# Question: Security Policies \> Policy Content
**URL:** https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175
**Category:** Forum - Software
**Created:** [June 9, 2022, 8:50am UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175 "2022-06-09T08:50:55Z")
**Posts on this page:** 8
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@david.davis](https://discussions.eramba.org/u/david.davis)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2022, 8:50am UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175/1 "2022-06-09T08:50:55Z")
This may be a bug, or it may just be the way the thing is designed:
One of the many parameters in the Security Policy module, in the ‘Policy Content’ tab, is ‘Document Content’, for which you have a choice of three:
- Use Content (which means you type in the content in a dialog there on the screen)
- Use URL, or
- Use Attachment
It seems that once a document is created, you cannot change between these, it’s ‘stuck’ with the original type. (But you can ‘change’ it in the Security Policy Review objects… but that doesn’t work)
This tripped me up recently:
for our Docs process, colleagues will tell me the title of new documents they have, and I will allocate a reference number for it and create and entry in the Eramba Security Policy module. But because they haven’t written the actual document, I thought i would be clever and, instead of uploading a dummy Attachment of the doc, I just selected ‘Use Content’ and typed ‘Just a draft for now’ in there.
However, when they their doc was ready for realise, I went to the first ‘Security Policy Review’ object for the doc and _there_, the Document Content field is NOT locked / greyed out,
so I could change it to ‘Use Attachment’ and I attached the document.
But, the parent Security Policy object still has its Document Content property locked as ‘Use Content’,
and when my users go the Policy Portal, they released version of the document isn’t there to download when you click into its entry.
The fact that you can change this parameter in the Review object but not in its parent suggests to me that this is a bug, not a feature…?
I can’t see a reason why the parameter should be locked, as it’s perfectly reasonable for new editions of documents to change their delivery format.
---
### Author:  [@kisero](https://discussions.eramba.org/u/kisero)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2022, 11:07am UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175/3 "2022-06-09T11:07:28Z")
i’m sorry i think i perhaps dont understand .. is best if you describe a bug as steps that we can reproduce .. for example this is what i tried to do based on your input:
1- create a policy, content type editor (content):
2- create a review (add review) to that policy, set version 2, i change content type to attachment and put a png file
3- policy shows as v2 and type attachment .. so this seems ok
4- edit the policy, all looks consistent:
5- policy portal also shows consistent content:
im probably doing something different .. or i cant reproduce your issue
---
### Author:  [@david.davis](https://discussions.eramba.org/u/david.davis)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2022, 11:22am UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175/4 "2022-06-09T11:22:27Z")
I think you are trying to do the same steps as me, yes.
But when you create a Security Policy, do you not find that its Document Content field becomes greyed out and can no longer be changed? (It can be changed in child Security Policy Reviews, but I found that what is shown in Policy Portal is then stuck that the content type set in the original Security Policy)
---
### Author:  [@kisero](https://discussions.eramba.org/u/kisero)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2022, 11:48am UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175/5 "2022-06-09T11:48:29Z")
> [@david.davis](#):
>
> Document Content field becomes greyed out and can no longer be changed? (
yes , and this is intended as the only way to change the content and the version and the next review date is trough reviews.
---
### Author:  [@david.davis](https://discussions.eramba.org/u/david.davis)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2022, 1:00pm UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175/6 "2022-06-09T13:00:11Z")
OK, that makes sense.
But in that case I definitely experience a bug in the portal:
I had completed the policy’s first review, and changed it there to ‘Use Attachment’,
but in the Policy Portal, it was just showing me the original ‘Use Content’ version.
I had to delete the Security Policy and make a replacement. (This means I can’t screenshot it for you to demonstrate it, because the misbehaving one is deleted, of course! 😉 )
---
### Author:  [@kisero](https://discussions.eramba.org/u/kisero)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2022, 2:08pm UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175/7 "2022-06-09T14:08:21Z")
> [@david.davis](#):
>
> I had to delete the Security Policy and make a replacement. (This means I can’t screenshot it for you to demonstrate it, because the misbehaving one is deleted, of course! 😉 )
ohh let us know if you find a way to reproduce the issue !
---
### Author:  [@david.davis](https://discussions.eramba.org/u/david.davis)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2022, 2:15pm UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175/8 "2022-06-09T14:15:04Z")
I’m surprised that it didn’t reproduce for you.
It’s _possible_ that what happened was that I somehow messed up the dates of my reviews, thus meaning that Eramba still regarded the v1 as the ‘current’ one…?
---
### Author:  [@kisero](https://discussions.eramba.org/u/kisero)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2022, 3:10pm UTC](https://discussions.eramba.org/t/question-security-policies-policy-content/2175/9 "2022-06-09T15:10:48Z")
> [@david.davis](#):
>
> I somehow messed up the dates of my reviews, thus meaning that Eramba still regarded the v1 as the ‘current’ one…?
the portal will show the latest version always … whatever that was ! you can see what i did on the screenshots above