Advanced Permissions/Permissions per user
building now
J
Justin Hayes
Hello! I'm a system administrator for a company with 120 employees, and I'm hoping to make a feature request. I would really appreciate it if we could have more control over custom permissions for each individual, and the ability to create permissions based on more options. Specifically, I'd like to set permissions for things like creating or copying a list, moving tasks to certain statuses, and restricting access to creating or updating labels. Basically, I want complete control over what each person can create or edit. For example, I'd like to restrict certain people from editing specific custom fields.
Currently, the role system is limited, and some members have the same permissions as others, which isn't ideal. Many of my supervisors are members, but I don't want them all to have access to everything. While there are different roles we can create, the options for setting permissions are very limited. It would be great if we could have more flexibility in creating custom permissions for each individual.
Log In
Andrew Tomassetti
I see that this feature request is being is in "Building Now". Will that include permissions to associate things like:
- views - sharing views with members instead of all views in a list? This is a big one as we may have 30+ views on a list and bring on a limited member and ideally we'd like to share a single view so filters and everything are set up correctly and no issues with defaulting to another list causing confusion.
- assigned tasks - a permission to have a user only be able to see tasks assigned to them would be fantastic. Sure there are permissions for users not being able to delete, however we should be able to block visibility completely, WITHOUT requiring to make every task private.
Matthew Burt
I was sent here by the AI chatbot, but this looks like a fundamental design flaw, not a feature request.
Here’s the issue: I assign a user Admin with all admin permissions enabled, including custom field permissions and the explicit ability to edit custom fields. Then, on specific custom fields, I set them to view-only because I don’t want general staff editing them.
Result? My Admins can’t edit them either.
In what world is this “working as intended”? The entire purpose of an Admin role is to override restrictive user-level permissions. If a field-level toggle can silently nullify Admin permissions, then “Admin” isn’t actually an override—it’s just another role with arbitrary limits.
The proposed workaround makes this worse: manually open each custom field (even if you have 100+), check whether it’s view-only, and then explicitly add Admin users by name and grant edit access one-by-one. And let’s be clear—this mechanism isn’t Admin-specific at all. Once a field is view-only, I can grant edit access to any individual user the same way.
So what exactly does the Admin permission level do here? Because in many real-world cases, it does nothing meaningful.
If field-level permissions are intended to supersede Admin, that needs to be explicit and intentional—ideally with an option like “Allow Admin override.” As it stands, this setup defeats the core expectation of an Admin role and creates unnecessary operational friction at scale.
Armine Seropyan
Merged in a post:
Role-Based Custom Permissions for each Space (not just the Workspace)
Looking to create & set role-based Custom Permissions that can vary from Space to Space.
For instance, a Marketing VP should have admin-like Custom Permissions in their Marketing Space, but should not have the same level of capabilities/control in an HR, IT, or Finance Space.
Role-based Custom Permissions are currently available on the Workspace level -- bringing this functionality down to the Space level would be invaluable, especially for larger/more complex Workspaces!
Armine Seropyan
Merged in a post:
More granular permissions
Marek Dziedzic
We need a permission that is between "edit" and "full". Basically, we want to support the following condition:
Ability to create new tasks, modify existing tasks, and move them around with in a list/folder/space but NOT be able to modify other permissions, edit views, create new fields, modify other user's permissions etc.
The use case is that we have a group of admins/leaders who have built out the spaces, and we have users that need to now "use" the spaces (creating tickets, running projects, etc.) but should not be able to touch the overall configuration.
N
Neil Hogan
Yep! And please review some of the permission settings available on the business plan! this really should be more generous.
A
Alexandra Can Sakhara
100% this is vital. i have no idea unless i look in each list what everyone's able to do as well there needs to be a permissions management page for all users for the admin & yes more flexibility. being able to lock items, all items - tasks, subtasks, pages, subpages - as people have mentioned needs to be more granular plz
S
Scott Johnson
can we get an update on this please
Rakesh Rathore
Any Update on this ??
Helen Gamage
Yes very needed, we find often that we need people to have full access in one list and be able to delete items and then we don't want them to be able to do this and delete in another list or area, but it isn't granular enough - also another example is we might need them to be able to delete attachments to replace with updated ones and not tasks, but currently these 2 things are on the same setting.
Stacey Lopez
This is so needed!
Ideally, we can set permissions for people to edit status, dates, etc. at the "task" level... to mange the tasks, not the lists.
There is no need for them to have permissions to edit list functionality. So I am limited to give them nothing or almost everything which is so scary!
Load More
→