In addition to what Tom has said:
For years, those of us who realized the ease with which a determined
cracker
could get past ULS have been advising that if your data was worth US$150
to
you (the cost of password recovery software on the Internet) should use a
server back end for security and that compiling to .MDE would protect your
code. Now, it turns out that the ULS password recovery code can be had
for
free, and there is now software, either free or inexpensive, to convert an
..MDE back into a usable .MDB.
With the new ACCDB in Access 2007, access to SharePoint data is
enhanced...
it's not truly relational, with referential itegrity, but many companies
are
using it, and finding Access a good front-end, just as it has been for
server DBs. And, like server DBs, it has its own data security. There are
additional datatypes, and user interface changes (the latter, you will
have
to decide for yourself if it is an advantage or disadvantage). I think
you'll find a longer and more-detailed list of changes at the
http://office.microsoft.com
website.
ULS has been convenient for keeping users from stumbling over their own
keystrokes, but that can be coded -- it won't be truly "secure" but will
be
about as secure as ULS has turned out to be. In fact, one of my earliest
paying jobs with Access was to implement a "security lite" scheme for just
that purpose, and the client and prime contractor were worried not at all
that it was relatively easy for a knowledgeable Access user to break.
Larry Linson
Microsoft Office Access MVP
"evenlater" <evancater@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:6d31dfdd-03b1-43e0-bd1e-ffa1c6447bb8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>I realize that user level security is not available for Access
> databases in the new AK27 format .accdb, and I know that I can still
> utilize ULS by making my database an .mdb file.
>
> But I'm wondering WHY Microsoft is scrapping a feature that I've
> always found to be extremely useful. Surely they don't expect that
> users of the new database format will no longer have a need to assign
> permissions at different levels for different users! Why would they
> want to make Access LESS powerful for a wide variety of uses?
>
> So I'm thinking they must be thinking that .accdb developers will use
> a different method to achieve the functionality previously offered by
> ULS. Is the built-in ULS feature unnecessary because the same results
> can be achieved using VBA? (Of course, there have always been some
> kinds of permissions that can only be managed with VBA -- for example,
> ULS can be used to set table-level permissions but not record-level
> permissions.)
>
> Also, what are the selling points of the new .accdb format? What
> advantages does it have that .mdb does not? I am concerned that if I
> develop a new db in the old format that future versions of Access
> might not sup****t it.
>
> Thanks for your counsel.
|
