Add system-characteristics 'cia-has' and 'has-system-name-short' constraints

[Gabeblis]

Committer Notes

Description

Added system-characteristics 'cia-has' and 'has-system-name-short' constraints and tests for each of the constraints. These should be added as they are part of the effort write all of the constraints from the constraint tracker.

Changes

• Added constraints cia-impact-has-selected, cia-impact-has-adjustment-justification, and has-system-name-short to fedramp-external-constraints.xml.
• Added pass and fail yaml tests for all of the above constraints.
• Edited ssp-all-INVALID.xml to ensure all constraints fail correctly.
• Edited ssp-all-VALID.xml to ensure all constraints pass correctly.

{Please provide a description of what this PR accomplishes. Be sure to reference any issues addressed. If the PR is a work-in-progress submitted for early review, please submit the PR as a draft PR using the "Draft pull request" dropdown.}

All Submissions:

• Have you selected the correct base branch per Contributing guidance?
• Have you set "Allow edits and access to secrets by maintainers"?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?
• Have you squashed any non-relevant commits and commit messages? [instructions]
• Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
• If applicable, have all FedRAMP Documents Related to OSCAL Adoption affected by the changes in this issue have been updated.?
• If applicable, does this PR reference the issue it addresses and explain how it addresses the issue?

By submitting a pull request, you are agreeing to provide this contribution under the CC0 1.0 Universal public domain dedication.

[aj-stein-gsa]

Woops, meant to be an approval.

[aj-stein-gsa]

These looks good, thanks for the work here. We still need documentation updates. I will approve but hold for merge.

Hold for GSA/automate.fedramp.gov#55 and GSA/automate.fedramp.gov#58.

[Rene2mt]

PR looks good!

[aj-stein-gsa]

I am happy with this PR as it progressed, but we need to rebase. I can look into this because, per our style guide reqs, that rebase should include alphabetically sorting (the target branch on rebase screwed that up when I merged, not @Gabeblis).

[aj-stein-gsa]

I am happy with this PR as it progressed, but we need to rebase. I can look into this because, per our style guide reqs, that rebase should include alphabetically sorting (the target branch on rebase screwed that up when I merged, not @Gabeblis).

You know what? Nevermind, no. I will open a chore PR to fix that lest I mess things up. 😆