Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Out-of-the-Box Security - Needs Work?
12-05-2017, 09:19 AM, (This post was last modified: 12-05-2017, 10:06 AM by VortecCPI.)
#6
RE: Out-of-the-Box Security - Contract
(12-05-2017, 08:49 AM)falkoner Wrote: Although the defaults should be better I would always recommend in any implementation that a lot of time is given over to full planning of the security profile. It is very flexible and gives fine grain control over who can do what, but only if it is properly planned.

In my experience every organisation is different and requires a different security profile.

Tim

Tim,

I do not, and can not disagree with the end user working out the final ACL on his or her own. However... I have never worked with an application, OS or not, that did not come with suitable out-of-the-box ACL setup/settings. If the webERP ACL is incomplete or has errors it should be either repaired or removed. Since the demo data is very useful for what-if scenarios and training I believe it should be repaired. Of course that is just my opinion!
The FrontAccounting fork has in interesting take on a more-simplified ACL, at least from the user's perspective.
I made a spreadsheet of a join of PageSecurity and Tokens and the more I look at it the more I believe something got shifted around at some point. There are many entries that are very obviously mismatched.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/eclipsepaulbecker
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Out-of-the-Box Security - Contract - by phil - 12-05-2017, 05:11 AM
RE: Out-of-the-Box Security - Contract - by VortecCPI - 12-05-2017, 09:19 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)