Unix & Linux Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Linux, FreeBSD and other Un*x-like operating systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have a folder on a Linux machine that I would like to be read only for members of one group, read write for members of another group, and read write for the owner. Others would not be able to access this folder at all.

Is there a way to do this without using ACLs?

share|improve this question
I'd to stop my car. Is there a way to do this without using the brakes? – Caleb Jun 7 '11 at 9:55
@Caleb Actually, there is, slamming it into a solid wall :-) – Let_Me_Be Jun 7 '11 at 10:22
@Let_Me_Be: I could think of lots of others. Parachutes, hills, downshifting, etc. The point is the right, simple, obvious, way to do it is with the normal tool built for the job. Only when there is a good reason the obvious won't work do you move on to alternate solutions. The asker here has given no good reason not to use the brakes, so suggesting running the car into a bog isn't going to be my first suggestion :) – Caleb Jun 7 '11 at 10:24
@Caleb sorry if this was a stupid question from your point of view - I'm a Java programmer by trade and have suddenly found myself needing to do a bit of Linux admin. Hence the reason I asked the question. – Rich Jun 7 '11 at 11:27
No I'm not saying it's a stupid question. It's something I've asked myself after years of unix admin work. The puzzling part is that you already seemed to know the right answer but wanted us to say something different. If you had a reason for wanting a different solution maybe could ask, "Are there alternative ACL systems that provide feature X without drawback/hastle Y." or something that sets us on the track of your real issue ... otherwise we're just going to give the obvious answer. – Caleb Jun 7 '11 at 11:31
up vote 4 down vote accepted

The simple answer is "no" ... that's exactly what ACL's are for, controlling access to resources :-)

The normal unix model only includes one set of permissions for the group owner, not two. You could perhaps hack this by making them read only to world and read write for the group and owner, but that has the obvious drawback of been world readable. If you need more fine grained control use ACLs. That's what they were designed to do.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.