[AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs

My 2c
  The only MDE I use is as a REFERENCE to my MDB for my application
authentication logic. I have just started using the BEU in the same MDE.
Testing has been slow but so far the BEU has worked with out any problems in
this capacity. It seems to work just as if it was imbedded in the MDB.

  I do lock down my MDB tight (the only exception is certain users have
access to the formatting of reports) and password protect the "code window".
In the project that I have been working on, I must allow the user to modify
formatting and field positions on reports. So for me that rules out an MDE
completely.

Robert Gracie
www.servicexp.com


>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] 
> Sent:	Thursday, April 17, 2003 3:00 AM
> To:	accessd at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject:	RE: [AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs
> 
> My 2c
> I have never used an MDE and I have never had a user curious enough (for
> curious read stupid) to tamper with an FE. And that's a LOT of users at a
> lot of compnaies over the years. I must live a charmed life. I wouldn't
> hesitate to go the MDE route if I had to, but I never have.
> 
> (Just hadn't seen any posts on this side of the debate and couldn't stand
> the idea of the list being unanimous on any subject ;-) )
> 
> Andy Lacey
> <http://www.minstersystems.co.uk>
> 
> 
> 	 -----Original Message-----
> 	From: 	accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [<mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com>] 
> 	Sent:	17 April 2003 00:23
> 	To:	accessd at databaseadvisors.com
> 	Subject:	RE: [AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs
> 
> 	I had a user inform me that she had tried to make a change to a
> table and the database wouldn't let her.  The database was split, and she
> was trying to make the change to the linked table through the FE.  One has
> to wonder why any user thinks they have the right to just start modifying
> tables, but things like this DO happen.  And to then TELL ME that she was
> trying to do this... it boggles the mind!
> 
> 	In most cases I use the split FE/BE, with the FE located on a server
> and downloaded by a shortcut on the user's desktop.  The user can modify
> whatever they want on their copy.  The next time they fire up the FE, they
> get a clean copy from the server.  I usually have a copy on my system at
> my office as well.
> 
> 	John W. Colby
> 	Colby Consulting
> 	<www.ColbyConsulting.com>
> 
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> 	[<mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On> Behalf Of
> Charlotte
> 	Foust
> 	Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 7:13 PM
> 	To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
> 	Subject: RE: [AccessD] Secured vs. Unsecured FEs
> 
> 
> 	When I do independent contracting, that is exactly what I do ...
> Unless
> 	the contract specfies otherwise.   I learned many years ago that it
> was
> 	the only way to protect the application from "curious" users or
> those
> 	who had taken a class in Access and were anxious to use what they
> 	learned. <g>
> 
> 	Charlotte Foust
> 
> 
> 	-----------------------------------------------------
> 	eMailBoss puts you in command of your email.
> 	Get your copy today at <http://www.eMailBoss.com> << File:
> ATT00022.txt >>  << File: ATT00012.txt >> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3444 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://databaseadvisors.com/pipermail/accessd/attachments/20030417/ab89f53e/attachment-0001.bin>