Re: Access security - permission checkboxes

It sounds good but I'm afraid it doesn't (unless they changed it in A2k3).

It's easy enough to test, as I did before posting.

Chris

"Scott McDaniel" <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0tWdndCkPYR1LpbeRVn-rQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> If I follow you correctly, this indicates an Implicit permission ... in
> other words, one not directly assigned to the particular User, but instead
> one that is "inherited" through a User's membership in a particular Group.
> --
> Scott McDaniel
> InfoTrakker Software
>
> "Amit" <Amit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1A85297D-A668-4849-B285-DBFD601D70E7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > MS Access 2000
> > =============
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a quick question regarding the permission checkboxes when
> > implementing security for Groups/Users.
> > The checkboxes that assign security to database objects have three options
> > when clicked:
> > 1. clear
> > 2. greyed out and checked
> > 3. distinct checked (with a white background)
> >
> > I've been searching like crazy on the Internet/MS Help for an explanation
> > for the "greyed out and checked" state, but I have failed to find an
> > explanation.
> >
> > Can someone please shed some light on this?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -Amit
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Access security - permission checkboxes
    ... I have a quick question regarding the permission checkboxes when ... The checkboxes that assign security to database objects have three options ... I've been searching like crazy on the Internet/MS Help for an explanation ...
    (microsoft.public.access.security)
  • Re: Access security - permission checkboxes
    ... this indicates an Implicit permission ... ... > implementing security for Groups/Users. ... > I've been searching like crazy on the Internet/MS Help for an explanation ...
    (microsoft.public.access.security)
  • Re: Access security - permission checkboxes
    ... was on Access security but obviously not ... ... >> I've been searching like crazy on the Internet/MS Help for an explanation ...
    (microsoft.public.access.security)
  • Re: Security through Obscurity [was RE: [fw-wiz] Using RDP Port 3389]
    ... >Speaking of security through obscurity, ... >adjunct to security, but certainly shouldn't be a primary mechanism? ... I have to say I think the explanation in ... (you can check all the ports, or look at traffic, or social engineer ...
    (Firewall-Wizards)
  • RE: Antivirus Tools Fool XPs Security Center
    ... Actually, there is a benign explanation for this, at least with the Norton ... that it is a security risk for the Security Center to be able to report ... > Windows Security Center to report erroneously that the products were ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)