Addition of Protective Marking sub-section to api-security.md #49
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…ussed Working Group July 27 Addition of Protected Marking sub-section to API Security, as discussed Working Group July 27
TimGoodwill
changed the title
jordanwalsh23
suggested changes
Nov 13, 2020
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm happy with these changes from a Victorian Government API standards viewpoint. We are comfortable to implement the protective marking approach with the APIs we build in the WoVG API Team that contain sensitive data.
That said, the bullet points in the 2nd paragraph have slightly gone out of alignment, can you resolve and resubmit?
|
Updated as requested |
ghost
reviewed
Nov 23, 2020
ghost
reviewed
Nov 23, 2020
ghost
mentioned this pull request
Merged
|
To be replaced with generalised version, based on current v1.1 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Addition of Protective Marking sub-section to API Security, as discussed Working Group July 27.
A unified approach to protective marking would greatly enhance API inter-operabilty. It is acknowledged that each jurisdiction may have similar requirements, and this section should be open to evolution.
I have based this addition on Peeyush's PR update to this document.