Re: [foxboro] Locking / Disabling equipment

We allow Select access, due to the fact that we do not have every point on 
graphics.  At one time we used protection classes everywhere to limit some 
access, but this got unwieldy very quickly, and the weakness of this 
security model (access control from every graphic/faceplate/detail display 
rather than at the controller) disturbs me.  We have now started "locking" 
parameters we don't want changed, either via loopback connections or 
connections to other blocks.  This is a PITA (I wish there was at least a 
shorthand for "this block", like "self" in some object-oriented computer 
languages), but it is the most foolproof way.

That said, we also do not rely on the DCS as a lockout/tagout mechanism. 
We use physical isolation/removal of energy sources wherever possible.


Corey Clingo
BASF Corp.






"Weiss, Andreas" <andreas.weiss@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
08/24/2005 01:19 PM
Please respond to foxboro

              To:  foxboro 
              cc: 
         Subject:       Re: [foxboro] Locking / Disabling equipment






> However, anyone with access to SELECT (or any=20
> other way to get
> block default display) also has access to the DISABLE=20
> parameter.

Access to Select including block default display in combination with
"dmcmd omsets enabled" is only allowed for a special group of people.

Andreas



 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
 
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe:      mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
 

Other related posts: