MS designs Windows so that the average user gets a good experience with it,
with little to no effort on their part.
Most home users aren't concerned about perms on secondary drives. Make it a
security risk for some, or make it a nuisance for most, the choice is fairly
"Roger Abell [MVP]" wrote:
> I guess my followup question is why not give that non-write access
> to Everyone? What would you suggest instead?
> Remember, the default security descriptor is applied when the
> storage is first formatted. Many of us have the practice of setting
> the NTFS permissions at the drive root as a first action after a new
> format, with those permissions selected based on the use to be made
> of the storage.
> It is pretty hard to see what one should use that would be the "most
> likely" permissions, so forcing on the least people the need to adjust
> those permissions. It is certainly not possible for the drive to come
> out from the format factory so that the storage is private to jgascon
> as would be the My Documents of account jgascon; well, if jgascon
> did the formatting it would be possible, but that would be a guess
> that would likely cause the most people to have to adjust permissions
> post format.
> "jgascon" <email@example.com> wrote in message
> >I just noticed that, under Vista beta 2, non system drives are given, by
> > default, special access permissions of: traverse, execute, list folder,
> > read
> > to EVERYONE. Isn't that a security risk? How about those of us, for
> > example,
> > who built Vista on a separate drive but still have personal data on a
> > drive
> > that is now mounted with those special permissions? If these data were
> > under
> > "Documents and Settings" they were protected (and many people are now
> > complaining that the old files are not accessible any more) but I am
> > concerned about folders and files that were not under "Documents and
> > Settings" and were, therefore, not necessarily protected.
> > Why give access to EVERYONE to these other drives?