locked
Privileges on Contract Line RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi,
    I need to know how i can give privileges on the contract line.
    Thanks in advance
    Friday, February 27, 2009 11:01 AM

Answers

  • Ok, I think I understand what you are asking now.  It appears that you want a user to be able to open a Case but not have Read or any other rights to the associated Contract or Contract line. 

    If a user tries to open a Case and there is an associated Contract or Contract line, the user will not be able to open the Case unless the user has read rights to the Contract.  The user will receive an error.

    If you associate Contracts and Contract Lines to cases, users will need to have read rights on the Contract which gives the user read rights on the Contract Line.  Users will not be able to open Case records that have associated Contracts and / or Contract Lines if the user does not have read rights on the Contract entity.

    Can you help me understand the business issue associated with trying to prevent users from viewing Contracts who have rights to view Cases?  Maybe there is an alternate solution. 

    The only other option is to do some fairly significant customization by possibly removing the 'link' characteristic of the lookup field for certain security roles or only displaying the link for certain security roles.  For example, turn the field to read only for certain security roles.


    Best Regards, Donna
    Tuesday, March 3, 2009 10:42 PM

All replies

  • As you cannot have exclusive rights and privileges set directly on the Contract Line, you would have to depend on Contract entity privilieges. For e.g. inorder to stop users from adding a Contract Line item, you could simply deny the user role an Append To privilege on the Contract entity. This would stop the user from adding a contract line to the contract record.
    Monday, March 2, 2009 9:38 AM
  • Actually what i need is to prevent a user who opens a case from being able to open Contract or Contract Line.
    I was able to apply it on Contract but not on Contract Line.
    Any workaround for this?
    Monday, March 2, 2009 10:49 AM
  • Have you tried removing all rights to the Contract and Contract template?
    Best Regards, Donna
    Monday, March 2, 2009 11:53 PM
  • Hi,
    The error is happening because all the privileges are removed. So i should have the Read privilege for on Contract and Contract Line.
    Actually when i don't fill any contract or contract line in a case, it opens normally.
    So any other idea?
    Tuesday, March 3, 2009 9:01 AM
  • Ok, I think I understand what you are asking now.  It appears that you want a user to be able to open a Case but not have Read or any other rights to the associated Contract or Contract line. 

    If a user tries to open a Case and there is an associated Contract or Contract line, the user will not be able to open the Case unless the user has read rights to the Contract.  The user will receive an error.

    If you associate Contracts and Contract Lines to cases, users will need to have read rights on the Contract which gives the user read rights on the Contract Line.  Users will not be able to open Case records that have associated Contracts and / or Contract Lines if the user does not have read rights on the Contract entity.

    Can you help me understand the business issue associated with trying to prevent users from viewing Contracts who have rights to view Cases?  Maybe there is an alternate solution. 

    The only other option is to do some fairly significant customization by possibly removing the 'link' characteristic of the lookup field for certain security roles or only displaying the link for certain security roles.  For example, turn the field to read only for certain security roles.


    Best Regards, Donna
    Tuesday, March 3, 2009 10:42 PM
  • Hi Donna,
    You really got my point. In that case i will have to put the lookup fields as read-only for some security privileges and i will have to hide the button we click to view the contracts. I thought there was a way that could be a little more practical.
    Thanks for your replies
    Wednesday, March 4, 2009 7:02 AM
  • You're welcome!
    Best Regards, Donna
    Wednesday, March 4, 2009 4:11 PM