220-1102 Practice Question: That a shared file on a Linux server is not…

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

• ✗

  chmod 755 file

  Why it's wrong here

  The `chmod 755 file` command sets permissions to `rwxr-xr-x`, granting read, write, and execute to the owner, and read and execute to both the file's group and all other users. While this provides some access, it does not address the fundamental issue that the file's *group ownership* is incorrect (still 'admin' instead of 'staff'). Consequently, members of the 'staff' group are still treated as 'others' and may not have the appropriate level of access, or the intended group-specific permissions are not applied to them.

• ✗

  chmod g+r file

  Why it's wrong here

  The `chmod g+r file` command adds read permission specifically for the file's *current* group owner. If the file is currently owned by the 'admin' group, this command would only grant read access to members of the 'admin' group. Since the user's team belongs to the 'staff' group, which is not the file's group owner, this action would not provide the necessary access to the 'staff' team, as they would still be subject to 'others' permissions.

• ✓

  chgrp staff file

  Why this is correct

  The `chgrp staff file` command directly changes the group ownership of the specified file from its current group (e.g., 'admin') to the 'staff' group. By doing so, any existing group permissions (e.g., read, write, execute) associated with the file will now apply to all members of the 'staff' group. This precisely resolves the access issue for the user's team by aligning the file's group ownership with their team's group, granting them the intended access without altering owner or 'others' permissions.

• ✗

  chown user:staff file

  Why it's wrong here

  The `chown user:staff file` command changes both the owner of the file to 'user' and its group to 'staff'. While changing the group to 'staff' is a correct step towards resolving the access issue, altering the file's owner to 'user' might be unnecessary or even undesirable. Changing the owner could disrupt existing ownership structures, accountability, or other permissions tied to the original owner, making it a less precise and potentially overreaching solution compared to simply modifying the group ownership.

Go deeper

Related to this question