multiple owner of same folder
I have changed owner of /var/www/html
folder to www-data
,. Now I want to grunt ownership to ubuntu
too.
How can I do that. I don't know which group they belong to.
I login to ssh
by using ubuntu
username and my FTP also working with ubuntu, but now due to this change I am facing permission issue when editing file by ftp.
16.04 aws
add a comment |
I have changed owner of /var/www/html
folder to www-data
,. Now I want to grunt ownership to ubuntu
too.
How can I do that. I don't know which group they belong to.
I login to ssh
by using ubuntu
username and my FTP also working with ubuntu, but now due to this change I am facing permission issue when editing file by ftp.
16.04 aws
Can you trysudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu
and check ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:50
askubuntu.com/questions/46331/…
– Panther
Dec 1 '17 at 15:41
add a comment |
I have changed owner of /var/www/html
folder to www-data
,. Now I want to grunt ownership to ubuntu
too.
How can I do that. I don't know which group they belong to.
I login to ssh
by using ubuntu
username and my FTP also working with ubuntu, but now due to this change I am facing permission issue when editing file by ftp.
16.04 aws
I have changed owner of /var/www/html
folder to www-data
,. Now I want to grunt ownership to ubuntu
too.
How can I do that. I don't know which group they belong to.
I login to ssh
by using ubuntu
username and my FTP also working with ubuntu, but now due to this change I am facing permission issue when editing file by ftp.
16.04 aws
16.04 aws
asked Dec 1 '17 at 12:37
urfusionurfusion
1137
1137
Can you trysudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu
and check ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:50
askubuntu.com/questions/46331/…
– Panther
Dec 1 '17 at 15:41
add a comment |
Can you trysudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu
and check ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:50
askubuntu.com/questions/46331/…
– Panther
Dec 1 '17 at 15:41
Can you try
sudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu
and check ?– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:50
Can you try
sudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu
and check ?– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:50
askubuntu.com/questions/46331/…
– Panther
Dec 1 '17 at 15:41
askubuntu.com/questions/46331/…
– Panther
Dec 1 '17 at 15:41
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Solution 1
Easiest way if only that one user ubuntu
and www-data
need access would be
sudo chown ubuntu:www-data <path/to/file or directory>
this gives ownership to the user ubuntu
but still keeps the ownership for the group www-data
.
So you control what ubuntu can do by
sudo chmod u<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
and you control what www-data
can do by
sudo chmod g<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
or simply use complete permission masks (see example below).
Example:
User ubuntu
shall be able to read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
)www-data
shall be able read(r
), execute(e
) but not write(w
)other users
shall be able to do none of those
sudo chmod u+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod g-w+rx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using a permission masks (helpful generator)
sudo chmod 750 <path/to/file or directory>
Also interresting for your case might be the -R
parameter for both commands, applying ownership and permissions recursively on the content of a folder.
For more information about options and parameters see
man chown and
man chmod
Solution 2
I would rather NOT add a user to a system functional user's group as suggested in the comments like
sudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu an
as this is a really dirty way of granting a user permissions because he could also fuck up things...
Instead if you want you could add a completely new group using groupadd
(see man groupadd)
groupadd <group name>
add all users who shall have the perissions on the file(s) to this group
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> ubuntu
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> www-data
and now set the ownership of the file(s) to this group
sudo chgrp <group name> <path/to/file or directory>
than you set the permissions as described before but this time only for the
group (read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
))
sudo chmod g+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod u-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using the mask
sudo chmod 070 <path/to/file or directory>
Note that using this solution you lose the control over the different permissions for ubuntu
and www-data
.
you need to add the directory name in the last in your first command, right ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:57
yes ofcourse .. I just thought if the user states he already changed the ownership he should know how to usechown
;)
– derHugo
Dec 1 '17 at 12:58
@T.Todua I mentioned it under Solution 1:Also interresting for your case might be the -R parameter....
was that not clear enough? I don't think that one of the two solutions is better or worse .. it depends on the use case which one fits better actually
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 20:56
dont take it, it was just my thought, ok. btw, can you mention two words about, whywww-data
shouldnt havewrite
permision?
– T.Todua
Jan 8 at 20:57
1
I have four: It was an example. I only used it to show how the permission flags work. Ofcourse there might be use cases where e.g. the server should be able to write a file as well :)
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 21:01
|
show 2 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
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: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
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%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f982123%2fmultiple-owner-of-same-folder%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Solution 1
Easiest way if only that one user ubuntu
and www-data
need access would be
sudo chown ubuntu:www-data <path/to/file or directory>
this gives ownership to the user ubuntu
but still keeps the ownership for the group www-data
.
So you control what ubuntu can do by
sudo chmod u<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
and you control what www-data
can do by
sudo chmod g<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
or simply use complete permission masks (see example below).
Example:
User ubuntu
shall be able to read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
)www-data
shall be able read(r
), execute(e
) but not write(w
)other users
shall be able to do none of those
sudo chmod u+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod g-w+rx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using a permission masks (helpful generator)
sudo chmod 750 <path/to/file or directory>
Also interresting for your case might be the -R
parameter for both commands, applying ownership and permissions recursively on the content of a folder.
For more information about options and parameters see
man chown and
man chmod
Solution 2
I would rather NOT add a user to a system functional user's group as suggested in the comments like
sudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu an
as this is a really dirty way of granting a user permissions because he could also fuck up things...
Instead if you want you could add a completely new group using groupadd
(see man groupadd)
groupadd <group name>
add all users who shall have the perissions on the file(s) to this group
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> ubuntu
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> www-data
and now set the ownership of the file(s) to this group
sudo chgrp <group name> <path/to/file or directory>
than you set the permissions as described before but this time only for the
group (read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
))
sudo chmod g+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod u-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using the mask
sudo chmod 070 <path/to/file or directory>
Note that using this solution you lose the control over the different permissions for ubuntu
and www-data
.
you need to add the directory name in the last in your first command, right ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:57
yes ofcourse .. I just thought if the user states he already changed the ownership he should know how to usechown
;)
– derHugo
Dec 1 '17 at 12:58
@T.Todua I mentioned it under Solution 1:Also interresting for your case might be the -R parameter....
was that not clear enough? I don't think that one of the two solutions is better or worse .. it depends on the use case which one fits better actually
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 20:56
dont take it, it was just my thought, ok. btw, can you mention two words about, whywww-data
shouldnt havewrite
permision?
– T.Todua
Jan 8 at 20:57
1
I have four: It was an example. I only used it to show how the permission flags work. Ofcourse there might be use cases where e.g. the server should be able to write a file as well :)
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 21:01
|
show 2 more comments
Solution 1
Easiest way if only that one user ubuntu
and www-data
need access would be
sudo chown ubuntu:www-data <path/to/file or directory>
this gives ownership to the user ubuntu
but still keeps the ownership for the group www-data
.
So you control what ubuntu can do by
sudo chmod u<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
and you control what www-data
can do by
sudo chmod g<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
or simply use complete permission masks (see example below).
Example:
User ubuntu
shall be able to read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
)www-data
shall be able read(r
), execute(e
) but not write(w
)other users
shall be able to do none of those
sudo chmod u+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod g-w+rx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using a permission masks (helpful generator)
sudo chmod 750 <path/to/file or directory>
Also interresting for your case might be the -R
parameter for both commands, applying ownership and permissions recursively on the content of a folder.
For more information about options and parameters see
man chown and
man chmod
Solution 2
I would rather NOT add a user to a system functional user's group as suggested in the comments like
sudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu an
as this is a really dirty way of granting a user permissions because he could also fuck up things...
Instead if you want you could add a completely new group using groupadd
(see man groupadd)
groupadd <group name>
add all users who shall have the perissions on the file(s) to this group
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> ubuntu
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> www-data
and now set the ownership of the file(s) to this group
sudo chgrp <group name> <path/to/file or directory>
than you set the permissions as described before but this time only for the
group (read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
))
sudo chmod g+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod u-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using the mask
sudo chmod 070 <path/to/file or directory>
Note that using this solution you lose the control over the different permissions for ubuntu
and www-data
.
you need to add the directory name in the last in your first command, right ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:57
yes ofcourse .. I just thought if the user states he already changed the ownership he should know how to usechown
;)
– derHugo
Dec 1 '17 at 12:58
@T.Todua I mentioned it under Solution 1:Also interresting for your case might be the -R parameter....
was that not clear enough? I don't think that one of the two solutions is better or worse .. it depends on the use case which one fits better actually
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 20:56
dont take it, it was just my thought, ok. btw, can you mention two words about, whywww-data
shouldnt havewrite
permision?
– T.Todua
Jan 8 at 20:57
1
I have four: It was an example. I only used it to show how the permission flags work. Ofcourse there might be use cases where e.g. the server should be able to write a file as well :)
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 21:01
|
show 2 more comments
Solution 1
Easiest way if only that one user ubuntu
and www-data
need access would be
sudo chown ubuntu:www-data <path/to/file or directory>
this gives ownership to the user ubuntu
but still keeps the ownership for the group www-data
.
So you control what ubuntu can do by
sudo chmod u<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
and you control what www-data
can do by
sudo chmod g<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
or simply use complete permission masks (see example below).
Example:
User ubuntu
shall be able to read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
)www-data
shall be able read(r
), execute(e
) but not write(w
)other users
shall be able to do none of those
sudo chmod u+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod g-w+rx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using a permission masks (helpful generator)
sudo chmod 750 <path/to/file or directory>
Also interresting for your case might be the -R
parameter for both commands, applying ownership and permissions recursively on the content of a folder.
For more information about options and parameters see
man chown and
man chmod
Solution 2
I would rather NOT add a user to a system functional user's group as suggested in the comments like
sudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu an
as this is a really dirty way of granting a user permissions because he could also fuck up things...
Instead if you want you could add a completely new group using groupadd
(see man groupadd)
groupadd <group name>
add all users who shall have the perissions on the file(s) to this group
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> ubuntu
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> www-data
and now set the ownership of the file(s) to this group
sudo chgrp <group name> <path/to/file or directory>
than you set the permissions as described before but this time only for the
group (read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
))
sudo chmod g+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod u-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using the mask
sudo chmod 070 <path/to/file or directory>
Note that using this solution you lose the control over the different permissions for ubuntu
and www-data
.
Solution 1
Easiest way if only that one user ubuntu
and www-data
need access would be
sudo chown ubuntu:www-data <path/to/file or directory>
this gives ownership to the user ubuntu
but still keeps the ownership for the group www-data
.
So you control what ubuntu can do by
sudo chmod u<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
and you control what www-data
can do by
sudo chmod g<+|- permission> <path/to/file or directory>
or simply use complete permission masks (see example below).
Example:
User ubuntu
shall be able to read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
)www-data
shall be able read(r
), execute(e
) but not write(w
)other users
shall be able to do none of those
sudo chmod u+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod g-w+rx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using a permission masks (helpful generator)
sudo chmod 750 <path/to/file or directory>
Also interresting for your case might be the -R
parameter for both commands, applying ownership and permissions recursively on the content of a folder.
For more information about options and parameters see
man chown and
man chmod
Solution 2
I would rather NOT add a user to a system functional user's group as suggested in the comments like
sudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu an
as this is a really dirty way of granting a user permissions because he could also fuck up things...
Instead if you want you could add a completely new group using groupadd
(see man groupadd)
groupadd <group name>
add all users who shall have the perissions on the file(s) to this group
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> ubuntu
sudo usermod -a -G <group name> www-data
and now set the ownership of the file(s) to this group
sudo chgrp <group name> <path/to/file or directory>
than you set the permissions as described before but this time only for the
group (read(r
), write(w
), execute(e
))
sudo chmod g+rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod u-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
sudo chmod o-rwx <path/to/file or directory>
or using the mask
sudo chmod 070 <path/to/file or directory>
Note that using this solution you lose the control over the different permissions for ubuntu
and www-data
.
edited Jan 8 at 21:04
answered Dec 1 '17 at 12:50
derHugoderHugo
2,29021429
2,29021429
you need to add the directory name in the last in your first command, right ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:57
yes ofcourse .. I just thought if the user states he already changed the ownership he should know how to usechown
;)
– derHugo
Dec 1 '17 at 12:58
@T.Todua I mentioned it under Solution 1:Also interresting for your case might be the -R parameter....
was that not clear enough? I don't think that one of the two solutions is better or worse .. it depends on the use case which one fits better actually
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 20:56
dont take it, it was just my thought, ok. btw, can you mention two words about, whywww-data
shouldnt havewrite
permision?
– T.Todua
Jan 8 at 20:57
1
I have four: It was an example. I only used it to show how the permission flags work. Ofcourse there might be use cases where e.g. the server should be able to write a file as well :)
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 21:01
|
show 2 more comments
you need to add the directory name in the last in your first command, right ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:57
yes ofcourse .. I just thought if the user states he already changed the ownership he should know how to usechown
;)
– derHugo
Dec 1 '17 at 12:58
@T.Todua I mentioned it under Solution 1:Also interresting for your case might be the -R parameter....
was that not clear enough? I don't think that one of the two solutions is better or worse .. it depends on the use case which one fits better actually
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 20:56
dont take it, it was just my thought, ok. btw, can you mention two words about, whywww-data
shouldnt havewrite
permision?
– T.Todua
Jan 8 at 20:57
1
I have four: It was an example. I only used it to show how the permission flags work. Ofcourse there might be use cases where e.g. the server should be able to write a file as well :)
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 21:01
you need to add the directory name in the last in your first command, right ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:57
you need to add the directory name in the last in your first command, right ?
– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:57
yes ofcourse .. I just thought if the user states he already changed the ownership he should know how to use
chown
;)– derHugo
Dec 1 '17 at 12:58
yes ofcourse .. I just thought if the user states he already changed the ownership he should know how to use
chown
;)– derHugo
Dec 1 '17 at 12:58
@T.Todua I mentioned it under Solution 1:
Also interresting for your case might be the -R parameter....
was that not clear enough? I don't think that one of the two solutions is better or worse .. it depends on the use case which one fits better actually– derHugo
Jan 8 at 20:56
@T.Todua I mentioned it under Solution 1:
Also interresting for your case might be the -R parameter....
was that not clear enough? I don't think that one of the two solutions is better or worse .. it depends on the use case which one fits better actually– derHugo
Jan 8 at 20:56
dont take it, it was just my thought, ok. btw, can you mention two words about, why
www-data
shouldnt have write
permision?– T.Todua
Jan 8 at 20:57
dont take it, it was just my thought, ok. btw, can you mention two words about, why
www-data
shouldnt have write
permision?– T.Todua
Jan 8 at 20:57
1
1
I have four: It was an example. I only used it to show how the permission flags work. Ofcourse there might be use cases where e.g. the server should be able to write a file as well :)
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 21:01
I have four: It was an example. I only used it to show how the permission flags work. Ofcourse there might be use cases where e.g. the server should be able to write a file as well :)
– derHugo
Jan 8 at 21:01
|
show 2 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- 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%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f982123%2fmultiple-owner-of-same-folder%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
Can you try
sudo usermod -a -G www-data ubuntu
and check ?– Rooney
Dec 1 '17 at 12:50
askubuntu.com/questions/46331/…
– Panther
Dec 1 '17 at 15:41