Clone permissions #11538

Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:46:32 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
Owner

Originally created by @mathieumd on GitHub (Aug 28, 2025).

NetBox version

v4.3.6

Feature type

New functionality

Proposed functionality

Ability to clone permissions.

Use case

NetBox permissions is very granular. So we create more or less precise permissions, which are then assigned to groups.

For example: Tags (Read only) and Tag (Write). But if I want to create a new Tag (Full) (including Delete permission), I would have to create a new permission and manually select Object Types.

If I could clone an existing permission, after cloning I would only have to check the Delete permission.

(Well, my example with Tags is not very good because you only have on or two Object Types, of course. But imagine a permission with many Object Types, like DCIM for instance!)

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @mathieumd on GitHub (Aug 28, 2025). ### NetBox version v4.3.6 ### Feature type New functionality ### Proposed functionality Ability to clone permissions. ### Use case NetBox permissions is very granular. So we create more or less precise permissions, which are then assigned to groups. For example: `Tags (Read only)` and `Tag (Write)`. But if I want to create a new `Tag (Full)` (including Delete permission), I would have to create a new permission and manually select Object Types. If I could clone an existing permission, after cloning I would only have to check the `Delete` permission. (Well, my example with Tags is not very good because you only have on or two Object Types, of course. But imagine a permission with many Object Types, like DCIM for instance!) ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: featurestatus: duplicate labels 2025-12-29 21:46:32 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:46:32 +01:00
Author
Owner

@mathieumd commented on GitHub (Aug 28, 2025):

Forgot to mention it has already been debated, but without conclusion, on #4920.

@mathieumd commented on GitHub (Aug 28, 2025): Forgot to mention it has already been debated, but without conclusion, on #4920.
Author
Owner

@alehaa commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2025):

I believe this is a duplicate of #15492.

@alehaa commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2025): I believe this is a duplicate of #15492.
Author
Owner

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 3, 2025):

Yes, agreed. And #15492 is no longer blocked.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 3, 2025): Yes, agreed. And #15492 is no longer blocked.
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#11538