Question

Limit Project Access/Visibility to Company

  • 30 August 2022
  • 7 replies
  • 68 views

Userlevel 3
Badge +5
  • Do Gooder (Customer)
  • 17 replies

Is Project Access the only way to restrict visibility/access to all projects regardless of company they belong to?

 

i.e. User is employed by Company 123, and only has access to Company 123 in permission sets, but can currently see projects for Company 123 & Company 456.

 

Is there a way to set up Project Teams, without having to specify which projects are included/excluded - i.e. at a company level?


7 replies

Userlevel 5
Badge +12

Hi @PennyB 

1)  When company access is removed, users cannot access to the projects that belong to that company. However in the “User Project Access” screen, the application will populate all the project regardless of company access but users cannot go into details. It is just a overview. 

2)  According to my understanding we cannot set up project teams without having to specify the company. Even in the help function it is mentioned that “The identification of the company associated with the project. The field cannot be modified.”

Thank You,
 

Userlevel 3
Badge +5

Hi @Dilan Senevirathne 

Thanks for replying. 
 

  1. That doesn’t seem to be the case, as company access is restricted but all projects are visible/editable. This seems to align with IFS documentation re Project Access- it says if it isn’t switched on, all users will have access to the project
  2. I don’t have an issue adding ‘company’ to the teams- that is what I want to do- but not have to specify project. I.e. similar to the employee tab in project access where you can enter company & wildcard employee, do the same for the project tab- so all projects in company ABC are included in access for the specified project team. 
Userlevel 5
Badge +12

Hi @PennyB 

Can you send me the steps that you follow when restricting the company access. Few screen shots will be helpful.
 

Thank You

Userlevel 3
Badge +5

Hi @Dilan Senevirathne Dilan

 

Company access is restricted at user level via the user security - i.e. access only given to relevant company/site/user group/GL authority class etc.

So my first question is, this doesn’t appear to restrict access to projects & project access has to be used?

I was looking at using Project Teams:

 

Team Members - you can select company and wildcard on Employee ID - i.e. include all employees from that company

Access Definition - Project ID appears to be mandatory - i.e. you can’t just select company & wildcard projects so all  projects from that company are included or excluded.

 

 

Userlevel 5
Badge +12

Hi @PennyB 

1)  This is how I removed user access to company and it worked as expected where the user cannot access the projects belong to access removed company.

 

2 ) Yes I understand your point here. But this is standard design of the application. But it seems like this is qualified as an enhancement request.

Thank You.

 

Userlevel 3
Badge +5

Hi @Dilan Senevirathne 

I’m not clear on the above.

 

My understanding is removing company access at user level, doesn’t remove access to projects - i.e. all projects are visible regardless of company setting on user account?

 

Are you doing this in conjunction with using Project Access and listing individual projects on the Access Definition tab of the team?

Userlevel 5
Badge +12

Hi @PennyB 

My apologies. As you said removing company access at user level, doesn’t remove access to projects. I double checked this in Apps10 as well. And it is very strange when considering the purpose of removing company access. Therefore my suggestion is to report this to IFS so that the product development team will have a look.

So as per the current application design the only way to restrict project access is through Access definition.
However I noticed that if “Project Access On” checkbox is checked (not necessary to have Access record afterwards)  and if we remove Employee record from Company window, then the access to project under that company will be removed. 

 

Thank You.

Reply