If you want to stop a user to view a document you have to revoke the access to that particular document or revoke the access to document management entirely.

Why do you want to stop users viewing the documents?

Or, is it the download part you don't want? A document needs to be downloaded to be viewed.

We want users to be able to view files, but due to new regulations we’re required to follow for compliance, we cannot have the files download to user’s machines. Is the file download function something that continues with Aurena and Cloud?

I wonder if the regulators know how hard it is to develop document viewing solutions that doesn't require a file to be downloaded, especially if the goal is to provide support for many file formats…

We had exactly what you want on Apps 10. In fact, it's still there and working. It's an integration with Oracle AutoVue. I don't want to recommend that solution though, for several reasons:

1. Oracle AutoVue, even if Oracle still supports it, is starting to get old in the tooth. It's hard to integrate well with modern systems (they might disagree). Just the fact that it relies on a local Java installation is a problem.
2. We only have the integration in Apps 10, a version that goes out of normal support in March.

We do want to find other alternatives which are more modern and integrate them with IFS Cloud, but we are not there yet.

On the regulations you refer to, is it actually the download that's the problem or is it the fact that you get a file "lying around"? The latter is not that hard to solve by having some background job running in the user's PC, deleting all files older than some hours. We are placing files downloaded for viewing in a separate folder for this exact reason. Something to consider…

Also, even if we had the AutoVue solution or similar, the user can still take a screenshot and share that with anyone, or use their mobile phone or analog camera to take a photograph of the document/file... If measures are taken to prevent that, the user can memorize the content and share it that way...  

It's healthy to sometimes question different regulations, looking at the underlying intent. Not sure what it is, in this case, perhaps you can describe it?