Home

Be ware when adding someone to your Planner....

%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-156546%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EBe%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-156546%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EI'm%20an%20enthousiastic%20user%20and%20ambassador%20of%20MS%20Office365%2FE3.%20I%20have%20created%20a%20private%20team%20in%20Teams%20and%20added%20Planner%20(Tasks%2C%20kanban)%20functionality.%20During%20working%20with%20the%20cards%20in%20Planner%2C%20I%20have%20invited%20people%20who%20aren't%20member%20of%26nbsp%3Bthe%20team%20where%20the%20planner%20to%20belongs.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EIt%20surprises%20me%20that%20these%20users%20had%20access%20to%20all%20information%20within%20the%20planner%20(other%20cards)%2C%20but%20also%20in%20team%20where%20the%20planner%20is%20started%20(channels%2C%20documents%2C%20onenote%2C%20etcetera).%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EIs%20this%20by%20design%3F%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EIf%20yes%2C%20access%20to%20the%20planner%20should%20be%20derived%20from%20the%20team%2C%20doesn't%20it%3F%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EIf%20no%2C%20is%20it%20a%20known%20error%20and%20will%20it%20be%20solved%3F%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EThx.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-LABS%20id%3D%22lingo-labs-156546%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3EGuest%20Access%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3CLINGO-LABEL%3EMicrosoft%20Teams%3C%2FLINGO-LABEL%3E%3C%2FLINGO-LABS%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-328147%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-328147%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EThis%20is%20the%20reason%20companies%20restrict%20group%20creation%20%3A)%3C%2Fimg%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-328146%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-328146%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EVery%20true.%20We%20don't%20have%20it%20codified%2C%20but%20when%20someone%20wants%20to%20create%20a%20Plan%20outside%20of%20Teams%2C%20we%20ask%20them%20to%20add%20'Tasks'%20or%20'Plan'%20to%20the%20end%20of%20the%20name.%20Then%20we%20know%20the%20group%20came%20from%20Planner%20and%20if%20they%20name%20it%20the%20same%2C%20we%20can%20see%20'IT%20Project'%20and%20'IT%20Project%20Tasks'%20sort%20together%20but%20still%20give%20some%20idea%20of%20what%20the%20group%20was%20originally%20for.%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3ELots%20of%20training%20involved...%20we%20only%20have%20250%20people.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-328131%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-328131%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EBut%20I%20think%20this%20will%20create%202%20separate%20O365%20groups.%20If%20you%20have%20similar%20names%20for%20them%20it%20can%20get%20confusing%20real%20quick.%20It's%20a%20good%20way%20to%20work%20with%20it%20as%20long%20as%20you%20know%20what%20your%20doing.%20Unfortunately%2C%20I%20am%20not%20sure%20Team%20Owners%20will%20be%20able%20to%20keep%20it%20straight.%20I%20am%20already%20having%20issues%20with%20migration%20from%20Distribution%20Lists%2C%20Mail%20Enabled%20Security%20groups%20and%20now%20O365%20groups%20with%20similar%20names.%20Makes%20a%20real%20mess%20when%20looking%20at%20Display%20Names%20and%20not%20object%20ID.%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-327624%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-327624%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EHmmm%2C%20weird.%20The%20usual%20'it%20worked%20for%20me'%20lol...%20But%20I%20took%20a%20plan%20from%20a%20separate%20team%20and%20added%20it%20to%20a%20second%20team%20-%20but%20that%20shouldn't%20make%20a%20difference.%3CBR%20%2F%3EOK%2C%20I%20tested%20by%20making%20a%20separate%20plan%20from%20%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftasks.office.com%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttps%3A%2F%2Ftasks.office.com%3C%2FA%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EGrabbed%20that%20address%2C%20which%20looked%20like%20this%3A%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftasks.office.com%2FTENANTNAME.onmicrosoft.com%2Fen-US%2FHome%2FPlanner%2F%23%2Fplantaskboard%3FgroupId%3DGROUPGUID%26amp%3BplanId%3DPLANID%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttps%3A%2F%2Ftasks.office.com%2FTENANTNAME.onmicrosoft.com%2Fen-US%2FHome%2FPlanner%2F%23%2Fplantaskboard%3FgroupId%3DGROUPGUID%26amp%3BplanId%3DPLANID%3C%2FA%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3Eand%20added%20it%20to%20a%20tab.%3CBR%20%2F%3EIt%20did%20go%20through%20a%20sign%20in%20process%20(automatically%20in%20may%20case)%2C%20and%20it%20threw%20me%20into%20the%20Planner%20hub.%20Though%20when%20I%20selected%20the%20plan%20again%2C%20it%20seemed%20to%20'stick'.%20Probably%20will%20stay%20that%20way%20until%20it%20needs%20authorization%20again.%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-327593%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-327593%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EIt%20is%20indeed%20a%20great%20idea%2C%20thanks%20for%20the%20input!%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EBut%20the%20tab%20with%20the%20link%20to%20the%20Planner%20board%20failed%20to%20load%20on%20the%20Teams%20app%20on%20desktop%20for%20me.%20I'm%20not%20sure%20if%20it's%20just%20on%20my%20machine%2C%20haven't%20had%20the%20time%20to%20test%20it%20on%20other%20platforms%20or%20on%20the%20web%20yet.%20But%20I'll%20try%20some%20more.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EThanks%2C%20anyway!%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-327580%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-327580%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EYes%2C%20this%20a%20great%20take%20on%20it!%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-327571%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-327571%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EIt%20would%20be%20nice%20to%20get%20a%20bit%20more%20warning%20-%20I've%20noticed%20that%20in%20many%20areas%20they've%20put%20these%20'gotchas'%20into%20comments%2C%20so%20maybe%20the%20planner%20folks%20will%20do%20that.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EOne%20way%20around%20this%20is%20to%20create%20your%20plan%20outside%20of%20Teams%20-%20use%20%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftasks.office.com%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttps%3A%2F%2Ftasks.office.com%3C%2FA%3E%20so%20the%20plan%20will%20create%20it's%20own%20group.%20Add%20in%20all%20the%20team%20members%2C%20and%20you%20can%20assign%20people%20to%20the%20tasks%20and%20they'll%20only%20be%20able%20to%20access%20the%20plan%20group.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EThen%2C%20in%20your%20actual%20team%20where%20you%20have%20your%20conversations%2C%20add%20it%20a%20tab%2C%20using%20the%20website%20link%2C%20and%20paste%20in%20the%20long%20%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftasks.office.com%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%20rel%3D%22noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%20noopener%20noreferrer%22%3Ehttps%3A%2F%2Ftasks.office.com%3C%2FA%3E%20link%20to%20that%20outside%20plan.%20Your%20team%20will%20have%20easy%20access%2C%20and%20others%20in%20the%20company%20can%20use%20the%20outside%20planner%20link.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-327542%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-327542%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EYeah%2C%20it's%20by%20design!%20When%20you%20add%20someone%20trough%20planner%2C%20they%20become%20a%20memberof%20the%20office%20365%20group%2C%20aka%20get%20access%20to%20all%20team%20resources!%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EAdam%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-327541%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-327541%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EFrom%20my%20perspective%2C%20this%20is%20a%20real%20no-go%20for%20using%20Planner%20and%20Teams%20solution.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EAs%20a%20dev%20team%20leader%2C%20I%20intended%20to%20keep%20track%20of%20team%20tasks%20using%20Planner%20and%20allow%20the%20team%20to%20communicate%20using%20Teams.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EBut%2C%20if%20I%20need%20to%20share%20the%20Planner%20board%20with%20someone%20else%20on%20the%20company%2C%20or%20my%20client%2C%20I%20would%20automatically%20add%20them%20to%20the%20Teams%20conversations.%20That's%20a%20real%20bad%20scenario.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-217667%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-217667%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3ETotally%20agree%26nbsp%3B%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F64%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40Tony%20Redmond%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3B-%20and%20I%20would%20like%20to%20see%20more%20of%20this%20approach%20that%20the%20Planner%20team%20have%20done%20in%20other%20workloads%20too.%26nbsp%3B%20Like%20take%20Teams%2C%20if%20I%20need%20to%20bring%20someone%20else%20in%20to%20a%20post%2Fthread%20and%20there%20not%20a%20member%20of%20the%20Team%2FGroup%20-%20I%20have%20to%20go%20and%20%22Manage%20the%20team%22%20add%20them%20and%20then%20come%20back%20to%20my%20post.%26nbsp%3B%20Where%20an%20%5Bat%5Dmention%20just%20like%20we%20get%20with%20Outlook%20would%20work%20me%20and%20others%20I%20have%20discussed%20this%20with%20too.%26nbsp%3B%20This%20could%20be%20accompanied%20with%20a%20tool-tip%20(of%20sorts)%20that%20says%20you%20are%20now%20adding%20personX%20to%20your%20group.%26nbsp%3B%20But%2C%20as%20you%20said%2C%20this%20still%20needs%20to%20be%20covered%20off%20with%20education%20and%20understanding%20but%2C%20does%20bring%20an%20%22ease%20of%20use%22%20factor%20that%20I%20would%20most%20certainly%20welcome.%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-203663%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-203663%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EI%20guess%20you%20can%20argue%20that%20this%20is%20a%20mixture%20of%20user%20education%20and%20ease%20of%20use.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EIt's%20user%20education%20because%20we%20need%20to%20train%20users%20that%26nbsp%3Bassigning%20someone%20from%20outside%20the%20group%20to%20a%20task%20adds%20them%20to%20the%20group...%20and%20gives%20them%20access%20to%20the%20full%20array%20of%20group%20resources.%20You%20can%20certainly%20argue%20that%20this%20is%20wrong%20because%20there's%20no%20warning%20and%20Planner%20just%20does%20it.%20I'd%20submit%20a%20request%20through%20UserVoice%20if%20you'd%20like%20to%20see%20this%20changed.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EOn%20the%20other%20hand%2C%20I%20guess%20the%20Planner%20team%20might%20argue%20that%20they%20do%20this%20to%20make%20it%20easy.%20You're%20an%20owner%20of%20the%20group%20that%20owns%20the%20plan%2C%20so%20if%20you%20add%20someone%20to%20the%20plan%20by%20assigning%20them%20a%20task%2C%20you%20know%20what%20you're%20doing.%20Normal%20group%20members%20cannot%20add%20someone%20to%20a%20group%20by%20assigning%20them%20a%20task%20-%20this%20is%20only%20possible%20for%20group%20owners%2C%20who%20have%20full%20rights%20over%20group%20membership.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EOwners%20need%20to%20know%20what%20they're%20doing%2C%20I%20guess...%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-203658%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-203658%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EThe%20issue%20is%20not%20the%20rights%20people%20have%20when%20they%20are%20added%26nbsp%3Bto%20a%20group%2C%26nbsp%3Bbut%20the%20way%20they%20are%20unexpectedly%20added.%20Not%20by%20%22Add%20user%22%2C%20not%20by%26nbsp%3B%20%22Share%22%20but%20by%20assigning%20someone%20to%20a%20task.%20Also%20I'm%20not%20asking%26nbsp%3Bto%20have%20it%20reversed%2C%26nbsp%3Bbut%20suggest%20make%20adding%20them%20as%20user%20after%20being%20assigned%20optional%20or%20at%20least%20warn%20the%20user%20that%20he's%26nbsp%3Badding%20a%20new%20user%20by%20assigning%20a%20task.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-203648%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-203648%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EThe%20design%20is%20what%20the%20design%20is%20and%20you're%20not%20going%20to%20have%20it%20reversed%20now.%20Groups%20is%20used%20by%20so%20many%20applications%20(Forms%20being%20the%20latest)%20and%20when%20you%20add%20someone%20to%20a%20team%2C%20they%20have%20the%20same%20degree%20of%20access%20to%20every%20resource%20attached%20to%20the%20team.%20Guests%20are%20somewhat%20restricted%20by%20some%20applications%20(guests%20can't%20create%20new%20plans%2C%20for%20instance)%2C%20but%20they%20enjoy%20the%20same%20access%20to%20group%20content.%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%0A%3CP%3EIn%20these%20situations%2C%20you%20are%20best%20to%20have%20segmented%20teams.%20Put%20content%20that%20you%20don't%20want%20guests%20to%20see%20in%20one%20team%2C%20and%20content%20that%20you%20don't%20mind%20sharing%20in%20another.%20Secure%20channels%20are%20coming%20and%20might%20help%2C%20but%20we%20don't%20have%20them%20now%20and%20haven't%20seen%20what%20they%20deliver.%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-203638%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-203638%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EI%20think%20it's%20bad%20practice%20to%20make%20this%20standard%20behavior%20since%20it%20can%20create%20a%20security%20risk.%20At%26nbsp%3Bleast%26nbsp%3Bthe%20team%20member%20adding%20the%20non-member%20should%20be%20warned%20that%26nbsp%3Badding%20a%20non-member%20to%20a%20task%20will%20automatically%20make%20that%26nbsp%3Buser%20a%20member.%20(Even%20better%20would%20be%20a%20configuration%20option%26nbsp%3Bwhere%20you%20can%20switch%20between%20adding%20a%20user%20as%20member%20by%20adding%20them%20to%20a%20task%20or%20not.)%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EFrom%20a%20perspective%20where%20someone%20who's%20working%20on%20a%20task%20should%20be%20a%20member%20in%20the%20first%20place%20makes%20the%20%22Guest%20member%22%20obsolete.%20The%20feature%20should%20be%20described%20as%20%22Adding%20a%20non-member%20to%20a%20task%20wil%20automatically%20add%20them%20to%20the%20group%20as%20a%20member%22%20instead%20of%20%22Allowing%20guest%20access%22.%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-160270%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-160270%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EHi%26nbsp%3B%3CA%20href%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Ftechcommunity.microsoft.com%2Ft5%2Fuser%2Fviewprofilepage%2Fuser-id%2F118217%22%20target%3D%22_blank%22%3E%40Jac-Rice%20van%20Brunschot%3C%2FA%3E%26nbsp%3B-%20Creating%20a%20Team%20will%20always%20create%20an%20Office%20365%20Group%20-%20along%20with%20all%20of%20the%20additional%20resources%20that%20come%20with%20a%20Group%20including%20a%20plan%20via%20Planner.%26nbsp%3B%20Now%20it%20doesn't%20really%20matter%20which%20path%20you%20took%20to%20add%20your%20plan%20to%20Teams%3A%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3COL%3E%3CLI%3EYou%20added%20the%20existing%20plan%20from%20your%20Group%20to%20a%20Teams%20tab%20OR%3C%2FLI%3E%3CLI%3EYou%20added%20a%20new%20plan%20to%20a%20channel%3C%2FLI%3E%3C%2FOL%3E%3CP%3E....it's%20still%20a%20resource%20linked%20to%20the%20underlying%20Group.%26nbsp%3B%20So%2C%20by%20adding%20someone%20through%20the%20Planner%20front%20door%20you%20added%20them%20to%20the%20Group%20(and%20Team)%20and%20as%20members%26nbsp%3B%3CSPAN%3Ethey%20can%20access%20everything%20in%20the%20group.%20This%20is%20per%20current%20design.%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FSPAN%3E%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-691841%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-691841%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3EOur%20exec%20team%20looked%20as%20using%20planner%20as%20well.%3CBR%20%2F%3EThey%20wanted%20to%20assign%20individual%20tasks%20to%20users%20without%20them%20being%20able%20to%20view%20other%20sensitive%20tasks%20in%20the%20group.%3CBR%20%2F%3E%3CBR%20%2F%3EDue%20to%20the%20user%20being%20granted%20full%20view%20rights%20to%20the%20group%20we%20have%20had%20to%20invest%20in%20a%203rd%20party%20solution.%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E%3CLINGO-SUB%20id%3D%22lingo-sub-786538%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3ERe%3A%20Be%20ware%20when%20adding%20someone%20to%20your%20Planner....%3C%2FLINGO-SUB%3E%3CLINGO-BODY%20id%3D%22lingo-body-786538%22%20slang%3D%22en-US%22%3E%3CP%3EI%20always%20use%20a%20sub%20sharepoint%20site%20to%20use%20planner%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EThe%20permission%20inheritance%20make%20it%20so%20my%20team%20have%20access%20to%20it%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EAnd%20the%20client%20is%20invited%20as%20o365%20guest%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3EI%20include%20the%20suffix%20word%20%22PUBLIC%22%20so%20my%20own%20poeple%20know%20it's%20a%20public%20site%20and%20be%20carefull%20not%20to%20write%20stuff%20not%20destined%20to%20the%20client%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3CP%3E%26nbsp%3B%3C%2FP%3E%3C%2FLINGO-BODY%3E
Highlighted
Deleted
Not applicable

I'm an enthousiastic user and ambassador of MS Office365/E3. I have created a private team in Teams and added Planner (Tasks, kanban) functionality. During working with the cards in Planner, I have invited people who aren't member of the team where the planner to belongs.

 

It surprises me that these users had access to all information within the planner (other cards), but also in team where the planner is started (channels, documents, onenote, etcetera). 

 

Is this by design?

If yes, access to the planner should be derived from the team, doesn't it?

If no, is it a known error and will it be solved?

 

Thx.

17 Replies

Hi @Deleted - Creating a Team will always create an Office 365 Group - along with all of the additional resources that come with a Group including a plan via Planner.  Now it doesn't really matter which path you took to add your plan to Teams:

 

  1. You added the existing plan from your Group to a Teams tab OR
  2. You added a new plan to a channel

....it's still a resource linked to the underlying Group.  So, by adding someone through the Planner front door you added them to the Group (and Team) and as members they can access everything in the group. This is per current design. 

I think it's bad practice to make this standard behavior since it can create a security risk. At least the team member adding the non-member should be warned that adding a non-member to a task will automatically make that user a member. (Even better would be a configuration option where you can switch between adding a user as member by adding them to a task or not.)

 

From a perspective where someone who's working on a task should be a member in the first place makes the "Guest member" obsolete. The feature should be described as "Adding a non-member to a task wil automatically add them to the group as a member" instead of "Allowing guest access".

 

The design is what the design is and you're not going to have it reversed now. Groups is used by so many applications (Forms being the latest) and when you add someone to a team, they have the same degree of access to every resource attached to the team. Guests are somewhat restricted by some applications (guests can't create new plans, for instance), but they enjoy the same access to group content.

 

In these situations, you are best to have segmented teams. Put content that you don't want guests to see in one team, and content that you don't mind sharing in another. Secure channels are coming and might help, but we don't have them now and haven't seen what they deliver.

The issue is not the rights people have when they are added to a group, but the way they are unexpectedly added. Not by "Add user", not by  "Share" but by assigning someone to a task. Also I'm not asking to have it reversed, but suggest make adding them as user after being assigned optional or at least warn the user that he's adding a new user by assigning a task.

I guess you can argue that this is a mixture of user education and ease of use.

 

It's user education because we need to train users that assigning someone from outside the group to a task adds them to the group... and gives them access to the full array of group resources. You can certainly argue that this is wrong because there's no warning and Planner just does it. I'd submit a request through UserVoice if you'd like to see this changed.

 

On the other hand, I guess the Planner team might argue that they do this to make it easy. You're an owner of the group that owns the plan, so if you add someone to the plan by assigning them a task, you know what you're doing. Normal group members cannot add someone to a group by assigning them a task - this is only possible for group owners, who have full rights over group membership.

 

Owners need to know what they're doing, I guess...

Totally agree @Tony Redmond - and I would like to see more of this approach that the Planner team have done in other workloads too.  Like take Teams, if I need to bring someone else in to a post/thread and there not a member of the Team/Group - I have to go and "Manage the team" add them and then come back to my post.  Where an [at]mention just like we get with Outlook would work me and others I have discussed this with too.  This could be accompanied with a tool-tip (of sorts) that says you are now adding personX to your group.  But, as you said, this still needs to be covered off with education and understanding but, does bring an "ease of use" factor that I would most certainly welcome. 

From my perspective, this is a real no-go for using Planner and Teams solution.

As a dev team leader, I intended to keep track of team tasks using Planner and allow the team to communicate using Teams.

 

But, if I need to share the Planner board with someone else on the company, or my client, I would automatically add them to the Teams conversations. That's a real bad scenario.

Yeah, it's by design! When you add someone trough planner, they become a memberof the office 365 group, aka get access to all team resources!

 

Adam

It would be nice to get a bit more warning - I've noticed that in many areas they've put these 'gotchas' into comments, so maybe the planner folks will do that.

 

One way around this is to create your plan outside of Teams - use https://tasks.office.com so the plan will create it's own group. Add in all the team members, and you can assign people to the tasks and they'll only be able to access the plan group.

 

Then, in your actual team where you have your conversations, add it a tab, using the website link, and paste in the long https://tasks.office.com link to that outside plan. Your team will have easy access, and others in the company can use the outside planner link.

Yes, this a great take on it!

It is indeed a great idea, thanks for the input!

 

But the tab with the link to the Planner board failed to load on the Teams app on desktop for me. I'm not sure if it's just on my machine, haven't had the time to test it on other platforms or on the web yet. But I'll try some more.

 

Thanks, anyway!

Hmmm, weird. The usual 'it worked for me' lol... But I took a plan from a separate team and added it to a second team - but that shouldn't make a difference.
OK, I tested by making a separate plan from https://tasks.office.com
Grabbed that address, which looked like this:
https://tasks.office.com/TENANTNAME.onmicrosoft.com/en-US/Home/Planner/#/plantaskboard?groupId=GROUP...

and added it to a tab.
It did go through a sign in process (automatically in may case), and it threw me into the Planner hub. Though when I selected the plan again, it seemed to 'stick'. Probably will stay that way until it needs authorization again.
But I think this will create 2 separate O365 groups. If you have similar names for them it can get confusing real quick. It's a good way to work with it as long as you know what your doing. Unfortunately, I am not sure Team Owners will be able to keep it straight. I am already having issues with migration from Distribution Lists, Mail Enabled Security groups and now O365 groups with similar names. Makes a real mess when looking at Display Names and not object ID.

Very true. We don't have it codified, but when someone wants to create a Plan outside of Teams, we ask them to add 'Tasks' or 'Plan' to the end of the name. Then we know the group came from Planner and if they name it the same, we can see 'IT Project' and 'IT Project Tasks' sort together but still give some idea of what the group was originally for. 

Lots of training involved... we only have 250 people.

This is the reason companies restrict group creation :)
Our exec team looked as using planner as well.
They wanted to assign individual tasks to users without them being able to view other sensitive tasks in the group.

Due to the user being granted full view rights to the group we have had to invest in a 3rd party solution.

I always use a sub sharepoint site to use planner

The permission inheritance make it so my team have access to it

And the client is invited as o365 guest

I include the suffix word "PUBLIC" so my own poeple know it's a public site and be carefull not to write stuff not destined to the client

 

 

 

Related Conversations
Tabs and Dark Mode
cjc2112 in Discussions on
46 Replies
Extentions Synchronization
Deleted in Discussions on
3 Replies
Stable version of Edge insider browser
HotCakeX in Discussions on
35 Replies
How to Prevent Teams from Auto-Launch
chenrylee in Microsoft Teams on
30 Replies
flashing a white screen while open new tab
Deleted in Discussions on
14 Replies
Security Community Webinars
Valon_Kolica in Security, Privacy & Compliance on
13 Replies