User Level Security in Access 2007

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • evenlater

    User Level Security in Access 2007

    I realize that user level security is not available for Access
    databases in the new AK27 format .accdb, and I know that I can still
    utilize ULS by making my database an .mdb file.

    But I'm wondering WHY Microsoft is scrapping a feature that I've
    always found to be extremely useful. Surely they don't expect that
    users of the new database format will no longer have a need to assign
    permissions at different levels for different users! Why would they
    want to make Access LESS powerful for a wide variety of uses?

    So I'm thinking they must be thinking that .accdb developers will use
    a different method to achieve the functionality previously offered by
    ULS. Is the built-in ULS feature unnecessary because the same results
    can be achieved using VBA? (Of course, there have always been some
    kinds of permissions that can only be managed with VBA -- for example,
    ULS can be used to set table-level permissions but not record-level
    permissions.)

    Also, what are the selling points of the new .accdb format? What
    advantages does it have that .mdb does not? I am concerned that if I
    develop a new db in the old format that future versions of Access
    might not support it.

    Thanks for your counsel.
  • Tom van Stiphout

    #2
    Re: User Level Security in Access 2007

    On Thu, 8 May 2008 12:51:54 -0700 (PDT), evenlater
    <evancater@gmai l.comwrote:

    I think they removed it because it was never very secure. In future I
    will implement role-based security based on membership in Active
    Directory groups.

    -Tom.

    >I realize that user level security is not available for Access
    >databases in the new AK27 format .accdb, and I know that I can still
    >utilize ULS by making my database an .mdb file.
    >
    >But I'm wondering WHY Microsoft is scrapping a feature that I've
    >always found to be extremely useful. Surely they don't expect that
    >users of the new database format will no longer have a need to assign
    >permissions at different levels for different users! Why would they
    >want to make Access LESS powerful for a wide variety of uses?
    >
    >So I'm thinking they must be thinking that .accdb developers will use
    >a different method to achieve the functionality previously offered by
    >ULS. Is the built-in ULS feature unnecessary because the same results
    >can be achieved using VBA? (Of course, there have always been some
    >kinds of permissions that can only be managed with VBA -- for example,
    >ULS can be used to set table-level permissions but not record-level
    >permissions. )
    >
    >Also, what are the selling points of the new .accdb format? What
    >advantages does it have that .mdb does not? I am concerned that if I
    >develop a new db in the old format that future versions of Access
    >might not support it.
    >
    >Thanks for your counsel.

    Comment

    • Larry Linson

      #3
      Re: User Level Security in Access 2007

      In addition to what Tom has said:

      For years, those of us who realized the ease with which a determined cracker
      could get past ULS have been advising that if your data was worth US$150 to
      you (the cost of password recovery software on the Internet) should use a
      server back end for security and that compiling to .MDE would protect your
      code. Now, it turns out that the ULS password recovery code can be had for
      free, and there is now software, either free or inexpensive, to convert an
      ..MDE back into a usable .MDB.

      With the new ACCDB in Access 2007, access to SharePoint data is enhanced...
      it's not truly relational, with referential itegrity, but many companies are
      using it, and finding Access a good front-end, just as it has been for
      server DBs. And, like server DBs, it has its own data security. There are
      additional datatypes, and user interface changes (the latter, you will have
      to decide for yourself if it is an advantage or disadvantage). I think
      you'll find a longer and more-detailed list of changes at the
      http://office.microsoft.com website.

      ULS has been convenient for keeping users from stumbling over their own
      keystrokes, but that can be coded -- it won't be truly "secure" but will be
      about as secure as ULS has turned out to be. In fact, one of my earliest
      paying jobs with Access was to implement a "security lite" scheme for just
      that purpose, and the client and prime contractor were worried not at all
      that it was relatively easy for a knowledgeable Access user to break.

      Larry Linson
      Microsoft Office Access MVP

      "evenlater" <evancater@gmai l.comwrote in message
      news:6d31dfdd-03b1-43e0-bd1e-ffa1c6447bb8@c5 8g2000hsc.googl egroups.com...
      >I realize that user level security is not available for Access
      databases in the new AK27 format .accdb, and I know that I can still
      utilize ULS by making my database an .mdb file.
      >
      But I'm wondering WHY Microsoft is scrapping a feature that I've
      always found to be extremely useful. Surely they don't expect that
      users of the new database format will no longer have a need to assign
      permissions at different levels for different users! Why would they
      want to make Access LESS powerful for a wide variety of uses?
      >
      So I'm thinking they must be thinking that .accdb developers will use
      a different method to achieve the functionality previously offered by
      ULS. Is the built-in ULS feature unnecessary because the same results
      can be achieved using VBA? (Of course, there have always been some
      kinds of permissions that can only be managed with VBA -- for example,
      ULS can be used to set table-level permissions but not record-level
      permissions.)
      >
      Also, what are the selling points of the new .accdb format? What
      advantages does it have that .mdb does not? I am concerned that if I
      develop a new db in the old format that future versions of Access
      might not support it.
      >
      Thanks for your counsel.

      Comment

      Working...