Today , we can't apply to a Channel a level the permissions to a "Security Group" , only an "Office Group".so, very unfortunately, it blocks actually the use of this service
Yes I agree with that. We now use Video and we are able to add security groups to channels there.
Yes I agree too. We need to use security at channel level
Yip, without this it’s not ideal to offer this as a service in a enterprise. This should have been in place from the get go, like we have in O365 Video Service. In addition this, Channel needs to be designed in a way where someone can be assigned as an admin for that channel to upload videos and manage in that channel. I know you can probably somewhat do this with Stream Group but needs to be at channel level.
Not someone, but a group must be assigned as an admin, we can not manage holding user by user. It is not a best practice (same as SharePoint), we have to be able to manage by group designation, for administration, collaboration or read only :)
Agree assigning permission by the admins must have the group functionality but an owner/admin must be a SPOC ( like the SharePoint Site Collection’s primary/secondary admins) otherwise it’s problemating in maintaining R n R. Too many admins/Owners for a single site/channel causes problems. Thanks.
with a good REST API and a good powershell code, no worry about maintaining a good security on any channels. If youtube can do, Stream must do ;)
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.