Very Computer

We have got a pretty simple security setup. Each client has got their own db
which is set as their default. That is the only db the can access. All
reads/ writes are done through stored procs. They all use WINNT security
through their own groups. Very simple, effective, and easy to manage. Would
applying the use of roles(standard or application) be of any benifit to this
scenario?

--
Thanks in advance.
Chris

Roles can be used effectively, if you have a lot of users needing same kind
of privileges in the same database. In this case, instead of granting
permissions to each individual user, add them to a role and manage
permissions on the role.

Though I don't know your system well, I don't see the need for roles here,
as each client accesses their own database. Again it depends on how many
different logins each client has, and if those logins need different levels
of permissions.
--
HTH,
Vyas, MVP (SQL Server)

http://vyaskn.tripod.com/

We have got a pretty simple security setup. Each client has got their own db
which is set as their default. That is the only db the can access. All
reads/ writes are done through stored procs. They all use WINNT security
through their own groups. Very simple, effective, and easy to manage. Would
applying the use of roles(standard or application) be of any benifit to this
scenario?

--
Thanks in advance.
Chris