Restrict IM and presence in CUPS / CUPC

Unanswered Question
Feb 12th, 2010
User Badges:

I have three groups of users such as Users1, Users2, and Users 3. I want to restrict who can IM and see the presence status of those user groups. Users1 should see everyone. Users2 should only see other people that are members of Users2 and Users 3 should only see members of users 3. Is it possible to restrict this using CUPC and CUPS version 7.x? Does the subscribe CSS and presence group restrict this ability?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 5 (1 ratings)
Bill19795_2 Fri, 02/12/2010 - 18:19
User Badges:

Thank you for the quick response. What about this setup. IF I had three different OU’s in the LDAP that the CUPC users were configured for. Say OU=Users1 , OU=Users2 and OU=Users3 so the full path would be OU=Users1,DC=Company,DC=Local  for each OU. Now in CUPS I set each users LDAP profile to only search within their OU. If they cannot see the other users via LDAP they should not be able to IM or see their presence. Would this work? I was going to lab it up next week and test it.

htluo Sat, 02/13/2010 - 09:06
User Badges:
  • Red, 2250 points or more

This will limit the search function from CUPC.  However a CUPC user can add contacts from http://cups/ccmuser page (if he knows the user ID of the contact he wants to add).


Bill19795_2 Sat, 02/13/2010 - 12:31
User Badges:

So if a user manually adds a contact but that person  is not in their LDAP profile they will still be able to see the presence state and IM them? 

Can the presence group or subscribe CSS in call manager be used to limit this access?

Bill19795_2 Sun, 02/14/2010 - 15:06
User Badges:

So if I have a user that is not in an OU that can be seen with my configured LDAP profile I will still be able to receive presence and IM that person?

htluo Sun, 02/14/2010 - 15:11
User Badges:
  • Red, 2250 points or more
fossilev700 Thu, 03/17/2011 - 06:52
User Badges:

Has this feature been added to CUPS 8. I do not see it listed in the release notes.




This Discussion