Re: anonymous access on item level
- From: spconsultant <gfpilot2002@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 06:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
The first level you have to get by is IIS to allow access to the
page. Since anonymous is by definition unauthenticated, it
can't be authenticated using a membership provider so you
couldn't then treat it just like an authenticated user. You could
probably eventually get to the funcitonality in your vision of
some docs can be accessed anonymously and others are protected,
but perhaps you could just simplify the solution by creating a generic
sign-on, and advertising it on your landing page?
like - Sign on as PORTAL/PORTAL for general read access.
You could probably even get this to be a default.
On Jul 11, 3:18 am, nik <n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm developing a publishing site in MOSS2007.
I don't understand why anonymous access is seperated from the other
rights that can be set on sites and list items. I would like to enable
or disable anonymous access on individual pages (list items) instead
of sites. If "the anonymous user" was just a user like all other users
that i can find with my membership-provider, there would be no need to
have a seperate menu for setting anonymous access and I would be able
to configure anonymous access on item level and not just on site
level. Am I missing something here?
A courios thing is that if I break rights inheritance on a list item
and aftewards sets anonymous access on the list and adds a new item I
can get into a situation where two list items in the same list has
different anonymous acces. A bit of a hack, since this is not directly
possible through the UI unless I have overlooked something.
Does it make sence to you?
Is there an easy way to manage anonymous access on item level?
/Nikolaj
.
- References:
- anonymous access on item level
- From: nik
- anonymous access on item level
- Prev by Date: Re: Extracting Custom Web parts info from Sharepoint Server 2003
- Next by Date: Tune Workflow Task Alerts
- Previous by thread: anonymous access on item level
- Next by thread: Re: Must workflow dll's be deployed to the GAC
- Index(es):