Stuck on an issue?
Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
Unable to edit security policies
See original GitHub issueBug report
Describe the bug
Trying to delete or save an edit to a row level security policy returns error id is required with an HTTP 500 status code.
To Reproduce
- Go to the Auth > Policies page
- Click delete on an existing policy (or edit and then save)
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 2 years ago
- Reactions:1
- Comments:9 (5 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Can't edit Local Security Policy - Super User
1 Answer 1 · Modify the policy in the applicable domain Group Policy Object. · Prevent any domain-based GPOs from specifying this setting,...
Read more >Unable to make Local Group Policy Changes for WIndows ...
Good morning,. I am having problems making changes to our domain controller within the Local Group Policy Editor.
Read more >[SOLVED] Local Security Policy settings greyed out
I'm logged in as a local Administrator with UAC On. The 2 in particular that I'm trying to change are: Local Policies |...
Read more >Administrator cannot change Local Security Policies
Try and edit security policies now. 2) In Security Options\Accounts: State of the administrator account\enable.
Read more >Unable to Edit security policies - Management Group ... - GitHub
The defined policies are are not the complete set of OOTB policies. There is no ability to add our custom polices in the...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Hey @emschwartz, this has been fixed and will be deployed by today.
The policy was a very simple one to disable reading so the definition was just
falseand it was forselect