ADSM-L

Re: Minimum administrative access on NT?

1999-05-17 08:48:14
Subject: Re: Minimum administrative access on NT?
From: "Allen S. Rout" <asr AT NERSP.NERDC.UFL DOT EDU>
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 08:48:14 -0400
=> On Fri, 14 May 1999 11:56:01 -0700, "Joshua Bassi" <jbassi AT gloryworks DOT 
com> said:


> Unfortunately support is right.  Think about it.  How can a user with out
> access to a file or directory back it up - he doesn't' have access to the
> file at the operating system level.  This is totally independent of ADSM.

I understand that the ADSM process needs to have access to read all files;  It
was my understanding (possibly mistaken, I am no NT admin) that a privilege
level 'backup' existed, which permitted the same read access, but did not
permit changes (or the execution of random scripts, or, or... )


> What I have done for other customers is merely install the ADSM scheduler as
> a service running under the System Account.  Then whenever the box boots,
> the service will start and run an unattended backup without having to have a
> user login to the box with that high level of administrative rights.

Really, it's not the startup that is at issue for the managers I'm working
with.  It's the notion of letting someone run any script they want
('administrative command' schedule, anyone?) on their servers, with full
"administrator" privilege.

And I can't blame them. :)

So, has anyone else deployed ADSM across administrative boundaries (on NT)
without giving the keys to _all_ the kingdoms to the ADSM admins?


Allen S. Rout
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>