Do not input private or sensitive data. View Qlik Privacy & Cookie Policy.
Skip to main content

Announcements
Qlik Connect 2026 Agenda Now Available: Explore Sessions
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
lim_fun_siong
Contributor
Contributor

Access control based on OR condition of two fields

Hi I would like to limit the data set that is accessible to a group of leaders based on two fields i.e.

course_school and faculty_school.

The reason is because these leaders should have access to all the data regarding 1) courses that their school offer and 2) courses that their faculty teaches but which may belong to other school. 

Hence, it is an "OR" or "union" condition such that the academic leaders should ONLY be able to see:

  1. course_school = 'their school name' OR
  2. faculty_school = 'their school name'

I've searched the help files in Qliksense on multiple fields for access control i.e.

https://community.qlik.com/t5/Qlik-Design-Blog/Basics-for-complex-authorization/ba-p/1465872

I don't quite follow the authorization bridge table.

So, here is what I have done:

 

A. The access file contains the following:

Sample Access FileSample Access File

 

B. In the access control section of the load editor.

UPPER(COURSE_SCHOOL)&'|'&UPPER(FACULTY_SCHOOL) as ACCESS_ID

 

C. In the data file loading section, I have also done the same

[course_school] & '|'& [faculty_school] AS ACCESS_ID

 

Here are my questions, 

1. How do I then create the authorisation bridging table? Is it that I have to create an entry for every possible permutation including the '*' key for any value i.e.

Is this how the bridging table would look like?Is this how the bridging table would look like?

2. If this is indeed the process, it seems like a very onerous process. It potentially results in a huge table (depending on the number of schools) and can be quite manual to maintain. Is there a better way? 

3. If this is not the right process, it would be great if you can show an example. Thank you.

 

Labels (2)
0 Replies