General managing question - area_designers

[datanibbler]

Hi,

I am a bit confused as I have heard different things about the nature of licenses

<=> my latest knowledge is that a Document_CAL is not sufficient for development work as the access_rights are somehow restricted. Is that so?

=> Thus, we would need Named_CALs for designers in the operative areas - a plan we have had for some time to enable the people there to do some things themselves.

That statement, however, has two parts:

A Named_CAL in QlikView gives

- unlimited access

- to all apps.

Is there any possibility not causing too much added effort to cut that in half and separate the "unlimited access"-part from the "all apps"-part?

=> We'd need to be able to give people in the operative areas a Named_CAL so they can do some development work, but only on the app intended for their area. <=> only some people (management, superusers, developers) should have access to it all.

I guess we could do that via section_access using NTNAME, no?

That way, the logon someone used would be queried and we could just create an Excel list with the logon_data of all the people who should have access to every app - plus the one user who should have access only to the specific one.

I guess that would be relatively quick to do.

[jonathandienst]

Hi

Document CALs and Session CALs are for web access only, and therefore cannot be used for development work. AFAIK, a named CAL is the only one suitable for developers.

You could use NT access control to limit the ability of a developer in one area accessing another person's document, and section access could also prevent other developers from opening a file that is not in their area, or limit them to user access - in the latter case don't forget to control what user access is allowed to do on the document properties and sheet properties Security tabs.

If you use an Excel list, make sure it is in a location with wide read access, but very limited write access.

Regards

Jonathan

[datanibbler]

Hi Jonathan,

that's approx. what I thought. Thank you very much for confirming it, though. I always prefer knowing what to do before I actually start doing it.

Your last sentence, however, is the crux of the whole thing: It's not so easy to control access as I have to write a ticket for global_IT to do it - for one, IT (all of IT, worldwide) always have access to everything. However, we can put it in a location where no one usually goes except us.

Thanks a lot!

Best regards,

DataNibbler