Admin Roles limited to specific servers or "locations"

Answered

Jeff Jones

August 07, 2020 17:58 Edited

In a school system we have the overall Board of Education" that has users who can see the entire hive of servers and cameras, but then each individual school has people who need to have admin control over just that school.

So, I'd like to see a feature when creating roles that makes it easy to give admin style permission to things that happen on a single server (or a single location if it has multiple servers) without giving access to anything at the other locations. As opposed to now where it seems like you have to micromanage everything in a custom role. This particularly seems like an issue when it comes to layout sharing and if new cameras get added to a server.

I realize there could be an issue with fail over options if a camera moves to a server at another location. Perhaps you could create the concept of tiered locations in the hive management system so users and cameras could be added to the location. Then if a camera moves to another server during a failover situation the system still knows what location the camera is at, and can keep the permissions in tact.

Therefore if a user role is given admin level permissions for a location, they could see and create users just for that location and create shared layouts, etc.

 

0

• 

  Permanently deleted user

  August 07, 2020 18:34

  Hi Jeff,

  Giving the permission to access the single server in a system is very challenging, because users, layouts, event rules, audit trail and other things don't belong to any server and are system-wide. It is possible to give access to single server settings, but it is mostly limited to storage management and failover, so, I assume, wouldn't help with you situation.

  What I see as a solution, and we have it in our roadmap is a feature we call "System Groups". With it it'd be possible to combine multiple systems in one group, and have ability to mange users and view cameras from multiple systems at a time, as well as to keep ability to manage each system separately – create system-specific users, layouts, set up rules, etc.

  Failover between systems won't work, but if servers and cameras in different locations (in different local networks) it shouldn't work anyway. 
  Can you confirm that failover does work in you case, and cameras from one location can be picked up by a server in another one?

  What do you think about System Groups? Will it solve your problem?

  If you want to know more details, you can write me at apats@networkoptix.com and we can arrange a more detailed presentation of the feature.

  0
• 

  Jeff Jones

  August 07, 2020 20:15 Edited

  Well in the case of the school system from the original post all those buildings are part of the same LAN.

  System Groups might work if there are users (at the top level) who can be a part of two or more System Groups at once and be able to see cameras from all systems in a single layout.

  0
• 

  Permanently deleted user

  August 07, 2020 20:09

  Yes, users will be able be in multiple system groups at once.

  Viewing cameras from different systems within the same system group in a single layout can be possible (maybe not in the first version though).
  Viewing cameras from different system groups – likely not.

  Thank you!

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.