Post reply

Dynamic Data Masking

  • May 15, 2016 at 10:31 pm

    #318885

    Comments posted to this topic are about the item Dynamic Data Masking

  • May 16, 2016 at 7:07 am

    #1879229

    It may serve us well for the HIPAA regs.

  • May 16, 2016 at 10:02 am

    #1879308

    Iwas Bornready (5/16/2016)

    It may serve us well for the HIPAA regs.

    It'll be interesting to see what shakes out there. As stated in the article, it's not a form of encryption and does nothing to protect data at rest or protect data from someone that has certain privs, like DBO, etc.

    --Jeff Moden

    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

  • May 16, 2016 at 2:45 pm

    #1879374

    Yes, not a great feature for true data security, but good for keeping non-priv users from seeing data they shouldn't. :ermm:

  • May 17, 2016 at 7:49 am

    #1879533

    **CORRECTION**

    A friend from Microsoft pointed out to me that there have been some changes to the Data Masking feature since earlier releases...

    One of the 'Cons' I mentioned (Masking can be ‘unmasked’ by using a CAST statement) is an issue that has been resolved, and is no longer a limitation in the upcoming RTM version.

    Also, the security enabled connection string was a requirement for Azure SQL Databases in the earlier version, but it no longer relevant.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply