On the Question of Data Separation...

[ben_hollifield]

The need to securely segment data between groups, departments, or even locations is constant, even within IT organizations. What organization doesn't have a particular group that is subject to extenuating compliance requirements that necessitate that their data remain hidden from the rest of the organization? As we delve deeper into the world of Enterprise Service Management, this need only grows. I have yet to find an HR organization that doesn't wish to keep their data separate from IT. Additional requirements for the financial department, medical organizations, etc only add to the complexity!

Historically, there have been 3 methods by which to attack this:

1. Access Control Rules - These make sense at first glance, but can be a real drag on performance. For simple needs, field level security, and role-based security, you're all good! For complex scripted conditions, you'd best keep these at arm's length. Remember, that script with 2 GlideRecord queries that you built into that ACL is going to run for every single record on that 1.2 million record Incident table at Acme Corp, and every single time you view the table - that's potentially 2.4 million queries needed for a simple table list! Not to mention that your users will see that annoying "XX rows removed by security" message every time they view that list.
2. Domain Separation - Pure power! Domain separation is a wonderful thing - separated and secured data between every domain; not to mention the ability to have separate processes for each domain - business rules, client scripts, and now even workflows that are unique to each domain in your instance! Sounds great, but make sure you know what you're getting into. The maintenance and testing requirements on a domain separated instance are far larger than a typical instance, and there is a financial uptick that comes with a license to use domain separation. If you need separated processes between domains, go for it! If you only need separated data, then this may be a hammer too big for the nail.
3. Before Query Business Rules - These are en vogue these days, and for good reason! But, they can sound a bit intimidating. What exactly do they do? Well, before query business rules allow you to inject custom queries onto the front of every database access, so that you may limit the data returned according to whatever custom requirements you may have - these rules can be specific to particular tables and user sessions, providing a great deal of flexibility. The best part? Before query business rules only run once for each table access. So, compared to option 1 above (with the 2.4 million queries), this option only requires a single query - quite a bit more efficient, eh?

Note that each of the methods above apply to every database access - meaning that simple lists will be affected, but so will data returned in your CMS pages, your knowledge base, reference fields, etc. Each of these methods is equally secure and should be functionally identical to the end user. And each one has it's own valid use cases. So, which should you choose? Whenever I'm approached with this question, I generally have 3 golden rules:

1. Are you segmenting data at the field level? In other words, do you want group A and group B to both have access to a given record, but only group B should be able to see field XYZ? If so, then Access Control Rules are your only option - the other options segment data at the record level.
2. Do you require significantly different processes between group A and group B, as well as segmented data? Are there many such groups that each require their own processes and own data? If so, Domain Separation is your baby. There is some gray area here, as small levels of process differentiation are possible via simple code. But, for significant variations, DS all the way.
3. In almost all other cases, go with Before Query Business Rules. They're relatively cheap, both financially and computationally, and they get the job done.

Disclaimer: Promotional Material Below...

Understanding that Golden Rule 3 will apply to most folks, and understanding that configuring before query business rules can be onerous, I've put together an application to simplify the process of building the most efficient business rules with the least amount of effort and time. This solution is available on ServiceNow Share currently, and has been road-tested heavily. Check out the video below, try it out in your dev instance, and see if it works for you!

Simple Record Separation on Share

For the latest supported release, visit Simple Separation on the ServiceNow Store

[ben_hollifield]

Hey Laurie,

Sure, I'll give this some thought. The key for me is being able to implement this kind of a condition in a way that is simple for a 'point-and-click' configuration. If I get the UI too cluttered w/ too many exceptions, then the tool becomes hard to use. If I can think of a way to do this simply, I may add it to a future version.

Thanks and, again, glad you got it working for your needs!

[Laurie Marlowe1]

Hey Ben,

We are getting a lot of javascript warnings thrown by the tool since it is on the task table.   It is affecting performance.   I have the resolution from SN Tech Support, but I cannot make the change to the tool.   Would you be willing?   I attached the information from SN.

Thanks,

Laurie

[ben_hollifield]

Hi Laurie - I've tested this on a couple of other instances, and in all my testing cases the 'execute function' value on the business rule is 'false' by default. In this configuration, the error you speak of does not occur.

Perhaps the default value of the 'execute function' field on business rules in your instance has been changed to 'true'. Or, it's possible that you are on a specialized build where this default value is different. In any case, changing the 'execute function' value on those specific business rules to 'false' should rectify this issue for you.

I'm hesitant to update the Share app, as I haven't received this issue from anyone else of the dozens of customers actively using this solution. I'd prefer not to risk changing behavior for those customers if the issue is isolated to your instance.

Thanks - I hope this resolves your issue!

[Laurie Marlowe1]

Hey Ben,

Guess who is bugging you again????

I'm trying to write a client script that uses an assignment group that is listed in the Separation Tool in the Groups field.   I'm getting a strange error.     Here is the URL to my post:   Unable to copy/paste sys_id for assignment group

Any ideas if this is the tool?

Thanks,

Laurie

[ben_hollifield]

Laurie,

You will never see client-side errors as a results of Simple Separation, as it runs solely server-side. See the reply by Gurpreet on your post - it tells you where the issue lies.