Advanced User Permissions


#134

Is there a way to limit access collaborators? I want to see if this product would work for my business, so far it looks great. We have several sales agents and I wanted to see if there is a way to give access to only certain tables within a base? It would be nice to have a table for each agent but limit the access so one agent cannot see the table of another agent. Let me know if this is possible, or the other alternative would be to have all sales in one sheet and limit what each agent can see by different views. Let me know if any of these options are possible.

The only other alternative that may work for our business would be to link between bases, so each agent can have a base, and have one that tracks my inventory. I see that several users have requested this and Airtable is considering it.


#135

+1 on this.

It would be very useful to be able to specify a View to enforce when inviting a Collaborator on board. This would afford collaborators a cleaner view of records relevant to them and could also be used as a crude means of row-level security.

At present you facilitate (through the UI) sharing a read-only View and inviting a Collaborator. Essentially I am looking for a conflation of the two. This would likely only make sense when inviting others on board with Edit Only privileges.


#136

I would like this too. I want to share SOME data from a base, and allow my collaborators to add to and edit it, without giving them access to ALL the data in the base. I cannot figure out any way to do this, as long as Airtable does not support linking between bases.


#137

Agree with this. I’ve just added a similar question around allowing users to edit a record without giving them access to the whole base.


#138

Yes, please!! Definitely would increase security and reduce my worry to be able to give collaborators access to just certain views in certain tables!


#139

Adding my vote for this functionality.


#140

I too need this feature.
I am running a consulting shop for software implementation.
I have one master list on which I track all of our clients open items.
I have a view for each client, of their open items and would like to provide them editor access JUST TO THEIR VIEW.
Very disappointed that this is not possible today!!!


#141

Is there any update on this?


#142

Does this help? https://airtable.com/whatsnew


#143

The What’s New is a good list for new features, but he’s probably looking for something like this:


#144

+1 Looking to restrict Collaborator Acces to tables


#145

@Airtable_Support would be very much appreciated if any updates could be shared for the roadmap of this feature!


#146

No, this doesn’t solve the problem because the viewer can just view it but can’t edit it or add comments.

We need to create views that a staff member or client can work in where they ONLY see their own tasks.

I don’t want one staff member to be start questioning why someone else got the assignment and they didn’t.

And a task like “Prepare to terminate Bob next week” can be seen by everyone instead of just the HR person you wanted to get things ready.


#147

Haha, seems like an oddly specific example :stuck_out_tongue:


#148

Having experience managing permissions in other systems, I agree with keeping it simple.

My use case: restrict the ability to approve an item (e.g., update the “approved” column on an expense request or vacation request) to a group (managers). Another: limit the ability of a group of users (say employees) to see a specific table (say salary data) while still allowing access to other related info (say, employee contact info).

A simple way to accomplish both of these is to put view/edit permissions on tabs. I could combine that with linked records and lookups to accomplish everything I need, with much less complexity than view/column permissions. Tabs could inherit permissions from the base, or have their own.


#149

Adding my voice to requests for table-level permissions:

We have two categories of data that we use - call them “programming” and “operational”.

Programming data needs to be edited by lots of people and inaccuracy is not too bad of a problem. Operational data only needs to be edited by two people who know what they’re doing. Inaccuracy here is a business-breaking problem, so we can’t currently keep it under the same permissions as the Programming data.

Unfortunately the operational data contains some core entities that are relevant to almost everything in Programming world. This means that we need to maintain a second version of the operational data in the programming base - with all the attendant problems that brings.

If we were able to use airtable as the source of truth for our operational data, we would potentially never consider moving to a “Real” database. However this bifurcation means that we can only ever see airtable as a flexible interim solution until we can move to a classic relational database.


#150

'+ 1 for this feature.
Role management (permission management) on tab/view level would help a lot!
You could use airtable for that :wink: #airtableception


#151

+1 for this feature. Need more granularity of permissions at the table and/or VIEW level.

Also would be a plus if there was an option to copy existing permissions when new bases are created


#152

+1. I believe that granular permissions (hiding tables or columns for certain editors) allows for much more serious enterprise uses.


#153

I Agree! setting permission to certain fields or tables would be a whole new level for Airtable. Hope developers find a way to introduce it. :pray: