You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Right now, we see that all person as project members in a project can archive it.
However, we think it can be a process issue as it means that everyone on the pentest can archive the project and we want to restrict archiving and unarchiving only to global archivers.
Would it be possible to consider an option to let only global archivers to archive/unarchive like:
PROJECT_MEMBER_CAN_ARCHIVE_PROJECTS=false
This could do one of those:
Do not let Project Members be used as archive/unarchive person
Let them be used as archive/unarchive person but they can't trigger the archiving by themselves.
What is your point of view regarding this option ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We can implement this and we suggest the following implementation details:
If this option is set, only archiving users are allowed to archive projects and restore projects. This means that encryption happens with fewer encryption keys and it will be more difficult to keep up the quorum for restoring projects (this could lead to availability problems).
If a user is project member and at the same time an archiving user, the user will still have the permission to archive and restore projects.
This cannot be applied to already archived projects. If this system is necessary to be applied to already-archived projects, they must be restored and rearchived after the option was set.
Hello,
Right now, we see that all person as project members in a project can archive it.
However, we think it can be a process issue as it means that everyone on the pentest can archive the project and we want to restrict archiving and unarchiving only to global archivers.
Would it be possible to consider an option to let only global archivers to archive/unarchive like:
PROJECT_MEMBER_CAN_ARCHIVE_PROJECTS=false
This could do one of those:
What is your point of view regarding this option ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: