… ROCK and Nucleus users excluded. 
Only with NAS storage they can “protect” from accidental (or intentional) file deletion. But NAS storage is only the second best option for ROCK / Nucleus …
On the other hand side this could mean some (or all) of the prospective advanced profile features only get implemented for ROCK / Nucleus, because only Roon OS provides for enough ecosystem control without creating a support hell.
I find it very strange that the Roonies are so quiet about this issue. Maybe they live on their own and never have friends over, so this problem seems completely alien to them. I also do not understand the absence of Roonies on these improvement threads - total silence. Whilst the rather over the top thread of personal data protection, gets graced by a lot of Roon attention. What is the point of an official discussion board, if there are no officials discussing? I do believe this is a very legit issue and it really cannot be that complicated to implement. All we need is a profile that hides settings and all is great.
I wonder if the profile and multiple library issue is tied into the mobile solution so they have to move in step, hence no movement or comment. Just a thought.
Whatever the issue might be - communicating is better than not communicating, especially on a communication board 
There have been a lot of helpful comments to prevent the “drunken friend deletion” syndrome. (Thanks!) I do have backups, and I know how to set read only access. The point, though, is that the security really belongs in the program. Setting Read Only access is not really an option for many users, and, could end up causing more support confusion. And, yes, everyone should have backups.
Really, the easiest option would be to remove the ability to delete physical files at all. Messed up Settings, etc, can be restored with a Restore.
Why doesn’t even one of the Roon team members seems to care to share the philosophy behind their reluctance to do anything about this basic feature? And by this I mean a recent perspective, not some disdainful link to a reply from several years ago…
+1 from me as well. The children are using Spotify connect and would love to give them a Roon profile if this is implemented.
Since there has been a plea for this basic funtion since 2015 - even from loyal forum moderators, it is very weird that it is being ignored by the Roon team. Atleast grace us with some insight - that would simply be polite.
As for setting a NAS to READ ONLY, yes that is a good option against mayor katastrophes, but having the settings open for everybody in a household can also be pretty damaging. Yes one can do a restore afte a party - but does one really want to restore after every time someone used Roon (kids?) Some changes might not even be seen immediately.
This is not a completely out of this world request, plus it is something that other programmers of other programmes have thought about and implemented. If they can why can’t the Roonies?
Since this is the only form of contact we have with Roon, simply sitting this one out by silence, is not the very best behaviour.
Atleast answer your moderators who are keeping this board organised and conversations civil - all for free.
To be clear, I do not expect or demand a response by the dev team. Nor am I upset that there has not been a response.
I understand that they do not comment much, if at all, in Feature Requests, however, I do know that they watch them. My only hope is that the request stays on their radar. Thanks for adding your voice!
In order to begin to give security to a profile, a framework to respect, acknowledge, manage and enforce that security needs to exist. That is why I was asking for a “pre-set” secure profile, rather, than a mechanism for creating and then managing profiles individually.
Having added profile managed security features to hosted document management applications, I know it is not as easy as you might think.
+1 … being a community moderator does not grant any additional entitlement.
Exactly!
/10char
I’m just blown away about the “complexity” of the user managerment. Years it has taken and nothing has been added.
So many years so little progress and yet so many empty words and smilies from Roonlabs.
If it is that hard, to make the final release of user management, then could you guys please start with a version 0.1 and just add one feature for “listen only”, that you can enable on each/a profile.
Thats all, for version 0.1
I LOVE Roon, but the user management is from 1980 and is a laugh.
Cheers
Jonny
Actually, ranting aside, creating a stripped down version for Parties is certainly one way to go. Not sure how simple it would be to maintain, but, probably much faster than building in a security framework with profile manager.
Just a password prompt to get into settings would be a help and for anything that involves a deletion or change of operation.
+1. Exactly this has been suggested and requested for years now. Why the stubborn resistance from Roon?
I’d say would be a start, but, many of the things I’d want disabled are available in the 3 dot menus all over the UI, like “edit”.
Unfortunately retrofitting role based access to an architecture that didn’t anticipate it is easier said than done.
Yes, indeed. I’d mentioned that earlier as well. Or did I forget and delete and not post, LOL. But yes, such retrofits can be very costly in man-power and would probably add in the program’s processing overhead.
Earlier this year I tested roon and I would have bought a lifetime license as a no brainer
if it weren’t for the missing user management.
I am deeply disappointed that nothing like it, not even a party mode was implemented with the new
major version.
Maybe I’ll give Roon another try with writeprotected sources and a regular automated
security baackup of the database.
But I am still deeply disappointed of the absense of any security features.
It is a real shame.
Sage self advice…but yes I totally agree there should be a tiered user access to all destructive/changeable items