►
From YouTube: Secure:Threat Insights group discussion 2021-03-30
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
A
I
don't
know
so
you
and
I
and
todd
we
are
cross
stage
because
we
have
protect
and
secure
so
todd
is,
is
on
sec,
but
just
just
how
we
had
trouble
having
a
an
engineering
sub
department
that
spanned
different
stages,
I
think
we're
going
to
have
troubles
having
an
engineering
section
that
that
spans
two
stages,
so
if,
if
he
has
the
the
sex,
some
things
might
break
anyway.
A
My
point
here
is
that
we've
we
haven't
been
using
deliverable
labels
and-
and
this
is
a
metric
that
todd
likes
to
do
for
other
cq
groups,
and
I
I
like
it
because
it
gives
us
the
say,
do
ratio
and
I
don't
think
it's
a
lot
of
effort
for
us
to
start
using
it,
because
we
already,
we
already
only
stack
on
the
board
more
or
less
what
we
think
we're
going
to
be
able
to
commit
to
based
on
the
velocity
right.
A
B
I'm
gonna
keep
that
quiet
for
the
recording,
but
I
don't
think
we
intentionally
stopped
using
the
deliverable
labels.
I
don't
think
that
was
a
conversation
that
we
had,
that
we
were
going
to
drop
them.
It
was
something
that
we
weren't
looking
at
and
it
was
work
so
we
stopped
so
matt
didn't
get
on
us
for
it.
So
we're
tiago-
and
I
are
just
both
like
shh
and
now
we're
gonna
go
back
to
that
step
in
our
planning,
which
is
still
documented
in
our
handbook
page,
which
will
go
away.
A
D
Yeah,
I
would,
I
would
say
I
am
definitely
more
of
a
a
chicken
than
a
pig
in
terms
of
the
deliverable
it.
I
guess
it's
nice
to
have,
but
I
certainly
don't
want
to
use
it
as
a
you
know
thing
to
point
at
and
you
know
throw
fits
over
like
I
was
deliverable
yeah
I
mean
if
it's
something
we
need
to
do
for
the
team
from
a
tracking
perspective.
D
A
Yeah,
I
don't
love
labels
either,
but
I
do
like
having
a
metric
that
we
follow
and
maybe
sparks
questions
say
hey
how
come
we
we
only
did
50
or
how
come
we
did
95.
I.
D
A
E
B
B
B
B
G
It
seems
like
none
of
us
are
really
ready
to
talk
about
it,
so
maybe
maybe
for
next
time.
B
E
B
E
B
A
It's
just
because
I
think
we
did
refinement
elisa.
I
did
last
time
because.
A
Not
in
death,
no,
no,
okay,
no,
no
yeah,
it's
ready
for
the
melon,
blocked
and
refined,
but
there
are
things
say:
hey
we're
looking
to
do
these
things
and
these
are
blocked,
so
they
might
not
get
done
these
in
refinement.
We
haven't,
we
might
not
have
everything
we
need
to
do
it
and
then,
in
there
say
hey
these
are
ready
to
go
and
does
anybody
think
we
should
not
be
doing
them.
E
That
that's
it
jonathan,
you
know:
okay,
okay,
I
got
you
got
you
I
was.
I
was
listening
and
also
trying
to
read.
At
the
same
time,
yeah
we
can
walk
the
room,
real,
quick.
I.
E
In
doing
it,
for
this
one
I
mean
it
seems
like
most
of
our
issues
are
now
in
like
closed,
verified
or
in-depth,
like
we're,
we'll
pass
a
lot
of
them.
We
have
three
in
refinement,
four
in
ready
for
development,
and
it
looks.
E
E
All
right
to
me
I'll
see
that
all
right.
E
So
we
have
these
look
in
the
refinement
column,
improving
sorting
lord
reports
service.
I
don't
know
what
that
one
is.
E
A
E
A
B
E
So
it's
working
on
that
we
got
an
n
plus
one
query:
we
have
several.
I
know.
That's
been
one
of
our
topics
of
conversation
quite
a
bit
recently
on
the
the
speed
of
our
database
queries
and
I
think
that
one
is
specifically
for
graphql.
E
All
right,
a
new
artifact
type
we've
got
some
new
work.
We
got
a
lot
of
work
on
the
vulnerability
feedback.
We
have
put
together
an
epic
on
that
one
and
so
yeah
we're
that's
that's
part
of
getting
through
and
speeding
things
up
and
allowing
for
some
comments
to
be
able
to
be
done
in
for
the
states
yeah.
It's
got
a
new
epic
on
that
one,
a
little
bit
of
feedback.
E
A
E
A
couple
of
bugs
over
here
ready
for
development
and
then
another
thing
about
the
security
findings.
So
we
got
some
work
to
do
on
the
security
findings
tables.
This
was
just
been
sitting
out
there
for
a
long
time.
The
technical
documentation
diagrams,
I
think,
everybody's
dodging
it.
I
think
so
that
one
probably
needs
to
just
that.
One
probably
needs
to
be
re-refined
and
look
that
again,
especially
since
we're
looking
we're
kind
of
starting
to
move
stuff
around
in
the
back
end.
E
Think
we
I
I'd
say
we
probably
need
to
punt
it
a
couple
of
milestones
in
the
future,
because
we've
got
stuff,
that's
getting
reworked
on
the
feedback
side,
we
have
new
evidence
models
that
are
going
in
and
we're
trying
to
rearrange
some
stuff
between
the
vulnerabilities
and
vulnerability
findings
makes
sense
to
me.
E
A
A
B
So
daniel,
if
you
really
don't
want
to
do
the
front-end
ones,
I
will,
but
I
you
know
wholeheartedly,
encourage
you
to
share
if
you
like,.
E
Daniel
there's
also
the
link
in
the
document
that
will
get.
G
You
your
your
oh
yeah
right.
That's,
I
think,
that's
what
I
clicked
on
earlier.
Okay,
so
for
13
11,
we
are
focusing
half
on
resolving
a
bunch
of
tech
depth
that
we
have,
and
the
other
half
is
to
introduce
several
major
features.
G
So
one
of
the
features
that
we're
adding
is
the
feedback
survey
and
that's
going
to
be
very
quickly
merged
soon,
hopefully,
and
the
other
big
piece
of
work
is
the
the
the
project
filter
in
order
to
show
more
than
what
the
to
be
able
to
select
projects
beyond
the
first
100.
G
G
That
also
involves
removing
the
old
security
dashboard
ux
version,
which
is
currently
in
use
on
the
pipeline
tab,
and
it's
the
only
place
left
of
the
old
security
pipeline.
So
by
switching
over
we're
able
to
remove
a
large
swath
of
files
and
also
standardize
using
the
graphql
vulnerability
list
across
every
area.
That
or
across
every
level
that
we
use
the
vulnerability
list
in
then,
apart
from
that,
it's
just
a
bunch
of
random
issues
like
some
follow-ups
and
error,
messages
and
stuff,
like
that,
oh
and
subscribe.
B
To
the
very
top
of
the
ready
for
development,
I
think
there's
a
couple
ones
that
you
missed
up
there
daniel
just
around,
especially
you
know,
there's
some
wrap
around
the
jira
integration,
but
what
I
wanted
to
call
out
was
the
dismissal
types
work,
oh
and
then
there's
also
some
work
around
the
generic
schema.
So
you
know
there
is
a
lot
of
sort
of
high
priority
items
but
little
things
contributing
to
them
all
over
the
place.
So
it's
hard
to
group
together.
So
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
those.
B
Items
go,
you
know
the
the
jira
feature
flag.
We
still
have
that
feature
flag
in
place,
matt
and
I'm
not
sure
if
we
need
to
because
we
got
a
customer
complaint
about
some
500
errors
and
a
self-hosted
instance
that
sometimes
can
be
reproducible.
I
think
even
the
person
who
reported
it
said
they
wouldn't
think
that
it
would
be
a
blocker
to
rolling
this
out.
Do
you
think
that
should
still
be
blocked.
B
B
D
That's
kind
of
a
tricky
one,
because
it's
not
I
mean
it's
it's
on
by
default,
but
you
actually
still
have
to
go
in
and
configure
it
into
all
the
setup
before
it'll
do
anything
so
I
feel
like
we
don't
necessarily
need
a
feature
flag.
If
they're
experiencing
problems,
they
can
just
disable
that
integration
for
that
particular
project.
So.
B
Okay
and
then
daniel,
you
know
more
about
the
other
two,
I
think,
or
at
least
the
bottom
one,
the
unaccessed
user-
that
is
actually
blocked
on
a
back
end
issue.
That
was
a
hacker
one
bug
report.
If
I'm
thinking
of
the
right
one
yeah
it
is
and
thiago,
I
know
that
you
guys
have
a
back
end
issue
that
I
believe
also
in
this
milestone,
that
this
one
is
just
sort
of
like
let's
verify
and
communicate
through
this
issue
and
then
daniel.
Do
you
want
to
comment
on
the
last
project
filter?
One.
G
Yeah,
so
that's
the
does
the
custom
scanner
filter
that's
blocked
because
of
a
back-end
performance
issue
with
the
the
the
query
tooth,
when
you
select
a
bunch
of
items,
it's
the
query
to
fetch
the
vulnerability
list
is
very
slow
to
the
point
where
it
actually
times
out
half
the
time,
so
we're
still
waiting
on
a
new
api
which
I
believe
jonathan
is
currently
working
on
in
order
to
allow
us
to
filter
by
vendor
and
the
scanner
type.
We.
E
Are
not
we
are
not
filtering
by
vendor.
We
discussed
that
not
doing
vendor
and
scanner
name,
but
instead
the
actual
scanner
id.
So
I
mean
so
that's
so
we
weren't
able
to
get
a
query.
That's
going
to
be
performance
enough
on
that
method,
but
we
are
providing
the
vendor
and
scanner
names
for
the
front
end
to
send
to
determine
which
scanner
id
which
scanner
ids
they
need
to
filter
on.
G
Okay,
so
that
re
that
will
resolve
the
problem
you
mentioned
about
having
non-unique
ids
across
different
projects
right.
G
E
It's
gonna
like
on
the
other
one
we're
gonna
have
to
do.
Two
table
joins
along
with
the
other
joints
that
were
going
on,
and
so
that
one
is
actually
in
its
very
last
last
review.
Phase.
Okay,.
G
Cool
getting
that
one
done
well,
oh,
no!
No,
not
okay!
Google
go
away.
Is
the
have
you
benchmarked
the
performance
to
see
what
the
improvement
is
like.
E
It's
not
being
handled
that's
the
thing
is
that
it's
a
totally
new
filter.
Oh
okay,
let's.
B
Take
this
offline
and
put
if
you
want
to
put
that
question
in
the
issue,
especially
since
you
know
now,
where
they're
at
with
back
end
piece,
daniel
and
then
the
last
item
to
call
it
is
this
refinement
issue
around
the
generic
report
schema.
This
was
something
that
was
identified
late
as
something
we'd
missed
in
our
early
planning
breakdown.
So
I'll
remind
dave.
I
think
it's
been
in
refinement
only
for
a
few
days.
So
that's
what
that
one
is.
I
think
that's
it
for
the
front
end.
Do
we
miss
any
daniel.
G
I
don't
think
so,
but
we
do
have
a
quite
a
few
tickets.
I
mean
we
definitely.
B
A
Do
we
want
to
have
a
crack
at
throwing
some
labels
there
lindsay
deliverable
was.
B
A
A
Anything
anyone
for
any
more,
no
have
a
beautiful
tuesday,
wednesday,
depending
where
you
are
and
I'll.