New 811 Business Unit Security

[cdawes]

Just starting taking a look at implementing the new Business Unit Security that's part of 811 and up.

Maybe it's Friday but I fail to see how this is any quicker that just doing row security in the P00950. Am I missing something? I've got cat codes on all my BU's and this app is asking me to do it all over again?

Please if anyone's implemented this lemme know what you think of it.

Thanks,

Colin

 

[mt7608764]

The new BU feature does not bring any advantage over the old Row security.

 

[Owen Pay]

Colin,

It is a bit more sophisticated than Row Security. As you know, when you set up Row Security you can say, for instance, that User X can see all data associated with BU 1 thru 10, for example.

This works well and is consistent, but does not allow any conditional controls, e.g User X is always allowed to use BUs 1 thru 10.

The new BU security allows you to set up some conditions, which would normally have required development to fulfil.

For example: User X could be restricted to Distribution Centres in BU 1, when placing an order for a customer under BU 1. Correspondingly, User X could be restricted to Distribution Centres in BU5 when placing an order for BU5. But when placing orders for BUs 8,9 &10, they could be restricted to Distribution Centres under BUs 8 and 10 (geographical reasons - Benelux countries).

It is quite complex, and needs careful planning. It was one of several "Security" features introduced by PeopleSoft to bring it into line with "Security" in the PeopleSoft Enterprise product. Personally I think that it is a useful, if messy, piece of functionality, especially for sites with no Development resource.

Not too sure about it being a security feature.

 

[cdawes]

Thanks Owen,

I was initially under the impression that BU security would be easier than row security however that's not the case. BU Security is however much more flexible.

In my particular case I want the BU security the same in ALL places so I've simply used row security on multiple tables. I can't use *ALL since I need all users to have full access to the address book so I've created an an APPL to automate the process.

Hope to see someone implement this sometime soon though.

Colin