Thanks Raman and Kevin,
I have a clear understanding of the requirements now. I'll open this up as an idea for engineering and we appreciate both of your inputs here to improve our Compliance offering.
Thanks,
ROBΞRT HΞNNINGPrincipal Solutions Engineer | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original Message:
Sent: 6/1/2023 10:41:00 PM
From: Raman Gulati
Subject: RE: New feature suggestion in Continuous compliance portal
Thanks for echoing this requirement @Kevin Bott!
Hi Robert/Team,
On you reply--In my experience the rationale is that if none of the fields are required for a table then it's assumed the table is not required to be in the ruleset. It also keeps the management more streamlined and to return objects in the UI or API which is stale or not in use.
We need that function to ensure that table still stays in the job but just to skip that table in the consecutive run for some reasons like performance monitoring, non-conformant data check or some other functionalities check. As stated earlier it takes time to remove and add it back in the ruleset tab and then again assign all algorithms back to that table is cumbersome task.
Also, as Kevin suggested instead of having a check box to remove all algorithms at one go the other better option is to have a check box Infront of every table in the inventory window, so that any table can be checked or unchecked to left in that particular run as required.
Hope that makes sense & appreciate your update from design team!
Regards,
Raman
------------------------------
Raman Gulati
Data Governance System Specialist
Bupa Australia Pty Ltd.
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 05-31-2023 08:23:26 AM
From: Kevin Bott
Subject: New feature suggestion in Continuous compliance portal
Similar request: My suggestion is an "Enabled" flag for the table. Instead of removing all the algorithm assignments, the table could just be skipped. A checkbox would make it easy to temporarily remove a table from masking. This has come up in our team at times when a masking job fails and we determine we don't need to reload the tables before running the job again. We end up copying the ruleset and removing all the tables that have succeeded. It works, but it's a bit clunky and requires people to remember to cleanup temporary rulesets. If they create a new job and delete it, we lose the job history and evidence of what was run.
In regards to removing tables from rulesets that do not have assignments, we keep all the tables in rulesets so that profiling will catch any new columns that are added to tables. This could also be handled through governance and change management controls, but this is the approach we've taken for now.
------------------------------
Kevin Bott
Sr. Database Architect
Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company
Original Message:
Sent: 05-30-2023 06:55:43 AM
From: Robert Henning
Subject: New feature suggestion in Continuous compliance portal
Thanks Raman,
In my experience the rationale is that if none of the fields are required for a table then it's assumed the table is not required to be in the ruleset. It also keeps the management more streamlined and to return objects in the UI or API which is stale or not in use.
If the deselection is for this table repeatable and on a pattern, you can create additional rulesets and jobs with logical names for your identification and run them according to your schedule. I'll bring your suggestion to the design team and will gather additional feedback.
Thanks,
Robert
Sent from my iPhone
Original Message:
Sent: 5/30/2023 3:09:00 AM
From: Raman Gulati
Subject: RE: New feature suggestion in Continuous compliance portal
Hi Robert,
Thanks for replying !
As stated in my initial post that this is just a suggestion to add another option to un-select the masked fields for one particular table instead of removing and adding it back from Ruleset option.
Few more details of the requirements are here:
We have an option at Inventory window where we can see what all fields we are going to mask under masked fields tab/button as in below snap:
Similarly, can there be an option to uncheck/deselect all these fields at once or on a click of a button where all the masked fields selected earlier from a table can get unselected instead of unchecking/unselecting one by one or removing the whole table from Ruleset.
Hope this provides more details of the requirement!
Regards,
Raman
------------------------------
Raman Gulati
Data Governance System Specialist
Bupa Australia Pty Ltd.
Original Message:
Sent: 05-29-2023 11:10:12 AM
From: Robert Henning
Subject: New feature suggestion in Continuous compliance portal
Hi Raman,
Thanks for reaching out. The inventory represents the fields of the table. If you want to remove one or more tables between masking runs, they need to be unselected and re-selected and then saved in the ruleset. If you would like to provide some more detail around your requirements that may be helpful. Thanks!
------------------------------
Robert Henning
Principal Solutions Engineer
Delphix
Original Message:
Sent: 05-28-2023 11:15:20 PM
From: Raman Gulati
Subject: New feature suggestion in Continuous compliance portal
Hi Team Delphix,
Just have one suggestion for a button/option inside inventory window where we can see what all masked fields are selected on a table. Can we include an option to deselect all masked fields on a table at one go instead editing one by one for each field.
I understand that this could be one off requirement after configuring algorithms but sometimes when we are running masking job on bunch of tables and we just want to remove one table from that list of masking ( could be done by deleting that table from inventory but again changing the ruleset for that is bit cumbersome) and just want to sit that table in the list without getting masked, then this feature will be quite handy.
Not sure if I am making any sense but happy to discuss in detail, if required. Below is the snapshot where this feature is required to remove all masked fields for a table:
Regards,
Raman
------------------------------
Raman Gulati
Data Governance System Specialist
Bupa Australia Pty Ltd.
------------------------------