Cognos Analytics

Hi everyone,

we have implemented row-level security in the FM model. Only a few users should see specific employee data. Fields in a row are masked (changed to ####) with a CASE statement, if there is no right to see the content:

We want to implement this in a DML (as a library). Now we face 2 problems

1. The DML is built on a data server connection. When users build other DML, they have access to that data server connection and thus they have access to the partner-view without employee protection.
2. Users can copy the DML and probably change the CASE statement and skip employee protection.

Anyone an idea for 1.) and/or 2.) ?

Thx

Hi everyone,

we have implemented row-level security in the FM model. Only a few users should see specific employee data. Fields in a row are masked (changed to ####) with a CASE statement, if there is no right to see the content:

We want to implement this in a DML (as a library). Now we face 2 problems

1. The DML is built on a data server connection. When users build other DML, they have access to that data server connection and thus they have access to the partner-view without employee protection.
2. Users can copy the DML and probably change the CASE statement and skip employee protection.

Anyone an idea for 1.) and/or 2.) ?

Thx

The Set data security table context menu entry, referenced in IBM Cognos Analytics Version 11.2 : Data Modules User Guide, chapter 2, Securing Data, does not exist when editing Data Modules in Cognos 12.0.4.

Has this feature been disabled? 

Hi everyone,

we have implemented row-level security in the FM model. Only a few users should see specific employee data. Fields in a row are masked (changed to ####) with a CASE statement, if there is no right to see the content:

We want to implement this in a DML (as a library). Now we face 2 problems

1. The DML is built on a data server connection. When users build other DML, they have access to that data server connection and thus they have access to the partner-view without employee protection.
2. Users can copy the DML and probably change the CASE statement and skip employee protection.

Anyone an idea for 1.) and/or 2.) ?

Thx

Hi Mr. Minihan,

I have a 12.0.4 installation here and just created a new data module: the option to specify data security for the data sources is there.

Which capabilities have been assigned to your user and could it be that the Cognos admin has configured this menu to disappear for your user role?

The Set data security table context menu entry, referenced in IBM Cognos Analytics Version 11.2 : Data Modules User Guide, chapter 2, Securing Data, does not exist when editing Data Modules in Cognos 12.0.4.

Has this feature been disabled? 

Hi everyone,

we have implemented row-level security in the FM model. Only a few users should see specific employee data. Fields in a row are masked (changed to ####) with a CASE statement, if there is no right to see the content:

We want to implement this in a DML (as a library). Now we face 2 problems

1. The DML is built on a data server connection. When users build other DML, they have access to that data server connection and thus they have access to the partner-view without employee protection.
2. Users can copy the DML and probably change the CASE statement and skip employee protection.

Anyone an idea for 1.) and/or 2.) ?

Thx

Hi Robert, Thanks for responding.

From what I can see, I have all of the necessary Role based permissions and Feature settings...

Hi Mr. Minihan,

I have a 12.0.4 installation here and just created a new data module: the option to specify data security for the data sources is there.

Which capabilities have been assigned to your user and could it be that the Cognos admin has configured this menu to disappear for your user role?

The Set data security table context menu entry, referenced in IBM Cognos Analytics Version 11.2 : Data Modules User Guide, chapter 2, Securing Data, does not exist when editing Data Modules in Cognos 12.0.4.

Has this feature been disabled? 

Hi everyone,

we have implemented row-level security in the FM model. Only a few users should see specific employee data. Fields in a row are masked (changed to ####) with a CASE statement, if there is no right to see the content:

We want to implement this in a DML (as a library). Now we face 2 problems

1. The DML is built on a data server connection. When users build other DML, they have access to that data server connection and thus they have access to the partner-view without employee protection.
2. Users can copy the DML and probably change the CASE statement and skip employee protection.

Anyone an idea for 1.) and/or 2.) ?

Thx

OK. That's  strange. You should see the data security menu with your roles as your user is not restricted at all.

What kind of data source you'd like to secure?

Hi Robert, Thanks for responding.

From what I can see, I have all of the necessary Role based permissions and Feature settings...

Hi Mr. Minihan,

I have a 12.0.4 installation here and just created a new data module: the option to specify data security for the data sources is there.

Which capabilities have been assigned to your user and could it be that the Cognos admin has configured this menu to disappear for your user role?

The Set data security table context menu entry, referenced in IBM Cognos Analytics Version 11.2 : Data Modules User Guide, chapter 2, Securing Data, does not exist when editing Data Modules in Cognos 12.0.4.

Has this feature been disabled? 

Hi everyone,

we have implemented row-level security in the FM model. Only a few users should see specific employee data. Fields in a row are masked (changed to ####) with a CASE statement, if there is no right to see the content:

We want to implement this in a DML (as a library). Now we face 2 problems

1. The DML is built on a data server connection. When users build other DML, they have access to that data server connection and thus they have access to the partner-view without employee protection.
2. Users can copy the DML and probably change the CASE statement and skip employee protection.

Anyone an idea for 1.) and/or 2.) ?

Thx