Re: user permissions

> Sort of. Create two tables a login table with user details and a specific > field for a ROLE. > > Then create a roles table that lists the various permissions. I store this [8<] > This process is significantly simpler when managing users, it's easier to > adjust permissions on one role than to edit a bunch of users when something > changes. In this mechanism, does a "role" differ significantly from a "group"? I have to admin a CRM system that has both roles /and/ groups, and it always seems a bit excessive. But maybe there's some benefit to roles, as such, that I'm not seeing. Thanks, Ben