Streamlining Report Findings and Rule IDs

What is a one sentence summary of your feature request?

Align the naming of report findings with their corresponding rule headings and IDs to improve usability and enhance the ability to copy findings from reports.

Please describe your idea in detail. What is your problem, why do you feel this idea is the best solution, etc.

Currently, there is a disconnect between the names of findings in the PingCastle reports and their associated rule headings and IDs.

For instance:

Finding Name: “Number of DC not updated = X”
Rule Heading: “Domain controller Update”

This inconsistency can lead to confusion and makes it difficult for users to quickly identify and understand specific findings in relation to the rules.

Additionally, the current inability to copy Linked findings directly from the report adds another layer of complexity, hindering efficient documentation and communication.

The best solution is to streamline the naming conventions by ensuring that report findings are clearly labeled with the corresponding rule heading.

Finding Name: “Number of DC not updated = X”
Rule Heading: “Domain controller Update - Number of DC not updated”

Furthermore, enabling the copying of Rule Finding text from the report would greatly enhance user experience and facilitate better record-keeping.

How do you currently solve the challenges you have by not having this feature?

Currently, users must manually interpret and cross-reference different names and IDs in reports, which is time-consuming and can result in miscommunication or oversight.

The inability to copy findings means that users often resort to taking screenshots or retyping information, which is inefficient and prone to errors.

This lack of streamlined functionality ultimately affects the overall productivity of the users and the effectiveness of the audit process.

2 Likes

I believe this is a source of frustration for many. We will add this to the backlog to look at. I think we should also look at displaying the rule ID for simplicity too.

What do you think of these mock ups where we use the same wording and also have the Rule ID removed from the accordion to be in header of it?


2 Likes

Looks great and would totally fit the requested purpose.

1 Like