Allow consultant to Link to file, but prevent from downloading source?

[cmroz]

My architectural firm is trying to understand the best way to share our model with another outside architect. The are acting as a consultant who will be designing a small portion of the interior, while we will be doing the bulk of the work. Ideally, we want to allow them to link our BIM 360 Could Workshared model into their project, however, we do not want to allow them to download the source file - which would give them access to every portion of our file (components, custom template, titles blocks, proprietary info, etc). This would be a sort of read-only situation, but when setting the file to "view only" permissions, they are unable to link the file into their project.

It seems like this has to be possible but can't find the question asked here, so I might be missing something obvious. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

[gareth.spencer1]

Hi,

Sorry I have a few questions for you? 

I take it you are the owner of the project and control the who has access, etc. So I would assume you set the permissions to what can be seen, accessed and worked on. 

You have set the file permissions to 'view only' are you saying in BIM 360 Design or Docs? 

• In Design, if set to View then they won't be able to consume a file. 
• In Docs, you can only set folder permissions and not file permissions. So they will have full access to the Consumed folder with the models in. Which leads me to my next question.

Which folder are they trying to link your model from the Consumed or Shared folder in BIM 360 Docs?

• Consumed folder: As mentioned above the folder permissions will stop you from adjusting the permission level as it is a subfolder and permissions levels are controlled by the folder its in.
• Shared folder: If you set the permissions to View only the user won't be able to link the model into theirs

Here is a link to the BIM 360 help on permissions for BIM 360 Design Members just for your information.

Maybe @lim.wendy can help with this further? 

[Yien_Chao]

The permission to READ only is for bim360 platform. If they can acces a file to link through Revit and bim360, they should be able to open it directly. 

[cmroz]

Thank you for the replies. Yes, I am controlling permissions for this project. I gave a specific example, but let me make the question more general: Is there a way to share a file with a consultant via BIM 360 that allows them to link to the file in Revit, but not download the source?

I read about the method of using "view only" permissions in this Autodesk University document.

"The brilliant part of limiting permission to “view” versus “edit” is those settings will be reflected in Revit’s Open and Link file dialogs. When a user has view only rights to a folder, in Revit, in the file open dialog they can
browse to the folder, but the models will not be visible; however, when that same user browses
to the same folder from the Insert Link dialog, the model(s) will be visible"

That does sound brilliant, but I've tested this multiple times and it doesn't not appear to work. Back to the specific situation; I created a new package and shared it (via the shared folder). I set the folder permission to "View only", hoping the consultant could link to the file, but not download or edit the file - it is only being used as a background for their project. They were unable to see the project from the "insert link" unless the folder permissions were increased, also allowing them to edit our file. We ended up exporting to 3D CAD and sending it that way, as we couldn't figure out a safe way to share the file.

[MA-maf]

I am wondering the same thing. It seems our consultant cannot link to our model unless they also have the ability to download the file. We just want the consultants to be able to link our model as a background and not have all of our sheets, drafting views, etc. accessible to them. Wondering if anyone has any suggestions?

[MachielAEC]

Simple answer is no. If they need to link the file in Revit they need download permissions.

By default BIM360/ ACC will create a local cache file of any models that are linked in your Revit environment.

If security is a high priority, then what I can recommend is to break this section out as a separate model and clear it off any items they don’t need or shouldn’t have access to. Once they link (download or local cache) it’s at least a limited/ controlled set of info.

[tylerVD3L4]

@MA-maf , what did you end up deciding to do? We have similar concerns.

I think we might go with @machiel suggestion, and create a separate Revit file containing all of our information we don't want shared, which is mostly drafting views.

[MA-maf]

We didn't find a solution that prevented this. Looks like there might be something on the Trello Roadmap under "For Everyone" - "Linking Coordination Models from Autodesk Docs" that might address this issue down the road? https://trello.com/b/ldRXK9Gw/revit-public-roadmap We ended up putting hold harmless contract language on the startup page.

[JK-CAMERON]

Hello, thank you for starting this thread.  I am also at a crossroads with this dilemma.  We want to offer our model for another team to link into their model for coordination, but we do not want them to be able to open our model and farm all of our templatized work, views, and families.  It seems odd that all these permissions are avail to apply to situations, but this specific situation is not something you can accomplish.  With all the work firm pour into templates, families, etc very hard to just give it away.

Breaking out a separate sanitized file to share with them is very inconvenient.  Is this what everyone is doing?  This feature gap may prevent us from using the BIM360 Collaborate function all together.  Our projects are short and small and with our type of work, we do not share our data. 

Any further thoughts/comments appreciated.  Maybe I am thinking about this wrong? 

[RobDraw]

So, you want to work in collaborative environment with consultants that you can't trust?

[MA-maf]

@tylerVD3L4 - We ended up putting contract language for hold harmless into our models on the startup page. Not our ideal workflow, as it doesn't prevent people from downloading the entire source, but the consultants can not link to our file without having the option to download the source file.

[JK-CAMERON]

LOL.  I was more or less using Autodesk language.  There is trust, but like I said, we would prefer not to allow them to open our model up.  Linking is fine.

I understand the tone of your question and would agree with it, but right now this is where we are at and I am trying to find solutions to accommodate it.  We are not in a typical Architect project environment, our workflow and customers are very different.

[JK-CAMERON]

Thank you for quick response. We are in a similar situation. I will update this thread if we ever figure anything out.

[MirraLee]

Hi

Just my two cents, having spent the last nine years coordinating different firms' design and construction models. 

In my experience, no one wants another firm's families and content, and it's a myth that someone less developed will get all your work etc. Chances are very high, they will not want it as the industry is so diverse and siloed now and most have developed their own content that is faster and better than yours for them. It only works for your firm because each firm, group and user has developed content so specific to a company now that it cannot be easily swapped and adopted.

These families only work well in the firm and environment that they are developed inside of. As they fit, the workflow and match that firm's standards, settings, processes, checklists, and users skill level. To use a great family that you "see" and mesh that into an already existing system never really works well. 

If you do not want them to link, and or download your Revit file, then try the old-school method and export CAD files and they can link in CAD backgrounds either 2D or 3D, or export a daily NWC or NWD and share those. Only you will lose trust and collaboration with those two methods.

[JK-CAMERON]

You make a very good points.  You are correct, trying to absorb families created by someone else usually is more work than just creating it on your own.  Perhaps we are approaching this wrong.  I need to step back and do some thinking.

Thanks you MirraLee

[RobDraw]

People like to think they are not typical and require different things bur I've found @MirraLee's suggestions to be true especially if your environment is not typical. 

[MachielAEC]

I think to answer the original question, have a look at the new Revit update that allows for linking in views but maintain permissions from ACC.

https://help.autodesk.com/view/RVT/2024/ENU/?guid=GUID-2D77DCD8-A4C7-48F7-995F-237693350747 

FYI, my opinion as the conversation has changed is that families are not IP, they are there to be used. The people and processes you put in place to developing them is a different conversation.

[RSomppi]

This will never be a read-only situation with the way BIM 360 works. When a model is referenced, it gets downloaded as a local copy to the users computer. It is not read from the cloud, it is stored on the local machine.

[JK-CAMERON]

Great Points everyone. I am going to push for us re-evaluate these restrictions as it only would hamper our collab abilities.
Thanks you all for your feedback. Appreciate you.

[JK-CAMERON]

I will take a look at the update changes relating to permissions. Thank you all for responding. After reflecting I have change my view on IP/Central model sharing. I think having the perspective that our content is so tailored to us that if someone wanted to extract and try to use it, it would probably take longer than just making it themselves. Maybe not for all cases, but the collaborative benefits outweigh the perceived downsides.

Appreciate everyone.