Thycotic Community Forum

8/27/2010 1:09:09 PM Nick D Posts: 58	We have a need to have a secret with only 1 user, but this user must only have View and Edit, but no Share. Is this possible? if we need to modify the permissions of the secret, we will have to use Unlimited Admin, which is ok. When I try to do this, secret server tells me that 1 user must have Share. Any way to do this?
	0 • link
8/27/2010 1:11:38 PM Nick D Posts: 58	The exact error is "Please ensure at least one user or group has Share permission."
	0 • link
8/30/2010 4:18:55 AM Jeremy A Posts: 61	I suppose a hack way around it would be to create an empty group, and then apply that group to the secret with share permissions, and then explicity add the single user with read -- http://www.ignitionmsp.com/
	0 • link
8/30/2010 6:33:25 AM Tucker Posts: 87	Hello Nick, It is not possible to explicitly have a Secret without Share permission. Although, you could do a work around like Jeremy discribed. I would recommend having at least one Administrator having Owner permission and managing it at a policy level where that person is trusted not to share it. You will have the detailed Audit of any changes that may occur. -- Regards, Tucker
	0 • link
9/8/2010 6:40:59 AM Nick D Posts: 58	Ok thanks. I'll figure it out, but having the ability to truly lock out a secret would have benefit (at least for us). The only way to modify it would be unlimited admin mode, and that would be ok.
	0 • link

---