-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
feat: remove dataProtectorSharing from the doc #79
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
- Implement `processProtectedData` method for secure processing of encrypted datasets. - Introduce `protectData` method for client-side encryption of user data. - Add `revokeAllAccess` method to manage access permissions for protected data. - Create `revokeOneAccess` method for targeted revocation of access permissions. - Implement `transferOwnership` method to transfer ownership of protected data securely.
- Removed references to the DataProtector Sharing module and related examples from quick-start and use-cases documentation. - Updated links in various methods to point to the correct paths for access management functions. - Streamlined content in the DataProtector overview and getting-started sections for clarity. - Enhanced descriptions for project cards in tooling and explorers section to provide better context.
- Changed sidebar text from 'DataProtector Core' to 'Methods' for clarity. - Revised introduction of the monetization guide to emphasize transforming encrypted data into a revenue stream. - Streamlined content by removing outdated sections on time-based access and focusing on signed orders for monetization.
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I still found a mention of IExecDataProtectorSharing
in src/references/dataProtector/getting-started.md
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To keep in mind for later : removal of appwhitelists is bad for iapp builders (but it should be moved to another sdk imo)
…ithub.com/iExecBlockchainComputing/documentation into feat/remove-dataProtectorsharing-from-doc
@64ix We only removed addOnlyAppWhitelist. That whitelist is useful for dataProtectorSharing. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks
No description provided.