of a valid group". Why would it then change anything if it was a different user belonging to a valid group? Also, why change the owner of the directory, when OP is the owner of the directory? Also, as you can see, the "others" entity also has read and execute permissions, so anyone on that system should be able to read that directory.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 13:00
2
@Larry because the file permission bits state that the owner does not have read, write or execute permissions on the directory. It seem like unusual permissions for the directory but that's what the permission bits are set to. A more suitable set of permissions would be 775
– Torin
Jan 8 at 13:22
@Torin: I see, thanks. But doeschownalso change the permissions that apply to the target user on the file? Otherwise, the other use will still be explicitly denied read permission.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 14:21
2
@Larri: chown changes the owner and group of the file/directory but does not affect to the permissions; if the permissions are 075, after the execution of chown they will keep same, but the permision 0 will affect to the new owner instead of to the "old" one.
– Dasel
Jan 8 at 14:28
2
@Larrychown-ing is one way to 'solve' the problem, but then the new owner has the issue that they can't access the directory (as long as they aren't root).chmod-ing would instead allow all users of the group, including the owner to have full permissions on the directory which is probably closer to solving it.
– Torin
Jan 8 at 14:38
You first said "even if android user is member of a valid group". Why would it then change anything if it was a different user belonging to a valid group? Also, why change the owner of the directory, when OP is the owner of the directory? Also, as you can see, the "others" entity also has read and execute permissions, so anyone on that system should be able to read that directory.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 13:00
You first said "even if android user is member of a valid group". Why would it then change anything if it was a different user belonging to a valid group? Also, why change the owner of the directory, when OP is the owner of the directory? Also, as you can see, the "others" entity also has read and execute permissions, so anyone on that system should be able to read that directory.
– Larry
Jan 8 at 13:00
2
2
@Larry because the file permission bits state that the owner does not have read, write or execute permissions on the directory. It seem like unusual permissions for the directory but that's what the permission bits are set to. A more suitable set of permissions would be 775
– Torin
Jan 8 at 13:22
@Larry because the file permission bits state that the owner does not have read, write or execute permissions on the directory. It seem like unusual permissions for the directory but that's what the permission bits are set to. A more suitable set of permissions would be 775
– Torin
Jan 8 at 13:22
@Torin: I see, thanks. But does
chown also change the permissions that apply to the target user on the file? Otherwise, the other use will still be explicitly denied read permission.– Larry
Jan 8 at 14:21
@Torin: I see, thanks. But does
chown also change the permissions that apply to the target user on the file? Otherwise, the other use will still be explicitly denied read permission.– Larry
Jan 8 at 14:21
2
2
@Larri: chown changes the owner and group of the file/directory but does not affect to the permissions; if the permissions are 075, after the execution of chown they will keep same, but the permision 0 will affect to the new owner instead of to the "old" one.
– Dasel
Jan 8 at 14:28
@Larri: chown changes the owner and group of the file/directory but does not affect to the permissions; if the permissions are 075, after the execution of chown they will keep same, but the permision 0 will affect to the new owner instead of to the "old" one.
– Dasel
Jan 8 at 14:28
2
2
@Larry
chown-ing is one way to 'solve' the problem, but then the new owner has the issue that they can't access the directory (as long as they aren't root). chmod-ing would instead allow all users of the group, including the owner to have full permissions on the directory which is probably closer to solving it.– Torin
Jan 8 at 14:38
@Larry
chown-ing is one way to 'solve' the problem, but then the new owner has the issue that they can't access the directory (as long as they aren't root). chmod-ing would instead allow all users of the group, including the owner to have full permissions on the directory which is probably closer to solving it.– Torin
Jan 8 at 14:38
|
show 1 more comment
File permissions have a precedence order:
- User permissions affect the owner of the file.
- Group permissions affect everyone in the file's group.
- Other permissions affect everyone else.
The permissions aren't merged -- they're tested in order. This means the group permissions don't affect the owner, and other permissions don't affect the owner and group. This then permits the situation where wider sets of users can have more permissions than more specific ones -- this is occasionally useful when you have a file or directory that should generally be accessible, but you want to exclude a specific user or group.
However, this is mostly ineffectual when it comes to excluding a user. The owner of a file also has permission to change its permissions, so the owner can do
chmod u+rwx /storage/sdcard0
However, if the user is in a restricted environment where they can't use chmod, this can be effective.
answered Jan 8 at 17:33
BarmarBarmar
7,0131223
add a comment |
File permissions have a precedence order:
- User permissions affect the owner of the file.
- Group permissions affect everyone in the file's group.
- Other permissions affect everyone else.
The permissions aren't merged -- they're tested in order. This means the group permissions don't affect the owner, and other permissions don't affect the owner and group. This then permits the situation where wider sets of users can have more permissions than more specific ones -- this is occasionally useful when you have a file or directory that should generally be accessible, but you want to exclude a specific user or group.
However, this is mostly ineffectual when it comes to excluding a user. The owner of a file also has permission to change its permissions, so the owner can do
chmod u+rwx /storage/sdcard0
However, if the user is in a restricted environment where they can't use chmod, this can be effective.
answered Jan 8 at 17:33
BarmarBarmar
7,0131223
add a comment |
File permissions have a precedence order:
- User permissions affect the owner of the file.
- Group permissions affect everyone in the file's group.
- Other permissions affect everyone else.
The permissions aren't merged -- they're tested in order. This means the group permissions don't affect the owner, and other permissions don't affect the owner and group. This then permits the situation where wider sets of users can have more permissions than more specific ones -- this is occasionally useful when you have a file or directory that should generally be accessible, but you want to exclude a specific user or group.
However, this is mostly ineffectual when it comes to excluding a user. The owner of a file also has permission to change its permissions, so the owner can do
chmod u+rwx /storage/sdcard0
However, if the user is in a restricted environment where they can't use chmod, this can be effective.
answered Jan 8 at 17:33
BarmarBarmar
7,0131223
File permissions have a precedence order:
- User permissions affect the owner of the file.
- Group permissions affect everyone in the file's group.
- Other permissions affect everyone else.
The permissions aren't merged -- they're tested in order. This means the group permissions don't affect the owner, and other permissions don't affect the owner and group. This then permits the situation where wider sets of users can have more permissions than more specific ones -- this is occasionally useful when you have a file or directory that should generally be accessible, but you want to exclude a specific user or group.
However, this is mostly ineffectual when it comes to excluding a user. The owner of a file also has permission to change its permissions, so the owner can do
chmod u+rwx /storage/sdcard0
However, if the user is in a restricted environment where they can't use chmod, this can be effective.
answered Jan 8 at 17:33
BarmarBarmar
7,0131223
answered Jan 8 at 17:33
BarmarBarmar
7,0131223
answered Jan 8 at 17:33
BarmarBarmar
7,0131223
answered Jan 8 at 17:33
BarmarBarmar
7,0131223
7,0131223
add a comment |
add a comment |
Try to execute like this:
newgrp aid_sdcard_rw
ls /storage/sdcard0/
answered Jan 8 at 12:30
Romeo NinovRomeo Ninov
5,92332028
2
sorry, but this doesn't work. still get permission error. I guess @Dasel is right. when you are owner of an directory, then it will first apply that rule and ignore others.
– zeyang yue
Jan 8 at 13:16
add a comment |
Try to execute like this:
newgrp aid_sdcard_rw
ls /storage/sdcard0/
answered Jan 8 at 12:30
Romeo NinovRomeo Ninov
5,92332028
2
sorry, but this doesn't work. still get permission error. I guess @Dasel is right. when you are owner of an directory, then it will first apply that rule and ignore others.
– zeyang yue
Jan 8 at 13:16
add a comment |
Try to execute like this:
newgrp aid_sdcard_rw
ls /storage/sdcard0/
answered Jan 8 at 12:30
Romeo NinovRomeo Ninov
5,92332028
Try to execute like this:
newgrp aid_sdcard_rw
ls /storage/sdcard0/
answered Jan 8 at 12:30
Romeo NinovRomeo Ninov
5,92332028
answered Jan 8 at 12:30
Romeo NinovRomeo Ninov
5,92332028
answered Jan 8 at 12:30
Romeo NinovRomeo Ninov
5,92332028
answered Jan 8 at 12:30
Romeo NinovRomeo Ninov
5,92332028
5,92332028
2
sorry, but this doesn't work. still get permission error. I guess @Dasel is right. when you are owner of an directory, then it will first apply that rule and ignore others.
– zeyang yue
Jan 8 at 13:16
add a comment |
2
sorry, but this doesn't work. still get permission error. I guess @Dasel is right. when you are owner of an directory, then it will first apply that rule and ignore others.
– zeyang yue
Jan 8 at 13:16
2
2
sorry, but this doesn't work. still get permission error. I guess @Dasel is right. when you are owner of an directory, then it will first apply that rule and ignore others.
– zeyang yue
Jan 8 at 13:16
sorry, but this doesn't work. still get permission error. I guess @Dasel is right. when you are owner of an directory, then it will first apply that rule and ignore others.
– zeyang yue
Jan 8 at 13:16
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f493211%2fwhy-cant-i-have-permission-in-that-group-which-i-already-in%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
