Someone who is granted access to information but not expected to read it

Question

I'm looking for word for a person who handles records, but isn't expected to read them. I'm creating a list of positions within an organization who should have access to certain records. Alongside the people who need to actually read these records, there are other people who handle the records as a practical matter. These are the people who may file and retrieve the information, or carry the key to the filing cabinet, or IT staff who are responsible for data encryption and storage. Anyone who could read the information, but really doesn't have reason to.

It would be good if it carried a connotation of trust and responsibility. The word "fiduciary" comes to mind, as it carries implications of professional ethics. As far as I know, that word applies to finances specifically. "Custodian/custodial" is in the ballpark, but perhaps too specific. Ideally, this word would describe anyone along the chain who has access, but does not act on curiosity outside of their direct job function.

A thesaurus search for "fiduciary" gives curator, depositor, trustee, and guardian. These are all a bit too specific, though "trustee" comes close. A thesaurus search for "custodial" has the same problem. They are all words for someone whose job it is to care for some thing. I want to include people who have access to that thing incidentally as part of their job.

The word can be an adjective (applied to the position), noun (describe the position), or adverb (applied to job function).

"Joe will have (adjective) access to the files." OR "Joe will have access to the files in a (adjective) capacity."
"Joe will have access to the files as a (noun)."
"Joe can access the files (adverb)."

I'm guessing there are existing legal terms for what I'm looking for, which is why I'm reaching out on this SE. I'm not drafting a legal document, though.

Edit: Let me clarify a bit. I'm looking for a way to describe the relationship of existing positions to the information in question. This isn't a new job title or even a primary job duty. The motivation is that I'm creating a list of which job titles have access to certain information, and I'd like to mark a difference between those who are supposed to be reading the information, and those who only have access of a necessity because of the way things work.

Answer 1

Clerk/Clerical/Clerically

If you have access to move files from place to place, you have clerical access to them. A clerk generally isn't supposed to read the documents, or discuss them, but is supposed to be able to find them when needed.

Clerical work... [involves]... filing documents.

https://www.thebalancecareers.com/clerical-skills-list-and-examples-4148486

This works a little better as an adjective than as a noun, as it’s understood performing clerical work does not make that worker a clerk.

Most employees need to do at least some clerical work, so these skills can come in handy no matter what your official job title is.

One caveat here is the adjective clerical also means “regarding a cleric”, or “regarding clergy.” But inside a business setting this is understood by context.

Answer 2

I would go with Administrator.

From your examples:

• "Joe will have administrative access to the files."
• "Joe will have access to the files in an administrative capacity."
• "Joe will have access to the files as an administrator."
• "Joe can access the files administratively."

Answer 3

The word archivist is a good choice.

[Merriam-Webster]
: a person who has the job of collecting and storing the materials in an archive

So:

Joe is an archivist.
Joe will have archival access to the files.

This follows from archive:

1 : a place in which public records or historical materials (such as documents) are preserved
// an archive of historical manuscripts
// a film archive
also : the material preserved —often used in plural
// reading through the archives
2 : a repository or collection especially of information

---

It's possible to also use secretarial (from secretary), but secretaries are often tasked with reading, if not actually writing or editing, documents, so it doesn't convey a read-only sense as strongly.

Answer 4

If these people have responsibility for the records in some sense, then the term stewardship comes to mind.

Joe will have stewardship over the files.

See Merriam-Webster:

stewardship noun
2 : the conducting, supervising, or managing of something especially : the careful and responsible management of something entrusted to one's care

Answer 5

Many organizations use the term position of trust to designate people who have physical access to spaces or documents as well as direct access to financial accounts via purchase cards. This category is broad, and includes people who may incidentally handle sensitive materials as part of their day-to-day records, like student interns filing human resources documents.

For example, the University System of Georgia in the US defines the term administratively in this way:

Positions of Trust are sensitive positions that involve responsibilities demanding a significant degree of public trust with significant risk for causing damage or realizing personal gain. Primary responsibilities to include but not limited to:

• The direct interaction or care of children under the age of 18 or direct patient care

• Security Access (e.g., public safety, IT security, personnel records, or patient records)

• Operation, access, or control of financial resources (e.g., P-Card, handling of checks or cash, or Budget Authority in making significant financial decisions)

Each institution’s hiring office is responsible for identifying and maintaining a list of positions of trust within their organization.

With your given examples, you might say:

As an IT staffperson with security access, Joe holds a position of trust within his organization.

Answer 6

If the position is that the person will be in physical contact with the file, but shouldn't look inside, then you could say they have de facto access.

That means that they don't necessarily have a right to access the file but they could because it's right there in front of them.

So you could say:

Jo has de facto access to the file.

Answer 7

As a person who has worked in operations and has had that kind of access to various kinds of data, I might say "I have operational access to that data." That could be construed to also be a person carrying a sheaf of documents--they are perfoming operations on the data, they could read it, but it's not their job to and they generally should not. A common abbreviation for operations is ops, so if it's something you need to use in conversation a lot you can shorten it to ops access while still using "operational access" in formal documents.

(This is similar to "administrative", but seems less likely to confuse people with the connotation "administrator in charge of producing/editing/etc the documents".)

An awful, clunky, too-long phrase that could help disambiguate "custodian" would be chain-of-custody access. (When I say "disambiguate 'custodian'" I mean the same kind of ambiguity as "administrator" or "steward". All of those could mean that they are supposed to do something with the data itself.). I think people are familiar enough with the idea of chain of custody that they would recognize that this means "just someone along the line that handled the data at some point". I think this concept is also in use in audit/regulatory language about data control.

Of all of this, I think "operational" really gets the separation right, it says you are just doing things like moving it around, storing, retrieving, etc. Operations.

Answer 8

I suggest Keeper. My Oxford Dictionary defines the word as a person who manages or looks after something or someone.

Answer 9

Joe is privy to the information contained on file.

Merriam-Webster

adjective

: allowed to know about (something secret). I wasn't privy to their plans.

OED

adjective

4.a Having or sharing in knowledge of (something secret or private); privately cognizant of; intimately acquainted with or accessory to.

Answer 10

Here are some suggestions that convey the sense of access, but do not imply authority, direct involvement, or examination of records being part of the job. While these could be job titles, which you said you are not looking for, note that these do not have to be treated as job titles.

facilitate

• "Joe has facilitator access to records."
• "Joe facilitates records access."

facilitate
fa·​cil·​i·​tate | \ fə-ˈsi-lə-ˌtāt \
facilitated; facilitating

transitive verb

: to make easier : help bring about
_{source: Merriam-Webster online dictionary}

The people who have the keys, fetch records, file records, and so on, do not need access to the records themselves. They are facilitating access to the records by the people who do need it.

logistician

• "Joe has logistics access to records."
• "Joe does records logistics."

logistician
A logistician is an individual who is responsible for the supply chain within a business. Individuals who work in this capacity perform a variety of tasks that can include purchasing, inventory, delivery, transportation and warehousing.
_{source: www.topaccountingdegrees.org}

from logistics:

logistics
lo·​gis·​tics | \ lō-ˈji-stiks , lə-\

noun, plural in form but singular or plural in construction

2 : the handling of the details of an operation
_{source: Merriam-Webster online dictionary}

coordinator

• "Joe has coordinator access to records."
• "Joe coordinates records."

coordinator
co·​or·​di·​na·​tor | \ kō-ˈȯr-də-ˌnā-tər \

noun

1 : one who coordinates something
especially : a person who organizes people or groups so that they work together efficiently
_{source: Merriam-Webster online dictionary}

Notes on other words

Administrator can carry the connotation of helping to make things happen, but it generally comes with a sense of authority that doesn't match your description.

Steward is good, but you said you wanted something more general and without the connotation of added direct responsibility, just access.

Archivist is not really their job role or title.

privy to implies a trust and level of intentional access that doesn't seem to match.

guard seems far from what you're asking for.

keeper was too specific, not applying to anyone who can read the information.

de facto seems to me a miss as it isn't really an answer, as it would modify the word you're looking for but doesn't suggest what that word could be.

position of trust doesn't really capture the meaning you're calling out, similar to de facto.

Answer 11

Ex officio might work here, especially in a fairly formal document: "Access to patient data is restricted to clinical staff, though the IT has ex officio access to all storage systems.

MW defines it as "by virtue or because of an office." It often, but not always, has the added implication that the position is not meant to be heavily used. The Vice President of the United States, for example, is an ex officio member of the Senate. They can vote to break ties, but they aren't expected to be there every day.

Answer 12

Microsoft used to have a built-in user group in Windows installations called "backup operators". These users had (going on memory here) administrative rights to all volumes attached to the systems because they had to be able to read them and change the "A" attribute, but were not intended to do normal "administrator" acts. You could call them "[adj] operators". I would avoid "operatives" because that is fit only for spies in a dime novel.

Answer 13

In the IT world, this is usually referred to as Authorization, Clearance, or Permission. (mostly Permission)

authorization (noun)

official permission for something to happen, or the act of giving someone official permission to do something:

---

clearance (noun) ​ official permission for something

---

per·mis·sion (noun) consent; authorization.

This is used to say a person CAN do something, without implying anything further. (like any responsibilities or tasks. For example, You have clearance/authorization to call the police, but that does not mean you will or that are obligated to.)

In IT, this is divided into individual subtypes (each can be granted or denied independently)

Read: They have permission to read, but not touch.

Write: They have permission to edit. (Usually requires read permission as well)

Execute: They have permission to run it (Just the permission to "hit start")

Outside of IT, it is more fuzzily used to say "They have clearance to access this space" or "They have clearance to handle these files (but not necessarily read or write in them)"

Both in and outside IT, a set of clearances will be defined somewhere as a Role, and people will be assigned zero or more roles (to more easily express/manage permissions). For example, people with the Admin role all have Read/Write access to the thing they are administrating, and a Proofreader may have Read, but not Write access to the document they are reviewing.

Answer 14

A guard is someone who control access to some place, event, or object, but does not generally go to the place, participate in the event, or use the object.

Compared to archivist, it better describes someone with the authority and ability to control access or to otherwise protect something from attack. Compared to steward, I think guard is more suitable as a general term for lots of people, whereas steward is more appropriate for a single position who is (alone) responsible for something's safety.