RTC 3.0(beta?) Security attribute question
![]()
Hello,
There is a feature in the upcoming release that allows for me to use a "security feature/attribute" to limit who can see work items...great. Let's say there are 4 work items total and 2 are supposed to be hidden. USER-A can see all WorkItems (4) and USER-B can only see 2 WorkItems. That's how I would envision it. What happens in BIRT reports (Dashboard) and Insight Reports? Will they see only (4) and (2) work items again? Or does this not apply? thanks... |
3 answers
![]() Hello, We are currently investigating how this can be handled in the context of reports. The conversation is started in the following work item, if you'd like to follow the thread. https://jazz.net/jazz/resource/itemName/com.ibm.team.workitem.WorkItem/120228 james RTC Reports Team Lead |
![]()
Geoffrey Clemm (30.1k●3●30●35)
| answered Jul 05 '10, 9:05 p.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
My answer would just be that it would be what you'd expect, namely, that
it depends on who executes the report. In particular, a report generated by USER-A will have access to all 4 work items, while a report generated by USER-B will have access to only the 2 non-hidden work items. Cheers, Geoff On 7/5/2010 2:37 PM, jmoody wrote: itengtoolswrote: |
![]()
Hi, I have been doing some tests with RTC 3.0 M6 and BIRT reports and
security works also in the reports as expected (I am using a Project Area with some users to restrict visibility using the new Restricted Access Control feature) and the BIRT report also takes security in consideration and only work items that are visible for the user that is logged into RTC are displayed. I have not done any tests yest with the Insight common reporting that will come in RTC 3. Ana On 06/07/2010 3:05, Geoffrey Clemm wrote: My answer would just be that it would be what you'd expect, namely, that |
Your answer
Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.