Jump to content

RNB-IT

Members
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About RNB-IT

  • Rank
    member
  • Birthday January 3

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Amsterdam
  1. Hi I got the problem.... <missing index> warning for the records /fields in the table SC_Person and SC_Address. The structure of the tables in the graph, in basic a "selector - connector" soultion: SC_USERS -- SC_Person ( link on username = ACCOUNT.NAME ) ACCOUNT.NAME is a calculated field with the value $$Accountname, which is initialized at the log-in screen. SC_USERS is connected to the layout table with x_Joins according to the selector connector solution. If we place one field from the SC_Person on my layout it says <missing index>. When we change the link to an
  2. Hi _user_privs = FilterValues ( Get ( AccountExtendedPrivileges ) ; SC_Users::privileges ) ; // why this? why not just tke the Account ext privs? when there is a version update of my application not all users have to (re)set a new password, the administration of all users is from an table Users, i known security wise it is better to add the users in filemaker, but you can limit the access to this table in a way that the table is only available for Admin (full access) or a few moments at the log-in window, and otherwise it is only readonly. The password is stored as MD5 in the file and all
  3. Hi Wim, You're are right, nesting could be difficult to read, but there is only one nesting in both lines... 1 line: Your line, with one statement more, to see where the switch is in the $$log between two records, and i will set it to the primary key. 2 line: Has the user (group) the rights that are defined in the extended privilege set, and is the result correct to see the information as defined. 3 line has the user rights to see all information , or is it limited to just a few records. In an let statement it would not be much better: let ( [ // get the user rights to access the
  4. Hi BruceR NOT in a dropbox folder, NOT served By file maker, File maker Closed, and on all my other computers i can uncompress the without any problem. I think that the fmforums upload is the problem, there is something going wrong at that point, maybe file size? If you like send me your email and i will we-transfer it.
  5. Yes also with Global fields i have the same results. I think i made the mistake to leave filemaker open and than made the archive, but here it is. compressed with standaard OSX 10.10.4 TestApp.fmp12.zip
  6. Hi, thanks for the explaintion of the log files, very nice, but still can not get the security rules working on the server version. what i see is that in the log files of the server version the portal is only evaluated for record number 0, (new records), but not for the record that should be displayed. STANDALONE first object record# 1 at 63572836260608 priv PERSON set evaluated record# 1 at 63572836260608 priv ADDRESS set evaluated record# 8 at 63572836260609 priv ADDRESS set evaluated record# 1 at 63572836260609 last objectevaluated record# 1 at 63572836260610 first object record# 1 at 6
  7. Hi, maybe this one will open, (compressed .zip) what can i do si that the RLA is updated correctly TestApp.fmp12.zip
  8. Here is a test file, in the standalone version it works as expected, upload the version to an FMS14 and no data is shown in the portal. to have full access use admin password admin to have limited record acces use: name: hans password: hans all suggestions are welcome TestApp.fmp12
  9. Fitch: No succes same problem, security works in FM 14 but not on FMS14. I will prepare an file database for upload...
  10. Josh: Yes that's true pressed the wrong button
  11. We have record based security enabled with the security tab. the global var are loaded with data after the login of the user. The rule is for viewing the Company data: If ( $$Account.Access_ALL ; 1; not IsEmpty ( FilterValues ( $$Account.Access_ID ; _id ) ) ) the _id field is for the Company, the rule is in context of the @Company table. for the address table we have the rule ( If ( $$Account.Access_ALL ; 1; not IsEmpty ( FilterValues ( $$Account.Access_ID ; _id_company ) ) ) ) _id_company is on the Address table, the rule is in the context of @Address table when we relate the Co
  12. The idea is that i want to have a nice layout and a structure to manipulate the Privilege Sets, and give the administrators of the Solution tools to this without giving them complete acces to all the privilege sets.... Why is this bad practice
  13. I use the Privilege Sets for this purpose for each table, for each user we define View 1 Edit View 1 1 Create Edit View 1 1 1 Delete Create Edit View 1 1 1 1 results binair 1, 3, 7, 15 LockUser globalfield contains , "Company = 7; Contacts = 15; Orders = 7; Payments= 1" then use a function to extract the result, SeedCode_GetValue( LockUser; "Company") This we use in the Privilege Set on the table Company in the Limited... options on View, Edit and Delete on t
  14. In the Custom Record Tab, modal screen there is for the view option an possibility to use an calculation. I use an database with all users to set the Privileges Set according the users rights. Without adding for each user his own Privilege Set. Why not use a calculation the option is available in View Edit and Delete
  15. I ave a question about the security levels in filemaker. I use a function to get access to the records of the tables based on File Maker Accounts and Privilege Sets (filemaker 13) in the security tab i use a custom privilege set and set for my table the View , Edit and Delete to custom. In the calculate tab i use a custom function to set the appropriate access. that works fine, but why can'y i do the same with new / create, that option is not available View, Edit and Delete have options; No, Limited... , Yes, but Create has only: No and Yes. How can i make this work so that so
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.