As a Knack Builder, I would like the view filters to match the Data Source filters I have specificied so that I able both able to use filters AND not display record values to customers that they should not see.
Scenario: Data Source is set up to only show records to the logged-in user's Company. But, if filters are allowed on a view to be set by the user, those filters show all companies, which might be sensitive data that the logged-in user should not see.
When is this going to be implemented please? It's such a basic, yet essential feature.
Yes I would agree, this is a major limitation when creating a multi-tenant platform. Seems rather basic.
this feature is crucial.
We don't want users to remove the filter and be able to see records we don't want them to see
I would like to stress that this Feature Request is really crucial to Knack users like me who are selling to a multitude of multi-person entities. There are three scenarios for the use of Knack.
A Knack account is used to create an app that is:
[1] used by a multitude of single-person customers,
[2] used by a multitude of users within a single entity,
[3] used by a multitude of multi-person entities.
Scenarios [1] and [2] are fundamentally similar. Scenario [3] is very different.
My distinction between [1 & 2] and [3] is that the customer for a Knack-built app in [1 & 2] is a single entity (whether John Doe or the Marketing Department of Proctor and Gamble) and in [3] the customer for the Knack-built app is a multitude of multi-person entities (businesses like real estate offices, architectural firms, or franchises).
The absence of a way to completely isolate one multi-person entity from another in my app is a constant limitation. This affects filtering the most (at the moment). Only objects and fields that are common to all multi-person entities can be filtered without exposing the custom data of other multi-person entities. This means that you can only filter by Date and by fields that are either/or. Every other type of field's data is exposed to every multi-person entity when filtering, in other words every record of every multi-person entity appears in the filter choices.
I had suggested that you need another level in the User Roles Objects area: *Organizations* > Accounts > User Roles. Another way of looking at it would be Accounts > Sub-Accounts > User Roles so that Sub-Accounts of an Account could share records.
Has anyone found a solution yet? I’m developing an app with a customer portal and right now all the filters have been turned off because we don’t want them to see the other customer’s data in the filter drop down. Why are the dropdowns not showing what actually in the view not what’s in the entire table?? Incredibly frustrating.
I’m struggling to understand the issue here…
The following table is showing Tasks related to the logged in account:
Note that I have a filter set yet all the tasks are for me, the logged in account. Here is the Source set up for the table:
Even if I use the filter to search for another accounts tasks, the list will not show any records for the other account.
Must be missing something??
Julian
Oh - just read you other post and see what you mean - it’s about filtering the content of the search drop down not the content of the table.
I see your point here and I think the only. work around at the moment would be to build the table so that only fields in the table could be used to search and also limit which fields are shown so that privacy is retained. Not ideal I know.
HOWEVER, is is possible to set table filters in Javascript and even hide them. Using this technique it is possible to use filterable fields in a search form (which would be a set of updatable fields on the account record) and then when these are updated to set the page URL to include the relevant search parameters. It’s quite complicated to do but I have done this in one system where similar issues were present.
I agree that a “Filter Search Options based on Record Source” would be a useful option but it would need to be clever enough to allow filters for non controversial data elements with no restriction. I think this would be quite difficult to implement for Knack???
