We use Matter level security to create ethical walls in DM (DM 5.2.106.5, on Windows 7). We had to choose the "matter level" option rather than client level because we have many multi matter clients and sometimes we don't want to apply security globally at the client level. We have been using Legal Views in DM Explorer to apply this security. Problem is, I have multiple libraries, so i have to log into one library, apply security for 5 or 6 users to each matter (sometimes I will have 50 or so matters that I must work through one by one), then I have to log out of Server A, and use DM Connection Util. to log into Server B, etc, and do the same. This has resulted in taking upwards of one whole week to accomplish this task for one ethical wall, and there were many mistakes made in applying the security. So I developed for myself a little utility using Intapp (fka Tsunami), which will take a .txt file as input and apply the security paramaters (user, group, access type) defined in the file, recursing all libraries. This works ok, but it's not something I can easily share with, i.e., our helpdesk. I started working on a VB app, and sketched out the form, and have written some of the code. If someone at OT (you're probably better and faster at programming than I am) were interested in continuing this, I would be happy to share the code I have so far and/or the form. Basically, it allows me to select multiple client/matters (non-contiguous) in the top frame, then in the lower frame I select the users and groups and thesecurity that should be applied to each of them, then I can check off the libraries I want to apply this to, hit APPLY and the security is applied across all libraries. It would be ideal if the tool would write the data about all intended secured matters to a separate table, because if a new matter comes into the system (we sync this data from our accounting system) after I've applied the security, I would like it to be able to check to see if security should be applied to that new matter and then take care of that. Please let me know if this is of interest, or if further clarification is required. -- Julie
