This question already has an answer here:

Two of my clients would like to be able to restrict the contacts that can be assigned to an activity. This is because they handle highly sensitive information and it would be potentially disastrous for them to accidentally select the wrong contact (e.g. a client rather than a case worker). This was asked before here and the question was rated a 5 - the answer from Coleman was to make a code change. I think there's a good case to build some kind of configurable restriction into core. So I'm asking this question again to see how much support there is for a core update, or alternatively to see if anyone has a better idea.

marked as duplicate by petednz - fuzion Nov 15 '18 at 22:26

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • What CMS? Asking, as i did on the other ticket, because Drupal already offers this via webform_civicrm – petednz - fuzion Nov 15 '18 at 22:24
  • actually if you are really asking the same question again then you may find this gets deleted as a Duplicate and you would do better to engage on the original one – petednz - fuzion Nov 15 '18 at 22:26
  • The problem is that the original answer isn't satisfactory - so all I can do there is add a comment which will have less visibility. A weakness of this Q&A approach, I guess, and where the old forum worked better. – Andy Clark Nov 16 '18 at 8:14
  • There's usually not much appetite to put something in core if it can be easily done with an extension. The basic mechanism exists via a hook (see other answer) so it needs a configuration screen to determine which activity contacts need to be restricted. Sounds like a fairly straightforward extension. Commissions welcome :-) – Aidan Nov 16 '18 at 10:28
  • Understood re the Q+A format. If you tweak your question to more clearly differentiate it then happy to remove the duplicate flag. But also worth making a comment on the other one since that has eyeballs on it. The fact 5 folk have given Coleman's answer a +1 doesn't mean much more than 5 folk saw that he had made an effort to respond in an informative way and no other Answers had been offered to compare with. – petednz - fuzion Nov 16 '18 at 19:35

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.