ck
My feedback
17 results found
-
50 votesck
supported this idea
·
-
7 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment ck
supported this idea
·
-
1 voteck
shared this idea
·
-
121 votesck
supported this idea
·
-
134 votesck
supported this idea
·
-
128 votesck
supported this idea
·
-
285 votes
Thank you for posting this request. We encourage others to “vote it up” for consideration in a future release.
Note that as of SMA 8.0, you can manually archive users, but the understanding on this request is that we automate it and that is what is under review.ck
supported this idea
·
-
288 votesck
supported this idea
·
-
242 votesunder review ·
AdminKent Feid
(Director of Product Management | Data Protection & KACE Unified Endpoint Management, Quest KACE)
responded
As previously announced, we adopted a new Dell Updates framework starting in the KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) release 11.1. This change was triggered by Dell’s plan to end of life the framework previously used by KACE. This new framework developed by Dell is supposed to bring additional capabilities as it matures. We are keeping a close eye on these incremental improvements made by Dell and are hopeful that things like mass passing of passwords will come in time to develop against.
ck
supported this idea
·
-
14 votesck
supported this idea
·
-
439 votes
This feature request is under review. We encourage others to vote for it to be considered in a future release.
ck
supported this idea
·
-
2 votesck
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteck
shared this idea
·
-
103 votesck
supported this idea
·
-
561 votesck
supported this idea
·
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment ck
commented
This would also help reduce duplication of documents if multiple assets are on one document.
ck
shared this idea
·
-
105 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment ck
commented
This is a huge thing, and shouldn't be terribly difficult to implement. Please add this feature to both software distribution and patch scheduling!
ck
supported this idea
·
Yeah I have a few good examples of where this would be super helpful.
1. Allowing role to have access to certain credentials to allow them to set certain credentials for scripts, managed deployemetns, etc.
2. Allowing role to modify what devices can be affected by a particular managed deployment or script, but not the list.
3. Preventing certain roles from altering the deployment parameters of managed installs, but allowing them to assign to certain machines etc.
4. Allow roles to update maybe even archive, but not delete asset objects.
5. Allow roles to have access to certain credentials.
Probably more out there as well.