{
"request": "Triage Jira ticket MZCLD-3699: Triage the full list of ISO 27001 audit findings for cloud-side remediation",
"references": [
"https://mozilla-hub.atlassian.net/browse/MZCLD-3699"
],
"sourceContext": {
"issue": "MZCLD-3699"
}
}MZCLD-3699 is a coordination/meta-ticket asking Cloud Engineering to walk through all 29 ISO 27001:2022 audit findings (recorded in an external Google Sheet) and explicitly mark each as cloud-relevant or not, assigning owner/target date only where relevant, and spinning off a tracked engineering ticket only when real remediation work is warranted. The ticket itself does not require new engineering work beyond the triage decision-making — three cloud-touching findings have already been identified and split into their own tickets (MZCLD-3697, MZCLD-3696, MZCLD-3698). The ticket is currently sitting untouched in Backlog with no comments, so it's unclear whether the full 29-item review has actually been performed or just the three obvious ones flagged in the description.
[
{
"capability": "jira.issue.read",
"args": {
"key": "MZCLD-3699"
},
"result": {
"key": "MZCLD-3699",
"summary": "Triage the full list of ISO 27001 audit findings for cloud-side remediation",
"status": "Backlog",
"description_text": "Background The auditor produced 29 findings against ISO 27001:2022, tracked in the findings spreadsheet linked below. That sheet is the single source of record for the full list \u2014 this ticket does not attempt to reproduce it in Jira. Most findings are owned by GRC, Legal, or People; several are cloud-relevant and one (#29, Annex 8.11 Data masking) names CloudEng directly. Goal Walk the complete list of 29 findings and decide cloud-relevant or not for each, so Cloud Engineering's coverage is explicit rather than assumed. Cloud-relevant findings get an owner and a target date. Create a separate Jira ticket only where the remediation warrants tracked engineering work \u2014 we are deliberately not making a ticket per finding. Known cloud-touching findings #19 (Annex 5.18, Access rights) \u2014 no documented user access review schedule. High / Major. Tracked in MZCLD-3697. #22 (Annex 5.29, Information security during disruption) \u2014 BCP and DR testing frequency not defined. Low / Minor. Tracked in MZCLD-3696. #29 (Annex 8.11, Data masking) \u2014 no data masking policy or evidence of controls. High / Major, CloudEng named as owner. Tracked in MZCLD-3698. Findings source (full list of all 29) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Nohasbf1LpY9VsjJjy5Dx40cYOSLIUPP32-UEVOIxik/edit?gid=0#gid=0",
"comment_count": 0,
"comments": []
}
},
{
"capability": "jira.issue.read",
"args": {
"key": "MZCLD-3697"
},
"result": {
"error": "read blocked by policy: resource not in run subject",
"args": {
"key": "MZCLD-3697"
}
},
"blocked": true
},
{
"capability": "jira.issue.read",
"args": {
"key": "MZCLD-3696"
},
"result": {
"error": "read blocked by policy: resource not in run subject",
"args": {
"key": "MZCLD-3696"
}
},
"blocked": true
},
{
"capability": "jira.issue.read",
"args": {
"key": "MZCLD-3698"
},
"result": {
"error": "read blocked by policy: resource not in run subject",
"args": {
"key": "MZCLD-3698"
}
},
"blocked": true
}
]{
"model": "claude-sonnet-5",
"input_tokens": 6153,
"output_tokens": 2363,
"estimated_cost_usd": 0.05390400000000001
}[]