docs: document DD_EDITABLE_MITIGATED_DATA and hide ignored close-finding fields#15259
Open
Maffooch wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
docs: document DD_EDITABLE_MITIGATED_DATA and hide ignored close-finding fields#15259Maffooch wants to merge 1 commit into
Maffooch wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
…ing fields Audit and document the DD_EDITABLE_MITIGATED_DATA setting, which gates editing of a finding's mitigated date / mitigated by. Editing requires both the flag enabled and a superuser (via can_edit_mitigated_data), and is off by default because backdating a mitigation can distort SLA-compliance metrics. - Add an "Editing the Mitigated Date and Mitigated By" section to the Editing Findings docs covering the default-off behavior, the superuser requirement, the SLA-backdating trade-off, the audit trail, the restart requirement, and a Cloud/Pro contact-support note. - Expand the settings.dist.py comment to note the superuser gate, UI+API scope, SLA rationale, and restart requirement. - Hide the mitigated / mitigated_by fields on CloseFindingForm when the setting is disabled, mirroring FindingForm, so users are no longer shown a Mitigated date input whose value is silently ignored on close. - Add a default-off test covering the hidden fields and that a backdated mitigated value is ignored (finding closes with the current date). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
github-actions
Bot
added
settings_changes
Jino-T
approved these changes
Jul 15, 2026
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Shortcut: sc-13692
Summary
Audits and documents the
DD_EDITABLE_MITIGATED_DATAsetting, and fixes the misleading Close Finding UI that motivated the audit.The setting gates editing of a finding's mitigated date / mitigated by through a single helper,
can_edit_mitigated_data()(dojo/finding/helper.py), which requires both the flag enabled and a superuser. It is off by default because backdating a mitigation can distort SLA-compliance metrics.Changes
editing_findings.md— default-off behavior, superuser gate, SLA-backdating trade-off, audit trail, restart requirement, and a Cloud/Pro contact-support note.DD_EDITABLE_MITIGATED_DATAinsettings.dist.py.CloseFindingFormnow removes themitigated/mitigated_byfields when the setting is disabled (mirroringFindingForm). Previously the Close Finding dialog still rendered a Mitigated date input whose value was silently ignored — the root of the customer complaint.CloseFindingViewMitigatedDataDisabledTestasserting the fields are hidden and that a backdatedmitigatedvalue is ignored (finding closes with the current date).Testing
Ran the affected tests in an isolated unit-test stack:
(
CloseFindingViewMitigatedDataDisabledTestplus the existingCloseFindingViewInstanceTest.)🤖 Generated with Claude Code