Matt, I think you are asking two questions here: 1) Has anyone implemented LSF9 with Lawson Security (LawSec) 2) Has anyone used FastTrack For the first question, I have been at a few sites that have done it, and was one of the architects at a very large Lawson Security Client (HCA). Since you aren't doing Apps, it shouldn't be very difficult, though I would suggest, that if you are going to do Apps 9.0 within 18 months, to consider doing Security at that time, instead of with LSF9. This will easy testing for your users, and elimiate double work for you. As for the second question, before you commit to FastTrack, I would throughly review the sample LS Security Classes and Roles (delivered with LSF9), and understand where your LAUA classes fall short. Once you do that, then compare FastTrack's delivered task breakdowns, to those of your organization. If they are fairly close, it would be a good start. Some things you need to know: 1) FastTrask only makes sense if your organization's definition of a task and/or role, matches the generic definition FastTrack deliveres (aka: one size fits all) 2) FastTrack does not deliver Data-Level Security (Lawson couldn't possibily know what you have) 3) Rules on FastTrack Security Objects would at best be incomplete, due to #2 above 4) FastTrack will not account for custom programs, tables, or any other Objects 5) FastTrack delivered Rules will most likely NOT be the most effecient, due to the "one size fits all" paradigm ...at HCA, we didn't use FastTrack, as no one had successfully implemented Lawson Security at that scale. We were the largest live client at the time (May 2007). I think only WalMart will be larger in Rulesets, Secured Objects, and replaced LAUA Security Classes (a bit under 4000). If you have any questions, feel free to call me Kwane 954.547.7210
|