Schedule Editor Security

[Former Member]

Hi Experts,

Am trying to provide a user access to the Schedule Editor, but no other "Admin" functionality. In System Security, the user is assigned to a role configured to be assigned to the following Services: Scheduler, SchedulerEditor.

This user can login to MII and sees the the Scheduler and Schedule Editor. The odd part is that the user can create a new schedule, but as soon as he adds a transaction all of the input fields in the web form go blank and so of course he can never actually configure or save a schedule.

I can login as with a user with XMII Administrator role and the Scheduler behaves as expected.

Am I missing a security setting somewhere? Is restricting system access like this feasible?

Thanks in advance!

[Former Member]

Hi David,

which MII version are you using? There have been slight changes between 12.0 and 12.1 onwards.

Are there any entries in the NetWeaver log?

Michael

Edited by: Michael Otto on Oct 25, 2010 9:39 AM

[Former Member]

Hi Michael,

Thanks for the response. I'm using 12.0.7 and there aren't any log entries of any interest.

Regards,

Dave

[jcgood25]

Does this user belong to a role that has 'Admin' service permission? After this base service, then the ala-carte ones for Scheduler, etc. can be added.

[Former Member]

Hi Jeremy,

that's interesting. I had a short test with a (new) user that only has onle (new) role, and only the "ScheduleEditor" service was assigned to the role. The User could create and save a new job without problems. As I have tested on 12.0.2, maybe something has been changed in later packages?

The steps I took:

- create role

- create User

- assign role to user

- assign role to ScheduleEditor service

- create Content Display Tab with MII Menu link for role (/XMII/Menu.jsp)

- logon with user, open Schedule Editor

- create new job (all input parameters were displayed correctly) and save

Michael

[Former Member]

Michael, Jeremy, Others,

I am still stumped on this. I have a role, called NEW_ROLE for this example. A user is setup as a member of the NEW_ROLE role and XMII Users role. I've set all sorts of combination of security Services for NEW_ROLE and in all cases get the same result (so long of course as I don't remove the SchedulerEditor service):

1. User requests a New Schedule

2. User selects a transaction and presses OK

3. The selected transaction briefly appears in the Transaction field but then the entire input FORM (all fields) is cleared.

This lag to me indicates to me that it is being cleared in the Schedule Editor's Javascript. Looking at the function, it appears to be submitting the form to "CMSAdmin" once the transaction is selected and for some reason rejects the selection and clears the form.

I've EVEN tried adding ScheduleEditor to XMII Users and still get the same result.

I do not have this problem with users with the XMII Administration role.

I'm really struggling with this one...

Thanks again in advance!

[jcgood25]

Sounds like the html form is being reset. Does this user belong to a Role that gives him/her the ability to pull the Transaction Inputs and Ouput lists that show up in the table. Is it limited to all TRX's or just particular one(s)?

Have you tried doing a view source and looking for the a DIV tag with class="SCROLLAREA"? anything in there like a class="FORMTABLE"?

[Former Member]

Hi Jeremy,

Does the user belong to a role that he can view transaction inputs and outputs? ... How do I confirm this? I tried adding XacuteDevelopment to the NEW_ROLE and I am successfully able to open the Workbench and view any transaction. This added security doesn't change the behaviour of the Scheduler that I was describing.

This issue appears for any transaction selected. It also appears for any user with similar role assignments and on any PC (i.e. is not a client issue).

I can indeed see both HTML elements that you describe, they both describe a table that isn't populated or gets populated at any point.

Is there any sort of contention that could be arising from multiple roles being assigned to a single user? I don't have access to the UME to perform some trial and error on the user/role mapping.