[AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs

...always, always, always as an mde ...a secured mde if data security is
required ...even if the contract requires I supply source code, I do that on
a separate cd with security different from that of the mde, never installed
...in addition, I've shifted to using runtime installs whenever possible and
always include a clause that makes user induced problems correctable at my
full hourly rate.

...sometimes its just not feasible to block all user access ...in which case
I go to extremes to document the status of the master mdb each time I leave,
usually copying it to an encrypted directory with only me having access.

...users will lie through their teeth when confronted with having screwed
with a critical app ...and if you have not protected yourself, they'll
readily destroy your credibility with the client ...fortunately, clients
rarely need a second demonstration of user culpability.

William Hindman
"All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." Edmund
Burke

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Bond" <stephen at bondsoftware.co.nz>
To: <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 6:04 PM
Subject: [AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs


> How many independent contractors in the group
> provide the Access FE to their customers
> either as an MDE, or, as a secured MDB, so
>   (a) changes can't be made, and,
>   (b) the VBA is password protected?
>
> I have my reasons for doing so,
> (fixing some amateur's efforts to
>  add an enhancement; protecting
>  my not small investment in
>  training and upskilling; these two
>  will do to start)
>
> and of course there are arguments against.
>
> Can I have some input please.  Both sides
> of the argument are welcome.
>
> TIA
>
>
> Stephen Bond
> _______________________________________________
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>