If you are following this thread, I started a new thread with a posting that has the zip file of the sample application attached.  It has the same basic description of "Problems with integrated users ...."  It is in this same Role Based Security forum section.

James J.

Yes, I have tested this with just a simple solution that contains 1 Windows project that contains 1 form that contains 1 button.



This is all created by default by the method I described in my previous post. Tell me which files I need to post for you ... do I need to zip up the whole solution subdirectory structure? I am using Strataframe version 1.7.0.2 for this ....

Could you post a sample app that demonstrates this?

Yes, the program.cs file already contained code defining the integrated Administrator user and the Maintenance user.



This code was already in place in the program.cs file when I started the solution by picking the "Strataframe Windows Application with Security" template to add the first project to the solution. I did change the user id and password but the "SecurityMaintenanceUserPk" is still -2 in the code.



As stated previously, the application will recognize this id and password at the login form level and runs the application okay after the login of the integrated Maintenance user but if you create an instance of the security dialog such as in the sample code and call it lodialog for example, and then call "lodialog.showdialog()" in an event handler for a button click, you get an access denied pop-up message just like if any other non-administrator tried to run the security dialog. If you run the same code but have logged in as the integrated Administrator user, it works okay and the security dialog loads as expected.

Did you setup the security user in the InitApplication event handler in program.cs? You need to set the user name, the password and it's ID (usually -2).

BTW:

I am using the same code as Juan listed in his last posting, only using the C# version to create the instance of the security dialog and then call the show dialog method.  This is also the same code that is shown in the Strataframe documentation about security and integrated users on how to call the security dialog.  I have also tried it without wrapping the code in the "Using" syntax.

The documentation states that the Security Maintenance integrated user is designed for "bootstrapping" the process of setting up users for an application so that the users do not have to be predefined at design time and distributed with the application.  Am I missing a step that is required to activate this functionality?  Does the Security Maintenance integrated user id and password need to be defined in the security data before distribution?  The application authenticates the integrated Security Maintenance user without a problem but will only allow the integrated "Administrator" user to access the security dialog ....

Help Please ......

I am having the same problem with the newest version of StrataFrame that I have installed ... the Administrator user can run all parts of the application and access the security dialog but the Security Maintenance user can only run the application parts but gets an "Access Denied" message when I try to access the security dialog through the same code that works for the Administrator user ... I have the call to the security dialog setup on a button click for testing.

Hi Trent

75% solved. After working on this I have access with the build-in administrator account to the security dialog.

Also I grant a user persission to access the security dialog and is working.

Also have access to the application with the build-in security account, but... This user have not access to the security dialog.

Do you have some ideas of what can prevent this user to have access there?

Now I'm using a simple access:

Regards

Everything is possible, just keep trying...

Hi Trent

1. If you login as an Admin, you should be able to get to anything, including security.
2. You never mentioned trying to login with a user created from within security.  Have you done this?  Does it work?  Does it cause an error?
3. Do you have a user with the same name as your hard coded user names?
4. Have you tried this same logic in a brand new SF app with all of the defaults to see if it is reproducable outside of your application environment?

1. I can login with the defaul administrator and enter and use every part of the application but if I try to enter to the security editor gives me an error, the shown in the first mail. This is the only one function I can not enter woth the integrated admin.

2. As I'm deloping and application, and have only two users, none have access to security, reason is because I always use the default admin account to change permissons and test with the only two users I have.

3) No, the names are completly different

4) No yet.

The integrated security account does not enter to the application, it shows an error, that I alredy post.

Can you tell me which fields are new, I can review the values in the tables to see if they have those fields.

Regards

Everything is possible, just keep trying...

The problem that you are having seems a little odd.  Im am going to answer under the understanding that you mentioned that when you login with the Admin you can get to anything and when you log in with the security user you get the error.  There are a couple of problems in your statement that don't make sense.

1. If you login as an Admin, you should be able to get to anything, including security.
2. You never mentioned trying to login with a user created from within security.  Have you done this?  Does it work?  Does it cause an error?
3. Do you have a user with the same name as your hard coded user names?
4. Have you tried this same logic in a brand new SF app with all of the defaults to see if it is reproducable outside of your application environment?

I can tell you this much, nothing in this regard has changed.  There have been some structure changes made between releases to account for a new field or two (i.e. Display Name).  So you will want to verify that as well.