Advanced User Permissions


Again running into issues with not having more granular control of User Permissions. Wondering if this is on the Roadmap and if so (Though I know you can’t say when) is it one of the higher priority items?

You all are awesome. Thanks!


Private Tables for Creator
Want Collaborator to only see own tasks
New security features: restricted share links and commenter permissions
Views and Collaborators
Allow a customer to edit a Gallery record
Granular Permissions Progress?
Granular Access Permissions: "Per Team, Per View"
Granular Access Permissions: "Per Team, Per View"
Role-based access control for tabs

There’s not a one-size-fits-all solution to user permissions—all of the users who’ve asked us about greater customization in their permissioning have had their own unique workflows and use cases. The challenge for us is to design features that solve the many different types of permission granularity that people want, without adding overwhelming complexity. There are other products that offer highly detailed permissions options, but we don’t necessarily want to bring all of those levels of complexity into Airtable, as we’re generally designed for more lightweight use cases.

We would love to hear more about the specific issues that you’re having with the current permissions model, and what problems you’re trying to solve—the feedback we get from users is one of the most valuable things we can have when we’re trying to design new features to be as elegant as possible.


Want Collaborator to only see own tasks

In my case at least, I believe that granular (edit,view,hidden) permissions per Column and per Table using the current Collaborator model would suffice.

It appears you already have the infrastructure in place to perform that within the Share View/Base model however the inability to Edit within that model is what ultimately limits the Non-API users.

Having reviewed the API documentation, I’m confident that I could build a web application to perform the functionality however I simply do not have the time to do so. As such I’ve just limited people’s access to View Only and they make email requests to me to update records. Yes it’s archaic but it works and allows me to ensure security and uniformity of the input data.

Hope that helps!



I would also like to hide some tables and views from certain users. Maybe with an option to exclude people (not breaking the current simple setup). Linked columns could be read only / non-editable or something…



Yes, I am new to AirTable, and I LOVE it so far. The only issue I am having is that I need the ability to either set someone’s viewing/editing permission on a table level or view level. This way, they can see and edit some of the columns but not certain sensitive ones.

Any updates on this type of feature?



We would love permissions, whatever they are, the ability to have only selected users to see some data would be idea.



I fully agree. The inability to set specific permissions by views or by columns, or tables is really limiting us from using Airtable more extensively. The use case is HR data where we are trying to be able to link compensation and management appraisal data to employees but want to keep them separate across members in the HR team to have single point accountability. Otherwise we will have difficulties keeping salary information or appraisal information confidential.



I think editable views would solve many problems. So I could give someone access to just a view that they could edit, but not delete or add to.



Agree View Level Permission should solve most permissions problem for example if we want to restrict options to choose from in main view, we can make main view write only and rest all linked tables with options as read only !!



I’d suggest View-Level permissions: Restricted (no access), Read, Write, Admin (with admin being able to change fields, sharing, etc.). This would solve most situations I’m coming across.



Hi all!

I believe that I have a direction that I have been trying to communicate regarding access control. I would like to be able to create a ‘table set’ - and then share that table set.

Using lookup on hidden tables restrict drilling without actually implementing granular control on the data.

With a little bit of creativity you can have separate data sets with the ability to share specific data…

It would be similar to hiding tabs in excel, but has much more power. It is also a great tool to limit options on the main screen and simplifies user experience even if all of the information remains accessible by drilling…

Looking forward to this!




Hi all, thanks for your continued interest in this topic! As @Katherine_Duh mentioned above, there’s no “one-size-fits-all” model for granular permissions, and so there won’t be a day when we suddenly release a silver bullet that solves all permissions needs for all users. However, we are actively exploring a few specific options that may at least help with a subset of use cases. One or more of these changes may go out in early 2017.

There’s a few interesting suggestions surfaced by various folks above. Other suggestions, and especially specifics of the underlying problem you’re trying to solve, would be very helpful to us! We’d love to hear the details! What industry you’re in, what exactly you’re organizing with Airtable (cattle? marketing projects? job applicants?), and who exactly you want to be able to see what.

Thank you!


Want Collaborator to only see own tasks

Here is an example. I have a table I want to share with an order and production specs. One person I want to share it with I just want them to be able to change one column - a qty filed on what they produced.

Another example. I want to share a table with someone who is not good at computers so I designed it to have the minimum data she needs. I done want her to even see other tables as she will get confused but this table does have to be in the same database

It seems pretty simple - each view, table etc should have share permissioning. Ideally each column as well



We have a table of accounts and prospects. We would like to limit access to the (insurance) agent to which each belongs. Some companies may need to be viewed by more than one agent. I believe view permissions would give us what we need.



Permission per table at least is needed to be able to have several people on the same base.
At least you could add edit or not permission per table for each user defined by base owner



I think the simplest way permissions could be implemented is on a per-table & per-view basis:

No Access

If using the same permissions that exist today for Bases then we’d be able to add lot more data to our bases and collaborate with more people because we wouldn’t have to worry about privacy issues.



Great to hear you’re exploring this! Here’s my use case, FWIW.

Industry: Education
Base: Student Enrollment / Information
Main Pain Point: I need a variety of staff to have edit access, but the fact that they could delete entire records or accidentally goof up formulas that are critical to integrations or reporting makes me really nervous.
Possible Fix: Make “record deletion ability” specific to each user? Also, view-specificity for permissions would be awesome! Our housing staff should be able to see ‘Applications’ but never edit them. Likewise, nobody except the all-knowing-admin should ever be able to delete students from the database.



Industry: Delivery
Base: Orders
Pain Point: Call center employees should be able to click a checkbox to mark an order as accepted or completed, but not be able to delete or modify the rest of the columns of a row.
Solution: Permissions for each column of a table or view.

1 Like


hello Howie, sure, there’s no “one-size-fits-all” solution. Your challenge as a software maker is to come up with solutions that solve the ‘more common’ user needs while keeping the app robust. Comprehensive user permission is an important part making any web based collaborative software powerful. Thank you.



Also keen to see this. I would like to be able to restrict a user to editing and viewing only the rows that they have entered. This would be particularly useful in conjunction with the existing “link to another record” functionality, where I would only want a collaborator to see their own rows in the linked record.

RowShare implements this perfectly by allowing independent control over viewing and editing for any user on any table. On every table and for every collaborator you have the options:
View: Nothing / Their own rows / All rows
Add and Edit: Nothing / Their own rows / All rows

These rules then apply wherever a user is looking at a table directly or through a linked record field.

1 Like