Dear All,

I got a different type of requirement......

Source is Oracle database (relation model) and security already
implemented on that.

I am crearting the cubes directly getting the data from Oracle
database.
I want the same securiy on the cube data as it is implimented on Oracle
database label,
and if security changes on the oracle database , it should be directly
reflected to the cube level security during refershing the cubes.

Security in Oracle

Role 1 Superuser (1 user)
Roles 2 Client (5 clients)
Roles 3 Manager (10 user under each clinet looking for 10
locations)

Security changes daily in oracle

Day 1 . user 1 looking for locations 1 and 2
Usre 2 looking for location 3,4 and 5

Day 2 user 1 -looking for 2 and 3
user 2 - looking for 4

Now my objective is to take this securtiy to Analsis servcies
dynamically whenever it got changes in Oracle database.

Or any other situation , how can impimented that security.
after that I also need cell level security on the cubes.

Please help me that..


Thanks

Ricky

Sorry. I know of no way to do this automatically. You will have to write an
application which translates and re-sychronizes the structures. One possible
way would be to look at the UDF technique of dynamic security as outlined
here:
http://www.mosha.com/msolap/samples/...20security.zip

--
Dave Wickert [MSFT]
dwickert (AT) online (DOT) microsoft.com
Program Manager
BI Systems Team
SQL BI Product Unit (Analysis Services)
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


"RICKY" <vinayusa (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote

Problem with dynamic dimension security is if a user doesn't have access to
any members of the secured dimension they still get access to the rest with
totals for that dimension. Is there a way of specifying if there's no access
to the dimension then there's no access to the cube?

If you could secure cubes and databases via a function then you could
replicate just about any security system stored in an RDB. One for Analysis
Services 2010 I suppose

"Dave Wickert [MSFT]" wrote: