Get a Link – Get a Break!

getalink-brokenchocolate2As I am writing help materials for our new intranet I do not only have to think about “HOW do you do this” but also “WHY would you do this” and “How can you do this BEST, without spending too much time, adding maintenance or messing things up?”

With the migration of content to the new platform, many Site Owners need to rework their publishing pages. Generally these pages contain (clickable) header images, Promoted Links, Summary Links and links in the text.

On the old platform, when you want to grab the link to a document or image, you go to the library, right click on the name and select “Copy Shortcut” from the pop up. This is no longer available in SharePoint Online.

So, how does one get a link in SharePoint Online?

I have found 3 ways to link to a document, page or image:

  1. In Summary Links as well as the Rich Text Editor on a page (Wiki page style), you can browse for the link to a document or image that lives in your site or site collection.
    Insert > Link > From SharePoint will allow you to browse the libraries and lists in your site and link to the desired content.

    When creating Summary Links you can browse for the content in your site.
  2. You can open the item and grab the URL from the address bar.
  3. There is the new Get a Link option, which you will see when you select a document or image from a library, in the Action Bar (is that what it’s called?) and the pop up menu.
    The Action Bar shows the Get a Link option when you select an item

    When you click the … behind an item name, you will see this in the pop up

The users in my company are all accustomed to grabbing a link when they want to share a document via email or on Yammer, so I think this “Get a Link” will appeal to them.

However, at first glance I see 5 different options. What to select?

5 options to Get a Link? Please note that the “no sign-in required” options can be disabled by the tenant administrator. This allows you to share links with anyone, in and outside of your company.

Let’s find out how this works!

Microsoft has already written about this but it is not very detailed.
So, I have created a brand new site in my own tenant. In this site I have uploaded 5 documents, each named after the action I will take.


I assume the file type is irrelevant so I have used a mix of Excel, Word and PowerPoint.

Please note I am the tenant admin, so I am not a normal Site Owner. Some things may work differently for a regular Site Owner with Full Control.

My tenant is almost out-of-the-box and external and anonymous sharing has been enabled on all site collections.

How to use Get a Link:

  1. Select the document and click “Get a Link”
  2. Select one of the 5 options
  3. Click “Create” (if the link has already been created earlier you will immediately see “copy”
  4. Click “Copy” and the link will be added to your clipboard
  5. Paste wherever you need it.

You can remove a link if you longer want to share. This means the link will be disabled if someone clicks on it.

For links with “no sign-in required” you can set an expiration date. This means the link will no longer work if someone clicks on it after the expiration date.

For “anonymous sharing” you can set an expiration time.


  1. The links look as follows:

Restricted link:

View Link – account required:

View Link – no sign-in required

Edit Link – account required

Edit Link – no sign-in required

2. Using the “View” and “Edit” links will break permission inheritance for the document as soon as you hit “Create”.

Pardon my French, but what did you just write there?

Yes, you may want to read this again:

Using the “View” and “Edit” links will break permission inheritance for the document as soon as you hit “Create”.

I was a bit worried about the word “guest_access” that I saw appearing in 4 of the 5 links, so I decided to check the permissions of my site.
Microsoft mentions this in the small letters of their post, but it is easily overlooked.

You know you can now see immediately if you have items with different permissions in your site. That is very convenient. Normally, only the Microfeed has different permissions, but now my Documents have too!

The document library has “exceptions”. That means: some items have different permissions.
Only the “Restricted Link” does not break permission inheritance!

4 of the 5 docs have broken permissions inheritance! The permissions have not changed yet, but the inheritance has broken. This may not appear to be a big deal now, but if you ever happen to add a new group or individual to your site, which is not unlikely, you will have to remember to give them access to these documents.
Do you seriously think any Site Owner will remember this? Or have the time for that?

More scary and inconvenient findings

  • As soon as someone clicks on a link they are added to the permissions of the document, regardless of their existing role in the site.
I am the tenant admin, and have Full Control of this site, yet I am added as soon as I click the link.
  • People in the Members group get all the options for “Get a Link” as well!
    I have tested this in my work environment and it turns out Members can see and use the “view” and “edit” options so they can break the permission inheritance of documents without the Site Owner being aware!
  • You can only find out which links have been created by checking the options for each document. Click “remove” if you see that an unwanted link has already been created. Now go find out which of your links (In a text, in Summary Links etc.) used this link 😦
  • You can remove the link, but the permission inheritance is still broken.
  • You can only “delete unique permissions”  per document, so you have to go to Site settings > Site permissions > Show items with different permissions > View Exceptions > Manage permissions > Delete unique permissions.
    This is a tedious process.

I think this can turn into a serious issue. I have found that many Site Owners do not fully understand the consequences of broken permission inheritance, and do not understand the extra maintenance and support issues involved. I have tried to tell them NOT to break permission inheritance unless it is really needed, and to never do this on a document or item level.
And even if they know, it is a time-consuming job to reset the permissions.

Also, why all this complexity for just getting a link? I think only the “Restricted link” would be sufficient. Who would ever want to use the “edit” options when linking to an image? Why would you use the “Get a Link” option to share via email if there is also a “Share” option which sends an email? (and which, in some cases, asks permissions to the Site Owner first?)

What would I recommend if you need a link?

  • Use the “Insert > Link > From SharePoint” option to link to a document or image when working in the text editor of a page
  • Use the “Browse” option when creating Summary Links
  • Use “Get a Link > Restricted View” when you want to get a link otherwise. This respects the permissions of your library.
  • Instruct your site Members about the dangers of Get a Link and ask them to use the Restricted Link.

What are your experiences with the Get a Link functionality? Have you been able to reduce the scope and if yes, how? I would appreciate to hear and learn from you!

Kitten image courtesy of Top Photo Engineer at Text added by myself.

Site Permissions Breaking Bad, episode 3

The Folders.

BrokenGlassNow and then you read a blog post that makes you think: “I wish I had written that”. Veronique Palmer has done it often, Dan Adams has done it a few times, and now I have found

Gregory Zelfond’s “12 reasons folders in SharePoint are a bad idea”.

It is a really good list of why you should avoid folders on SharePoint.

My own planned post on this topic is now completely redundant 🙂 . But I would like to illustrate his point 4: why maintaining permissions on folders can be a nightmare.

What are the issues with folder permissions?

  1. If you break permissions and add “Different permissions!” to the folder name, as I always suggest to do, the URL of the folder and all its documents changes. People who have this link in their Favorites and use it after the change, will get an error.
    That is another reason why folders are a bad idea: Links to folder, sub-folders and all documents in the hierarchy change when you change the name of the folder.
    Libraries and lists have a description field for that type of info, folders have not.
  2. Broken permissions are not easily visible, so unless you add something to the folder name (causing issue 1), you will not know what permissions your folders have. The only way to find out is by going to each folder and finding out. If you have a deep nest, you will have to start at the bottom of the hierarchy. Not a fun job 🙂
  3. People often are in a hurry to give someone access, without thinking about a sustainable setup, or writing down what the permissions are exactly.
  4. Having many folders with broken permissions, especially with individual permissions, may cause performance issues.

 Time for an illustration!

We have already seen the default permission setup, and what happens if you break permissions for one library. Here they are again:

This is the default permission setup of a site - the site and all lists and libraries have exactly the same permissions.
This is the default permission setup of a site – the site and all lists and libraries have exactly the same permissions.
Broken permissions- one library has different permissions.
One library has different permissions, and Visitors no longer see or have access to the library.

Now let us zoom in to one document library (the yellow block) in a site. What if it has 4 folders, 2 with inherited permissions (yellow) and 2 with broken permissions, each differently?

This is a site with one document library with folders. The individual users are also in the Visitors group, so they have access to the site.
This is a site with one document library with folders. The individual users are also in the Visitors group, so they have access to the site.

OK, this is getting complicated, right? Now what if one of the folders has 4 sub-folders with different broken permissions? And sub-sub-folders? Or if the folder and sub-folder inherit permissions from the site or the library, but the sub-sub-folder has broken permissions?  The potential issues multiply with each sub-folder.
You can imagine that managing and supporting that kind of setup becomes a difficult task – if a new person enters the team, where do you have to add him or her? And where do you need to remove their predecessor?

In one of my next posts, I will share some examples where breaking permissions in folders has led to misunderstandings, problems, urgent phone calls and me having to spend lots of time on cleaning the mess that someone else had made 🙂 .

Image courtesy of Suat Eman /

Site Permissions Breaking Bad, episode 2

The Invisible Library.

Broken eggSome time ago, a Team Site Owner asked me if I could help her move some content from one site to another. Since she had Full Control in both sites, she had the right to ask and I helped her transfer some large libraries and lists.

I then asked her what to do with the rest of the content. There was another library with a large number of documents in there, and the usual array of semi-empty Calendars, Task Lists etc.

She said she did not need anything else and that the site could be removed after some time. So we agreed that I would add a message to the site’s homepage, informing people of the new location for the content, and the date when the site would be removed.

At the agreed date I removed the site.

Several months later…

…another person from that department asked me about a certain library that he could not find anymore. He sent me the link and I saw it was the large library in the site I had deleted…

It was too late for a restore so the content was lost. Of course we all felt devastated, and I made a short analysis of what had gone wrong. As with most major accidents, it was a combination of several mistakes.

What had happened?

  • One content owner had removed all other people with Full Control from the library, and made it accessible for himself and a few other people only. So, the other people with Full Control did not see the library anymore, including the person I had worked with.
  • They used only the direct link to the library to check the documents. They never went via the homepage, so they never saw the message that the site was about to be deleted.
  • There was no message in the description of the library, so I had no reason to assume that there were any different permissions in that library.

What have we learned?

  1. Never remove the  Owners/Full Control group from a library. The Owners should be able to manage their site properly. If they do not see all their content, they may make incorrect assumptions.
  2. Add information about different permissions to the description field of the list or library .
  3. Ask the SharePoint administrator for a screenshot of the “View site content” page before you decide to delete a site. The administrator sees all content, and you can compare that with what you see.

This was the situation:

Library where Site Owners have been removed.

As always, your comments, suggestions and shared experiences are welcome!

Image courtesy of artur84 /

Site Permissions Breaking Bad, episode 1

BreakingPermissionsThe Survey.

In my earlier post, I showed default site permissions and what happens when you break permissions in one library.

This time I will show another common scenario with non-standard permissions, that may give issues if you do not set it up properly.

Scenario: Your list or library has a larger audience than the rest of the site.
This is quite common when you conduct a survey or have a request list in your site. You give your target audience contribute access to the survey or request form. They will generally not need to do anything else in your site.

In the picture below, the yellow circle is an additional members group with access to the one list, only.

A common setup for a survey, or a request form. The audience has access to the one list only.
A common setup for a survey, or a request form. The audience has access to the one list only.

This is an adequate setup if you are conducting a one-time survey, or have a request form where you invite people to participate via a link distributed by email. But in the following cases your users will still experience issues:

  • If you use a “Thank you page” after submitting feedback. The “Thank You”  page lives in another part of the site. Users will get an access denied as soon as they hit “Save”. Their feedback will be saved, but it is an unpleasant experience which will lead to many questions.
  • If you send them the link to the site, and ask them to navigate to the survey or request form, or click the survey/request form link or button. They will get an access denied when they try to enter the site.
  • If there are drop-down fields in the request form that use lookup lists. If they do not have access to the lookup lists, they will get a blank drop-down box.

Suggestion for a different setup.

  1. Determine if the rest of the site content is very confidential. If yes, store your survey in a less confidential environment. If not, proceed with 2.
  2. Add everyone in your audience to the a new group with Read access
  3. Create the survey, request form, library or other “app” 🙂  (I think it is really funny that lists are called Apps now)
  4. Now break permissions in the list or library
  5. Edit permissions for the new group from “Read” to “Contribute” in that list
  6. Break permissions in any confidential lists/libraries from your visitors and remove the new group. (Optional)

Your site’s permissions will now look like this. Much better and less issues!

Your audience now has read access throughout the site (with perhaps an exception or two) and contribute permissions for the list. This is less error-prone.
Your audience now has read access throughout the site (with perhaps an exception or two) and contribute permissions for the list. This is less error-prone.

Giving people access to one library or list only, is like asking the painter to come in through the window, not through the front door. It is better to let him in through the front door, and close or lock some rooms, than the other way around.

Next time, another example of how breaking permissions can go really bad!

Title inspired by award-winning series Breaking Bad.

Image courtesy of David Castillo Dominici at

Breaking Is Not Hard To Do

BreakingPermissionsDo you know what the following questions all have in common?

  • “I see a completely different homepage menu/libraries/folders than my other team members”
  • “I can no longer check out or edit a document”
  • “I know he has access to the list, but he can not access the link I send him”
  • “I have given her full control, but she still can not see that library”
  • “I can no longer access the site or library that I am supposed to manage”

Yes, you guessed it – these questions are all permissions-related.

It sounds really neat and useful to be able to limit access to sites, libraries and folders in SharePoint. It is easy to add groups and individuals and set it up just the way you think is best.
Many people, however, do not realize the full consequences of breaking permissions (= giving subsites, lists, libraries and folders different permissions than the site). As a result, I provide a lot of support on permissions-related issues.

I have found it hard to help users understand how it works in words, so I have created a series of pictures for clarification. You know I am not a designer, so if you have better visuals, please share!

Default site permissions.
First, let us show what the permissions in a “normal” site look like.
The fat dark blue line is a site. The blue blocks are libraries and lists. Or apps, as SharePoint 2013 calls them. 🙂
The purple circles are user groups. There is an Owners group (O) with Full Control, there is a Members group (M) that can read, add, edit and delete, and a Visitors group (V) that can read.

This is the default permission setup of a site - the site and all lists and libraries have exactly the same permissions.
This is the default permission setup of a site – the site and all lists and libraries have exactly the same permissions.

All lists and libraries have the same permissions throughout the site.
When we add an individual or another group to the site, (the circle with the person icon), this person/group will also have access throughout the site.

A new group or individual will automatically have access to all content.
A new group or individual will automatically have access to all content.

2. Site containing a library with different permissions.
Let us assume there is one library that contains confidential information, and we do not want Visitors to see that. You go to “Library Settings” and “Permissions for the library”, you edit permissions and remove the Visitors group. You add a note to the description of the library that this has different permissions. Visitors will not see the library anymore.
The permissions have now been broken, hence a dotted line around the library.

Broken permissions- one library has different permissions.
One library has different permissions, and Visitors no longer see or have access to the library.

Next, you want to add new people to the site. The best way is to add them to one of the groups – they will have the correct access. But if you add a new group or an individual to the site, they will not see the library. That is because the permissions have been broken, meaning that the site and this library no longer align and you need to maintain both entities. So, you have to give this person/group access twice…that is double the work!
But…Owners often forget that they have broken permissions. So they give someone access to the site, but that someone can not see the library. They then give that someone Full Control to the site, but they still can not see the library.
I hope the picture below shows you why.

Adding an indivudal to a site with broken permissions.
When you add an individual or group to the site, they do not automaticaly get access to all content. Permissions have been broken.

Now you know why I recommend to add a message in the description field of the library – that helps the Site Owner remember! And of course you see the benefits of adding new people to an existing group instead of as individuals.

So yes, breaking permissions is easy to do. Maintaining and supporting, however, is a lot of work!

Next time I will show you a few other scenarios.

You may also like:

The Key and the Team Site
Frankly my dear, they are just not that into your content

Title inspired by “Breaking up is hard to do” by Neil Sedaka.

Image courtesy of David Castillo Dominici at

Playing “Hide and Seek” in SharePoint

* Reviewed and updated in February 2015 *

After my earlier rant about people who want to secure their content for no good reason, I thought I would give some suggestions for alternative ways to hide content when it makes sense.

First let me stress that I recognize that some content is sensitive and really needs to be secured. But there is also a lot of content which is not confidential, but which you still may want to hide, to avoid information overload in general. Specific reasons may be:

  • The content is only relevant to a certain audience
  • You do not want people to influence each other
  • You want to allow people to focus on their own content, e.g. in projects or tasks lists

Next to giving permissions there are two other ways to hide content that I know of,  but I will be happy to learn new ways!

1. Targeting.

In SharePoint it is relatively easy to target web parts to an audience. In any web part menu, click open “Advanced” and add the audience, SharePoint group or person(s) to the Target Audience box on the bottom. Only they will see the web part.
We have used this especially to target links on the Homepage – in the main navigation, every employee had a link to the Employee Information of his/her country.
I have also used targeted web parts in Monthly Reporting in a Team Site.

2. Configuration.

a. Item-level permissions.
For surveys and lists, you can let people read only the items that have been created by themselves. (Advanced settings). This is nice if you do not want people to influence each other, but not very useful when you want to show the collected information to your audience. I usually apply it only in survey-type occasions.

Item-level permissions
Item-level permissions in the advanced settings

b. Created by = [Me].
When not using the item-level permissions, I like to use this filter for the default public view. That way people see their own items first and are not influenced by others, and they can not easily edit other people’s content. You can have additional public views showing all contributor’s items, or the process owner can create personal views and use web parts to display content from all contributors.

c. Impossible filters that show an empty default view.
We have used “Created < 01-01-2000” as the only public view to create an empty looking document library, accessible to all employees. The documents were distributed to other (secured) sites via Content Query web parts. Of course, the owners of the documents created personal views to see all documents. The advantage for the content owners was that the owners of the secured sites could manage access for their site.

d. Hidden columns.
In older versions (e.g. SP2007) you can create views without the Edit button, and without the “Name” column instead of “Name (linked to item/linked to document with edit menu)”. This way,  your readers will be unable to click on any items to see the complete item. Of course this is useless for Document Libraries, unless you only want to show that the documents are there.
Perhaps this can also be done in Office 365, but since I am the only one in my environment, I have too many permissions to test this.

e. Closing/hiding the web parts in the list or library.
You can close or hide the system web part of the list or library to avoid anyone seeing the content, including the site owner. I would recommend this only for very specific occasions, since it is very annoying to have to make the webpart visible every time you want to do something. Besides, every visitor will immediately see there is something wrong with this page.

f. Sending people to a non-default page after submitting data.
I often send people to a Thank You page after completing a survey or other data collection, by customizing the link. It is a nice gesture, it confirms that submission has been succesful and it allows you to give more information about next steps. It also hides other people’s responses from view.
I have also sent people from a topsite to a request form in a subsite, and after completion sent them back to the original page in the topsite. They did not have to see other people’s requests, and this way they could continue to do what they were doing in the topsite. Well, you will get the idea; you can use this with all pages within your environment.

How to do it?  Your links will normally have this format:
The part before “newform.aspx?” is the “data entry” part of the list, the part from “Source=” the location where people will go after clicking “OK” or “Finish”. You can replace the part after “Source=” with a link of your own choice. Please note this only works when you send a link in an email, use a Links list, or create a button. If you click “New Item” from the list, the link will always use the system format.

Thank you page
Simple Thank You-page

g. Removing the link from the title of a web part.
The title of a list/library web part on a page is clickable and leads you to the complete list or library. If you do not want that, go to the web part menu, open the “Advanced”  section and replace the link under ” Title URL”  by “#”.  Jasper Oosterveld also shares the screenshots.
People will still be able to go to the list/library via Site Contents, though.


  • Targeted or hidden content will normally still turn up in Search. People can also see it when they have the link to the information, or know how SharePoint works. This is not confidential information, so it is not a problem, but it helps to be aware of it. Do not be afraid that people will go and look for this info – they do not know it is there and they probably do not care if they knew.
  • Many people do not understand the difference between targeting (visible yes/no) and setting permissions (access yes/no), especially that you target a web part, but set permissions on a library or list. Be prepared for questions.
  • If you are the site owner, but you are not in the targeted audience, you will not see the content, so it will be difficult to maintain the web part. This is especially the case with Content Editor and Summary Links web parts, because they are not represented in the “back-end” of your site, i.e. the page showing all site content. This may occur when you are managing global content distributed over various “country” web parts.
  • If you target something and you are in the audience, you may forget that the content is not visible for everyone. Mention it in the web part title as a reminder.
  • Remember to discuss any targeting and personal views when handing over responsibilities for a site!

What other ways have you used to hide content without changing permissions?

Image courtesy of Willem Siers at; Post title inspired by Howard Jones’s “Hide and Seek“.

Frankly my dear…they’re just not that into your content.

“Oh yes, our employee benefits information should definitely be secured”, the country  HR manager said. “We do not want everybody to see that information”.

It took me some time to convince him that this was really not a good idea. I had to come up with various arguments:

  • Why would employee benefits be confidential content at all? Of course, people from other countries could see it and perhaps be jealous. But everyone knows there can be local differences in benefits, due to local laws and customs.
  • The information was published in a not very visible place and only employees in that country would have a link to it on their Homepage. Everyone else could find it in Search, or navigate to it if they knew where it was, but that would take a conscious effort which not everyone has the patience for.
  • The information was meant for about 700 people, how confidential is that?
  • Maintaining security for 700 people would mean a lot of work.  (Generally a good argument against securing content, by the way :-))

In the end I won him over by telling him that he already had a perfect natural security system: he was the  HR manager from Sweden and the majority of his content was in Swedish…;-)

This is just one example of people thinking their content needs to be secured. I have worked with many who were under the delusion that without restricting access, their site would bend under the weight of visitors and servers would crash by the flood of people eager to get a glimpse of that fabulous intranet content or application.

Wake up to the harsh truth, content owners! We still have to drive people TO your content, rather than chase them away FROM it. More organizations are struggling with a too low usage (“I can not find it”, “I did not know it was there”) than with too high usage. What is “too high” anyway? And what actually happens when “too many  people” see your content? Perhaps the site becomes slow or you get an error message when too many people try to access at the same time, but it is not that your site will break.

We are not satisfied with most intranet search tools because they can not find what we are looking for. Why do we then think that everyone will be able to immediately find our content, and will jump on it when they have found it? I still have to hear of one example of “too popular” content. (And please let me know when you have an example)

Because this is how things go with content:

  • If people do not know it’s there, they will not visit
  • If they know it is there but they cannot find it, they will not visit
  • If they know it is there, they can find it but are not interested, they will not visit

Of course I know that some information needs to be secured, but everything that is not business-critical should be open as far as I am concerned. It will be difficult enough to attract the right visitors to your content, so it is better to spend your time improving your content, usability and findability than on maintaining security groups.

Because frankly my dear, most employees don’t give a damn about your content…

Title and footer inspired by the movies “Gone with the Wind” and “He’s just not that into you