Skip to content
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

README has wrong schema for certification and standard #53

Open
jcscottiii opened this issue Sep 28, 2016 · 1 comment
Open

README has wrong schema for certification and standard #53

jcscottiii opened this issue Sep 28, 2016 · 1 comment

Comments

@jcscottiii
Copy link
Member

The README sections for certification and standard are really outdated.

Example of standard:
https://github.com/opencontrol/NIST-800-53-Standards/blob/master/NIST-800-53.yaml

Example of certification:
https://github.com/opencontrol/FedRAMP-Certifications/blob/master/FedRAMP-moderate.yaml

@Rikhter
Copy link

Rikhter commented Feb 14, 2019

Hi OpenControls Contributors!

This issue seems related, happy to break out my problem seperately if required.
I'm having difficulty using kwalify to verify my test-standards file as below:

---
# test-standard.yaml
name: test-standard
AC-1:
  name: "Access Controls - 1"
  family: "Access Controls"
  description: "Description A"

running: pykwalify -s schemas/kwalify/standard/v1.0.0.yaml -d standards/test-standard.yaml
generates:

pykwalify.errors.SchemaError: <SchemaError: error code 2: Schema validation failed:
- Key 'AC-1' was not defined. Path: ''.: Path: '/'>

I'm using pykwalify version 1.5.2.

From what I can tell the = in the schema is meant to denote a wild card match for the key allowing any number of map elements with any name in the root map.

However I'm not seeing any references to this syntax in recent kwalify versions documentation and this syntax doesn't seem to work. Has this changed and not been updated? Or have I missed something completely. Any help would be appreciated.

As an interim for myself I've replaced the = with the documented regex matching syntax regex;(.+).
Might be a valid fix/change to the standard and certification schemas?

Cheers,
Tom

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants