Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

3
  • Before I dig into this further, would this also provide provisions for not showing specific fields of a content type to unauthenticated users? Not that that is a deal breaker, but it seems that I might still have the same amount of work to do in views whether the content access module is there or not? What is better about this approach than the one I proposed? Thanks! Commented Feb 2, 2016 at 5:36
  • @UltraBob updated my answer Commented Feb 2, 2016 at 5:38
  • 1
    thanks! That is another piece of the puzzle I hadn't thought of. I already have field permissions installed to allow me to limit edit rights to some parts of the user profile. It seems that I can turn off view access for the internal only fields altogether for anonymous users, which if it works is great! Commented Feb 2, 2016 at 5:44