Skip to main content
Announcements
Have questions about Qlik Connect? Join us live on April 10th, at 11 AM ET: SIGN UP NOW
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Not applicable

QV server 9.0 SR1 - NTFS security problem

Hi.

We're running a new QV Server 9.0 SR1 solution by a customer, and going from a 8.5 to a 9.0 solution has caused a problem with the accesscontrol (NTFS).

In the accesspoint everything works fine for users that explicitly has been given access-rigths, but for users and documents that are handled by AD-group EVERYONE, that should give accessrights to all CAL-user, nothing works as it did in 8.5. That is: the user can't see the document in the accesspoint. That wasn't a problem in 8.5, but it's a problem i 9.0.

Is it a bug i qvs 9.0 SR1 - or do we have to handle the access to all-situation different in 9.0?

Thanks.

4 Replies
Not applicable
Author

Hi,

Pl look into this link ..

http://www.quickqlearqool.nl/?p=822

Reloading a Qlikview document with section access on the server will cause an error if you forget to define the NTNAME with the user account which runs the Qlikview services. Only with the NTNAME defined, Qlikview server can access the QVW for reloading.

Best regards,

Tapas

Not applicable
Author

Hi.

Thanks.

But the problem is not a Section Access problem, but a problem with the NTFS-authorization.

On a specific folder with a specific qvw-document the settings are that the AD-group EVERYONE has access to the folder and the document in the folder, that is: all END-users should bee able to see and open the document from the Accesspoint. But for reason or another the accesspoint won't include the document in the doc-list unless the user is asigned specific access-rights.

Hope it's cleat what the problem is.

biester
Specialist
Specialist

Are you really sure you have installed SR1 everywhere? I had similar problems in 9.0 (pre SR1) - see the posts in this forum -, but with SR1 I had no problems any more in THIS respect (which does not necessarily mean that the bug has vanished; it could as well have been disguised).

Rgds,
Joachim

Not applicable
Author

Hi.

Thanx. I read the posts, but we're running 9.0.7257.6 (that is SR1) on both qvs, developer and Plugin, so upgrading is not the solution at the moment, I guess.