Private Discourse - Read/Write Access for Authorized Users Only Possible?
The original poster, akuehnle, is looking to limit read/write access to their Discourse site to a limited set of users. zogstrip suggests utilizing site settings such as “invite only”, “login required”, and “must approve users” to achieve this.
The recommended approach is to invite users with their email addresses, allowing them to choose their own usernames and passwords zogstrip. Another suggested setting is “email domains whitelist” to restrict email domains that can sign up to the site mpalmer.
Regarding allowing all users to read content in public categories but only allowing logged-in users to update/post, sam recommends using category permissions instead of the “login required” setting, allowing categories to be set to “read” for anonymous users.
I’d like to limit read/write access to my discourse site to a limited set of possible users. John Q Public shall neither have read nor write access to any of our discussions. Is there a way to realize this?
I may be able to get a list of the allowed users’ email addresses. Alternatively, I could send out the website information to the allowed users, trusting them not to share this with others. Perhaps there are other ways to limit accessibility?
I write code for embedded computing, but am a beginner on the systems admin side, fwiw.
Another site setting that might be of interest is email domains whitelist – this allows you to restrict the domains of e-mail addresses that can sign up to the site. Can be handy if you want (for instance) a company-internal site, where everyone is guaranteed to have a company-provided e-mail address.
How about allowing all users to read content in public categories, but only allow users who have logged in to update/post? Would the “login required” setting turned off work for that? I want updates restricted, but not reads. Thanks for your response!
Have a look at the security options on categories, you can set a category to “read”, if you want any content to be visible to anonymous “login required” is not an option you would use, instead you would lean on category permissions.
Apologies, closing this cause the original question here was answered!