Anonymize discovery case study public docs - #3
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: db6f71efb0
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| This case study documents product ownership work for a generalized prevention technology workflow. The work focused on intake flow design, MVP scope control, requirements definition, acceptance criteria, governance, and developer-ready implementation planning. | ||
|
|
||
| This repository is a public portfolio case study based on a generalized prevention technology workflow. It has been adapted to remove client-identifying details and does not include private client data, credentials, production secrets, proprietary records, or stakeholder names. | ||
| This repository has been adapted to remove organization-identifying details. It does not include private data, credentials, production secrets, proprietary records, stakeholder names, non-public URLs, branding, or identifiable visual assets. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Purge identifying images from Git history
When this repository is published with its normal history, deleting the PNGs does not satisfy this anonymization claim: both branded images remain recoverable from the parent commit (for example, via git show c4f328a^:domain-risk-factor-mapping.png) and visibly contain the client-identifying “PTTC Discovery Tool” title. Rewrite the published history or export a clean history so these blobs are not distributed.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
db6f71e to
cbaa28c
Compare
Summary
AI Governance and ValidationsectionValidation