We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Post your ideas
Post ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted and upvote them if they matter to you,
Post an idea
Upvote ideas that matter most to you
Get feedback from the IBM team to refine your idea
Help IBM prioritize your ideas and requests
The IBM team may need your help to refine the ideas so they may ask for more information or feedback. The product management team will then decide if they can begin working on your idea. If they can start during the next development cycle, they will put the idea on the priority list. Each team at IBM works on a different schedule, where some ideas can be implemented right away, others may be placed on a different schedule.
Receive notification on the decision
Some ideas can be implemented at IBM, while others may not fit within the development plans for the product. In either case, the team will let you know as soon as possible. In some cases, we may be able to find alternatives for ideas which cannot be implemented in a reasonable time.
Mounting Shared drives with restrictive permissions
A way to mount shared drives (CIFS shares) in a capacity that utilises each users existing permissions on the remote share.
Currently the way that we this is set up for CP4D (3.0.1) is utilising defined account credentials that are stored in a secret. The Storage is then created as a PV using these defined credentials. But this user has R/W access to all shared drives - and upon mounting the drives in JupyterLab / Rstudio etc; All users will have the same full permission sets that have been applied to the PV to be mounted into the environment.
Have mounts added to JupyterLab / Rstudio as follows:
All of these are currently available, and as the defined account in the secret used for the mounting has full access, and defines the permission set for the mounts as 775/664 all users have 775/664 permissions on the mounts respectively. But, if the users were accessing via their own accounts within the BHP network they would have more restricted Access.
What we want is to be able to provide a scenario more like:
User A would have access to Folder_A,
User B would have access to Folder_B,
User C would have access to Folder_A, and Folder_C
Do not place IBM confidential, company confidential, or personal information into any field.