I have to create a list with different permission levels. I can see my list, but my teammates can't, but my manager can see all list.
I tried to use filters, but I couldn't define a filter for my manager. I was able to filter the list between teammates.
Is there any way to create groups of permissions. For example, the owners can see the full list, but the members can see their own part
Access to lists or items in them is determined by permission levels. You can check permission level for particular user or group by Check permission Button on List Permission Settings page.
You should also know that there are some users that can access lists and items without explicit permission grant in list's permission list. Farm admins, Site Collection admins or users have granted access at Web application level in Central administration.
Related
I have a user with permissions across many projects (see image below).
I have a new user who just joined the company. I want to give him the exact same permissions. How can I do this? I don't want to do it manually because that will take me ages and the Google Cloud Documentation is useless! I cant find much on using gcloud command line to do this with examples.
There must be a easy way to duplicate permission?
Thanks
It is indeed possible to grant a role to a member for more than one project:
Open the IAM & Admin Projects page in the GCP Console.
Select all the projects for which you want to grant permissions.
Click the Show Info Panel, followed by the Permissions tab.
Enter an email address in the Add members field, and select the desired role from the drop-down menu.
Click the Add button. The member will be granted the selected role in each of the selected projects.
Granting access rights to project is an action fraught with security risks, so bulk gcloud commands or simple copying of roles are understandably not supported.
You can find more detail on the "Granting, Changing, and Revoking Access to Resources" documentation page.
I am developing a POC (SahrePoint 2010) where I can demonstrate that the users can be granted certain permissions on a list for a Date range (for example contribute access for a selected week). I will be breaking permission inheritance and create unique permissions for a list.
I would like the permissions to be revoked automatically after the expiry date. Also, I would like to do this using the Manage Permissions list (_layouts/user.aspx) so that I don't have to maintain a separate list.
I have a couple of questions regarding this:
1. I assume that the custom permissions for any list must be stored n some list. How can get to know in which list the permissions are getting stored?
2. If at all I get to know in which list the permissions are getting stored, will I be able to add columns to that particular list?
I hope that the question is clear.
Permissions are not stored in any list. Rather, every securable object (including sites, lists, folders, and items) has a Role Assignments property that indicates what groups/users currently have access, and what their permissions are (if not inherited).
See the SPRoleAssignment class documentation for more information.
Note that the User Information list is not a "Manage Permissions" list; it stores profile information about users who access the site, but does not store any permission-related information. Further, it's not a typical list at all, in that it does not show up in the SPWeb.Lists collection for a subsite, and its fields are automatically populated by SharePoint's User Profile Service. While you could potentially add more columns to it, you'd be better off using a separate list to store and track your permission information instead of contaminating the site collection user info list.
To have permission changes take place based on an expiry date, you'll need to implement a time-based solution that runs on a regular basis to see if any changes need to be made, such as a custom timer job, a custom site workflow that runs on a schedule, or a Windows scheduled task.
Adding permissions to a role enables the given permission to all users in that role by default; this is something I want to avoid.
I want to be able to set permissions like "Booking: View own Bookings" at user level and not the role level.
Is there a module that already does this, or can someone give me some possible approaches or pseudo code of some kind?
Yes, there's the User Permissions module.
User Permissions provides an interface for giving additional permissions to individual users without the need to assign them to a special role. When this module is enabled, users with the 'administer permissions' permission can access the 'User Permissions' tab on each user's account.
I have to programmatically create a task for a user that was not explicitly added in the site users. He has permissions to contribute to the task list, though, because he belongs to an AD group that has been granted those permissions. I can assign the task to the user through the UI; how do I do it through code though?
The accepted way of assigning tasks to users is to set the AssignedTo field of the task to an SPFieldUserValue pointing to that user. Except it cannot be done in this case, because the users cannot be found in SharePoint, only his group! Assigning the task to the whole group is a bad idea, for obvious reasons. And our system administrators categorically refuse to add the users to Sharepoint one by one, because that would duplicate the data they have in Active Directory, and generally be a pain to manage. What do I do?
When a user authenticates to SharePoint, an entry is created for them in the profile store, even if their permission to the site comes from an AD group.
I did a quick test by adding new user (TGroupsUser) and group (SPtestPermissions) to my AD, so there is no chance the user was ever on my site before. I added the user to the group and gave the group "Member" permissions to my site. I then authenticated to SP with this new user.
To show that the user is part of this SPWeb, I wrote a quick webpart to enumerate the users on the web. Note that there are three groups of users with the SPWeb. All Users, Site Users and Users. See this link for full description of these properties. Basically, users are users on the web. Site Users are users and groups on the site collection. All Users is all users of the site including those granted direct permission or granted through group and then visited the site. Here are the results, minus the system accounts.
All Users
SPSDEV\rross
SPSDEV\sptestpermissions
SPSDEV\TGroupsUser
Site Users
SPSDEV\rross
SPSDEV\sptestpermissions
SPSDEV\TGroupsUser
Users
SPSDEV\rross
Since this account (TgroupsUser) is part of the user collection for the web, you can treat just like a user added directly to the site. To finish the testing, I created a task with the following code for the assignedTo field.
TaskItem[SPBuiltInFieldId.AssignedTo] = web.SiteUsers.GetByEmail("myemail#domain.com");
Here is a screenshot of the new task assigned to TGroupsUser.
FYI - I needed to use AllowUnsafeUpdates on the web object.
I would be happy to get some advice on "workflow" type. Im not sure what is best - "Intranet/Extranet", "Simple Publication" or a third choice. Below are the types of folders and roles Im looking for:
public folders: anonymous has "r".
intranet folders: users has "r". Special users has "rw".
private folders: only user in question and admin has "rw" (special users has also "rw")
special folder: users that are member of a group has "rw".
Lastly, I do not understand this, users with e.g. "read", "edit" or "contribute" role can see user folders (marked as private), but also a test folder created as admin (marked as private)? PS Im using "Intranet/Extranet" type.
Thanks.
Nikolaj G.
You're confusing Roles and Permissions in your question. "read" and "write" would be permissions. Reader, Editor, Contributor are Roles.
In an Internet/Extranet workflow, Anonymous users (a Role) would get Read access to Public content.
Private content would be accessible to users with the Owner or Manager (Administrator) role
"Internally Published" content is readable by users with Contributor, Editor, Manager, Member, Owner and Reader roles, but only editable by Managers.
"Internal" would correspond to the "Intranet" setting you want - where most users get read access, but you can give users the "Editor" role (using the sharing tab) to allow them to modify content.
Your "special" folders would simply be in the "Internal" state, but you would grant the Editor role to a group rather than a user.
Your last paragraph doesn't make much sense. What do you mean by "created as admin"? Created by admin?
In the Internet/Extranet workflow, the only difference between Private and Internal states is that "Members" can not view private content - but Editors can modify it and Contributors can view it.
Go to /portal_workflow/intranet_workflow/states/manage_main in your site to see the various Role-to-permission mappings