User Permission for accessing History without full access

I have already posted this request in another different topic, but it is better to have in separate topic so that it can be added to ideas category if possible.

I would like to give some users access to History without giving them full access. It is useful especially for internal auditors who can have access to check what the modification/deletion were, so that it can be accepted or not. Such users doesn’t necessarily require to have full access.

It is also useful when you want a user to check if the tracking codes of Payments & Receipts were selected correctly without the need to click on edit on each voucher.

That would present serious issues. Access to History would give users access to view things you do not want them to see and the ability to undo transactions in tabs they have no access to. Further, the entries in History do not contain all information entered for a transaction, so they may not suffice for auditing needs. And they do not allow for selective editing of the transactions involved, only undoing of whatever action was taken.

History is not a method for indicating acceptance. Remember, once a transaction is created or updated, it is already accepted. That is, the database has been modified.

That is not a compelling reason, because viewing the History file still requires opening each entry one by one. The details of an action are not shown in the main History listing. So you might as well open them directly in the Receipts & Payments tab, where you can edit them if necessary.

I know and only authorized user will gain access to it.

It has what I require.

When I stated acceptance, it mean if the changes were correctly done, auditor will consider it accepted. If the changes were not done correctly, then Auditor can either undo changes or go to Payments & Receipts to do the required changes.

It is just additional benefits.

Access to the History file is equivalent to combined View and Delete permissions for all tabs, reports, and settings. In fact, the ability to undo prior actions—a capability inherent to access to the History file—can also be the functional equivalent of Create and Update permissions, because someone might go back and restore prior deletions or undo changes, returning the database to a previous state. If you are willing to authorize a user for this level of permissions, why not simply give them full access? There is almost no difference.

Neither of these is the proper function of an auditor. Auditors do not modify or correct. They render professional opinions as to whether the accounts properly reflect the state of the business and make recommendations for changes or improvements.

This quoted response was to my explanation that access to the History file did not avoid the need to open transactions one by one. Perhaps I was not clear enough. You might get information you want from the History file, but you will need to view transactions one by one to do so. That is no easier than opening the original receipts or payments one by one. Thus, it was not a compelling argument for the change you suggested.