Enhancement? Data Masking at a Recipe Level and/or Connector Level

[mroldanvega]

It would be great if we could set up the data masking flag at a recipe leval, or at a connector level. In recipes with lots of actions, it is difficult to keep track and manage which actions were masked and which were not.

Anyone has any suggestions for this?

[deven-maru]

Manuel Roldan-Vega

> Also, will the role only prevent the user from seeing the data, but would still allow to see the execution table (job id, time, etc.), or would it hide the complete job tab in the recipe?

It will hide the Jobs tab.

One of the features we're working on is "zero retention" or "no retention" where you'd specify at a recipe level if you want Workato to store job data. If zero retention is enabled, then Workato will not store any data. You will see job execution history with job ID, time etc. but no other data related to that job will be stored.

Do you think something like zero retention may be more suitable for what you're thinking? Insteaf of masking at recipe level.

[mroldanvega]

Hi Deven Maru ,

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, the 'zero retention' feature sounds very promising. Is there a timeline for it (if you can share)? Will it be enabled/disabled easily or once and for all? Will it be controlled by the admin, operator, or will there be custom permissions for it?

Honestly, I didn't think that data masking at a recipe level would be very difficult. Since every action in the recipe is linked to the connection I thought it would be rather easy to toggle something at a recipe level and look for all actions on that recipe with the relevant connection and enable data masking for it.

[deven-maru]

Hi Manuel Roldan-Vega I agree that data masking at a recipe level may not be difficult to do but we'll have to cover different scenarios when all steps are masked. Let me explore it.

[mroldanvega]

Thank you!