Skip to content

Added Label Properties to 800-53 Rev 4 Groups #272

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

brian-ruf-ezd
Copy link

Committer Notes

Added label properties to groups in NIST SP 800-53 r4, so that tools that honor the label property will have data to use.

All Submissions:

  • Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
  • Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?
  • Have you squashed any non-relevant commits and commit messages? [instructions]
  • Do all automated CI/CD checks pass?

Changes to Core Features:

  • Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
  • Have you written new tests for your core changes, as applicable?
  • Have you included examples of how to use your new feature(s)?

@brian-ruf-ezd brian-ruf-ezd changed the title Added Label Properties to Groups in 800-53 Rev 4 Added Label Properties to 800-53 Rev 4 Groups Jul 8, 2024
@iMichaela
Copy link
Contributor

iMichaela commented Jul 10, 2024

@brian-comply0 - Thank you for splitting the proposed changes into separate PRs.
PLEASE NOTE- The PR needs to be submitted against develop or a feature-[issue] branch and not main branch.
I am not convinced 800-53 Rev4 needs such enhancement not justified by the original data set. I am waiting on the community to weigh in and provide their perspective.

@iMichaela
Copy link
Contributor

@brian-ruf-ezd - The SP 800-54 rev4 is withdrawn by the NIST RMF team and therefore NIST OSCAL team is no longer maintaining the associated OSCAL artifacts. We keep them on our website for now, but they cannot be updated past OSCAL v1.1.1 without substantial work we see no reason to invest in. If you have a different perspective, please share it and we can further discuss this PR if you maintain the request.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants