Welcome to the Syniti Ideas Portal!

Do you have feedback regarding the current product, or new ideas for improvement?

Tell us how we can make the Syniti Knowledge Platform more useful to you.

Security Profiles for Business Processes

At Eli Lilly, there is a desire to control data access (via Security Profiles) at the Business Process level. The Data Quality hierarchy has 4 levels: 1 - Subject Areas > 2 - Business Process > 3 - Datasets > 4 - Rules However, Security Profiles are only available on levels 1 and 4. For Eli Lilly, level 1 is less granular than they would like and level 4 is far too granular. The ideal would be for them to set a Security Profile on each Business Process. NOTE: Consider that each Security Profile must be multiplied by the number of Security Roles (https://ideas.syniti.com/p/skp-security-divorce-profiles-from-roles). In practice, nobody can set meaningful Security Profiles more granular than the Subject Area level until they are divorced from Security Roles.

Ben Bauer 17 days ago

1

Use-cases for multiple Report Cache Datastores

Currently, it is only possible to specify a single datastore for writing the output of DQ reports in SKPv2. This single datastore is configured here: https://knowledge.syniti.com/admin/parameters/data-quality At Eli Lilly, and I’m sure other clients would agree, it would be wonderful to be able to register any number of report cache datastores. Then, the specific datastore to use could be specified when toggling the ‘Save Errors’ option in the Implementation asset. Use-cases: Client has multiple tiers of report data (DEV > QA > PROD, for example) and they wish to register 3 reports (aka Enforcement + Implementation) under each Rule and have their output written to 3 separate database instances. Client has multiple Subject Areas and they wish to have their output written to a separate database for each Subject Area.

Ben Bauer 17 days ago

2

SKP Security - Divorce Profiles from Roles

Please link Profiles only to User Groups, not to Roles. The link from a Security Profile to a Security Role is enforced in a subtractive way that is very confusing and tedious to work around. The tagging of objects with Security Profiles should not require Role configuration, and those Roles certainly shouldn’t override a User’s other Roles. Hypothetical: If my User is a member of both a Read-Only Role and an Admin Role, but the Read-Only Role is linked to a Security Profile, then I can no longer maintain any objects tagged with that Security Profile. If I then add the Admin Role to the Security Profile, then I now have to give Admin permission to any user that is to be able to see the objects tagged with that Security Profile. Workaround is to create 2 Read-Only Roles and 2 Admin Roles, one set with the Security Profile and one set without it. Real Example: We have identified 19 different "Security Roles" at Eli Lilly (so far). These represent personas who have different page-level permissions throughout SKP. And we have identified 4 different "Security Profiles" at Eli Lilly (so far). These represent data-level permissions for their 4 subject areas (or so we thought). What we thought would be a security configuration of 19+4=23 roles, is now going to be 19*4=76 roles!

Ben Bauer about 1 month ago

2

Planned

SKP Catalog/Quality - use REST API to set asset ID numbers

As Data Quality is now more widely used, some customers will deploy it with multiple tenants of SKP. This poses a problem when trying to keep the Catalog asset ID numbers aligned. For Eli Lilly, the chief concern is the Rule ID, but the same issue exists for the other asset IDs. It is too unwieldy to have different ID numbers for the same assets between their multiple SKP tenants. Please enhance the SKP REST API to allow users to specify a Rule ID value when creating or modifying a Rule using the SKPv2 REST API. The standard documentation (linked below) doesn't list any means of specifying the Rule ID. This is a critical issue for Eli Lilly, who is using the REST API to transfer Rules from one tenant to another, and they need the Rule ID to stay the same. create a Rule (POST) modify a Rule (PUT)

Ben Bauer about 1 month ago

2

Add 'Target' as a column in Migrate > Deployment Reports

We have multiple targets in a given dataset. See the screenshot below to view how the reports are organized by default in Deployment Reports: Remember that business users are the audience in mind for this page. They do not understand our naming convention, and even if it’s decipherable, sometimes your reports are against the source table so there’s no easy way to sort and filter based on where they are registered. Further, you can’t use the Index column - multiple targets may have the same Index # I propose the ‘Target Index #’, ‘Dataset Name’ and ‘Dataset Description’ columns should be displayed here. The default sort should be based on Target Index # then Report Index #

jay.hornback@syniti.com about 2 months ago

1