Comments
5 comments
-
Hi @adam_hafner
Thanks for the post and for the suggestion (about suggestions!).
I'll run this past our dev team now.
Best
Richard Lynch. -
@adam_hafner
Is there something that you'd like to suggest for Datamasker now by the way?
Kind regards
Richard. -
I have been submitting some tickets to Support for some of the issues I have been finding. A lot of them are around the look/feel/experience. This tool doesn't have the same "polish" that I am used to with the other tools. I have seen some other gaps based on documentation holes or incorrect documentation.
Here are a couple of items I haven't submitted as an enhancements.
The ability to use keyboard shortcuts, specifically delete a rule with the 'Delete' key. I am only able to use the right click context menu, or the 'Delete Rule' button, but it seems legitimate that the Delete key should trigger the same action.
It would be also nice if there was a "Move Rule Up"/"Move Rule Down" action. You can move rules by clicking and dragging, but the interface seems a bit particular about where you can drag/drop things.
It would be nice if the some of the fields had some sort of autocomplete, dropdown or suggestions to them. For example, on the RwoInternal Rule editor. There is a textbox for 'Column replacement values clause'. It would be nice to have some ability to have autocomplete for column names. Also some function suggestions would be nice as well like GETDATE or other functions that are possible for use in the rule.
The interface for the 'Refresh Tables and Indexes' for the Rule Controller is a bit confusing.
It would be nice to have a rule that would trigger a refresh of the masking set's schema. So if you issue a "Command Rule" that changes the schema it would allow the schema of the tables in the masking set to be updated to include the table changes.
The audit reports would be nice to have in a CSV format with header/trailer rows for the overall stats. Also, it would be nice to have some other options for outputs as well that would be more friendly for auditors like a PDF file. If you are able to make it more presentable, you could also include some graphs or charts to show as well.
The ability to have masking rules based on or detect the presence of sensitive data fields based on the new SSMS "classifications" that can be assigned to fields. Give uses the ability to get a warning if fields that have sensitive information are not setup to have any masking performed on them?
I can definitely throw more out there as we continue to use this tool, but those are what I have so far.
-
It would also be nice if the "Error Handling" configuration would give you a list of errors that are common instead of requiring manually keying them in for the 'Ignore listed errors'
-
Hi Adam. Thank you so much for your feedback. I'm Sai, one of the members of the data masking team. We've made a note of this and will let you know when this makes into the tool as a part of the improvements. Thank you!
Add comment
Please sign in to leave a comment.