This is best Fabric, Power BI, SQL and AI community event. How do we know? The last event sold out! Save €200 with code FABCMTY200.
Register nowA new Data Days event is coming soon! This time we’re going bigger than ever. Fabric, Power BI, SQL, AI and more. Don't miss out.
i came across below methods of implementing object level security in power bi , are these right methods which I should use to implement column level security, are there any disadvantages or limitations of below methods? what is the right or appropriate way to implement object level security in power bi?
1. using field parameters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ND-DYBErMwc
2. using Tableau editor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3_Gu5FTUhw
Solved! Go to Solution.
Hi @powerbiexpert22 - Object-Level Security (OLS) controls access to specific tables or columns within a dataset, ensuring users only see the objects they are allowed to access. While Row-Level Security (RLS) restricts rows of data, OLS governs access to metadata-level objects.
Use Tabular Editor to define OLS roles, as this ensures that restricted objects are inaccessible across all tools and scenarios.
Use Field Parameters when dynamic field switching is needed but security is not a concern.
Quick reference Below snapshot.
Proud to be a Super User! | |
Hi @powerbiexpert22 - Object-Level Security (OLS) controls access to specific tables or columns within a dataset, ensuring users only see the objects they are allowed to access. While Row-Level Security (RLS) restricts rows of data, OLS governs access to metadata-level objects.
Use Tabular Editor to define OLS roles, as this ensures that restricted objects are inaccessible across all tools and scenarios.
Use Field Parameters when dynamic field switching is needed but security is not a concern.
Quick reference Below snapshot.
Proud to be a Super User! | |
Sign up to receive a private message when registration opens and key events begin.
If you have recently started exploring Fabric, we'd love to hear how it's going. Your feedback can help with product improvements.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 32 | |
| 26 | |
| 21 | |
| 20 | |
| 15 |
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 65 | |
| 43 | |
| 28 | |
| 22 | |
| 22 |