Skip to main content
Solved

Permissions - restrict access to one column

L

I’m new to airtable, it’s great!

I’m trying to use it for a sign-off / authority database for leave requests, expenses claims etc.

Is it possible to give a collaborator access to some columns but not others on the database? For instance they could create new requests but only people with sign-off authority could tick the “approved” column for requests.

I know you could achieve this effect with a form for new entries but I’d prefer permission controls. Please let me know, thanks

Thanks Lyndon

Best answer by Katherine_Duh

Nik_A_Hafiz wrote:

may i know the answer to this if it’s available?


We don’t have this feature right now, but we would certainly consider it alongside other forms of permissioning. If you don’t mind, would you like to tell us a little about why/how you would use this feature? Would using a form instead (as Lyndon suggested above) work for you?

View original
Did this topic help you find an answer to your question?

N
  • Nik_A_Hafiz
  • Participating Frequently
  • May 26, 2016

may i know the answer to this if it’s available?

K
Nik_A_Hafiz wrote:

may i know the answer to this if it’s available?


We don’t have this feature right now, but we would certainly consider it alongside other forms of permissioning. If you don’t mind, would you like to tell us a little about why/how you would use this feature? Would using a form instead (as Lyndon suggested above) work for you?

J
1 person likes this
  • J
    James_Samuel
N
  • Nik_A_Hafiz
  • Participating Frequently
  • May 27, 2016

hi,

thanks for responding.

my intent is to create a view that still restricts fellow write-enabled collaborators from modifying contents in certain columns whilst able to modify other columns or fields (whether in grid or form view).

example of application for such request would be for certain collaborator(s) like admin at a medical center to update a patient’s visit record but not patients name / id that appear on the same form / grid view.

tks: -nik-

F
T
K
4 people like this
  • F
    Fermin_Azcueta
  • T
    Toni_Nolasco
  • K
    Kirk_Nankivell
  • J
    James_Samuel
C

I second that.

There is a strong need here for more permissions level, either columns or table. We have sensitive information (i.e. salary) that we’d like to store up in the Air but at the momnet we have complicated workaround.

The idea is to create a table with the salaries and restrict its access to only a few people.

We are using the free version (just because we haven’t reached the limit in place) and would happily pay for these features.

J
M
T
6 people like this
  • J
    john_berger
  • M
    Matthew_Gazzano
  • T
    Toni_Nolasco
  • K
    Kirk_Nankivell
  • J
    James_Samuel
  • R
    RobinJ
J
Colin_Claverie wrote:

I second that.

There is a strong need here for more permissions level, either columns or table. We have sensitive information (i.e. salary) that we’d like to store up in the Air but at the momnet we have complicated workaround.

The idea is to create a table with the salaries and restrict its access to only a few people.

We are using the free version (just because we haven’t reached the limit in place) and would happily pay for these features.


I also look forward to more granular permission control - a must for the reasons Colin offered above. If employees are given editing access to enter data, they end up having access to the entire base which contains sensitive commercial data.

If anyone has figured out a workaround I would be keen to hear it ??

The only thing I can think of is to send records to another base (using the API) and then pulling the completed records back again into the master base.

F
K
J
3 people like this
  • F
    Fermin_Azcueta
  • K
    Kirk_Nankivell
  • J
    Julian_Kirkness
K
Katherine_Duh wrote:

We don’t have this feature right now, but we would certainly consider it alongside other forms of permissioning. If you don’t mind, would you like to tell us a little about why/how you would use this feature? Would using a form instead (as Lyndon suggested above) work for you?


Restricting (protecting, locking, whatever we want to call it :slightly_smiling_face: ) editing for columns would be great to ensure that those fields aren’t changed.

It would be incredibly beneficial as I’ve seen others (myself included) accidentally adding new options in a column which creates confusion and a need for constant oversight.

T
K
J
4 people like this
  • T
    Toni_Nolasco
  • K
    Kenneth_Leung
  • J
    Julian_Kirkness
  • R
    RobinJ
T

I think love this feature! We are using free version, but with update I will pay sure for using more Airtable. It’s a must have!

R
1 person likes this
  • R
    RobinJ
A

I second this feature. Would be glad to pay to use it.

J

This is a must have, please implement asap… I’ll pay you.

T
1 person likes this
  • T
    Trevor_Hawley
K
  • Kai_Renz
  • New Participant
  • February 3, 2018

Is there any news on this? I would like to have an airtable where one can offer shifts to employees. The employees could then state there interest by adding their name to one column. The rest of the column may not be changed.

D

+1ing this, as this is a feature we desperately need.

A

Throwing my weight behind this one! We REALLY need to limit access to specific views, or even better, fields. Without such access control, we can’t let partners into our database for fear that they will erroneously edit critical data that they should not have access to.

Right now, it’s all or nothing. So we give our partners XLS files to update, which we then paste back into Airtable. We have also experimented with sync to Google Sheets via Railsware, for partner edit there. But both strategies are silly compared to view- or field-only access.

F
M
2 people like this
  • F
    Fermin_Azcueta
  • M
    Matthew_Gazzano
D
  • Deon_Don
  • New Participant
  • July 20, 2018

+1 for this it’s very hard to use AT as a PM system if anyone can change anything

M
Katherine_Duh wrote:

We don’t have this feature right now, but we would certainly consider it alongside other forms of permissioning. If you don’t mind, would you like to tell us a little about why/how you would use this feature? Would using a form instead (as Lyndon suggested above) work for you?


Hi Katherine,

Is there an update from Airtable on this permissions feature since your May 2016 post? I work on a shared Base with other collaborators from different organizations- having the ability to lock certain fields for editing (Such as ID number fields, Status Fields) so that no one else can be accountable for changing them is very important for me.

I am trying to prevent certain members of my team from accidentally changing a field that may affect reporting. For example- A content creation team should only have access to editing a “Production Status” field, and an Operations team should only have access to editing a “Job Status” field.

Thanks,
Matt

D
F
J
3 people like this
  • D
    David_Isaac
  • F
    Fermin_Azcueta
  • J
    Jason_Dixson
M
Andrew_Enright wrote:

Throwing my weight behind this one! We REALLY need to limit access to specific views, or even better, fields. Without such access control, we can’t let partners into our database for fear that they will erroneously edit critical data that they should not have access to.

Right now, it’s all or nothing. So we give our partners XLS files to update, which we then paste back into Airtable. We have also experimented with sync to Google Sheets via Railsware, for partner edit there. But both strategies are silly compared to view- or field-only access.


Agreed Andrew! I have the same concerns as I collaborate with multiple partners on my base as well.

K
  • Kevin_Cho
  • New Participant
  • August 15, 2019

Would love this feature, i’d immediately convert into a paid user

D

Why is this still not a thing? Seems like a no-brainer to have this kind of thing. I’ve been googling for an hour how to do this without success.

M
H
2 people like this
  • M
    Montana_Senior_
  • H
    H_Barrameda
R
  • RobinJ
  • New Participant
  • December 15, 2023
Colin_Claverie wrote:

I second that.

There is a strong need here for more permissions level, either columns or table. We have sensitive information (i.e. salary) that we’d like to store up in the Air but at the momnet we have complicated workaround.

The idea is to create a table with the salaries and restrict its access to only a few people.

We are using the free version (just because we haven’t reached the limit in place) and would happily pay for these features.


I have this exact same need.  Just logging it here, so that the Airtable team knows it's in demand.

S

Checking in from 2024. Can we please get this added?

J
1 person likes this
  • J
    JacobWu

Reply


Most helpful members this week

Terms & Conditions