This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "CMHAFF call, Monday, April 17"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "Attendees: Agenda: * Discuss next steps on HITRUST agreement and evaluation * Discuss getting NC DOH use cases * Review latest cMHAFF edits (ballot comment disposition textua...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Attendees: | + | Attendees: Vanessa Batoon, Serafina Versaggi, David Tao |
Agenda: | Agenda: | ||
| − | * Discuss next steps on HITRUST agreement and evaluation | + | * Discuss next steps on HITRUST agreement and evaluation -- Serafina pointed out that there are many publicly available documents on the HITRUST website, that may be useful, while we deliberate over the CSF 8.1 (which requires limited license agreement) |
| − | * | + | * Since cMHAFF is a framework, we should consider if there is a particular risk assessment guideline that we can reference, rather than just saying "an accepted risk management framework." The HL7 Security Cookbook describes such a framework, but the way it's written, it's targeted not for software developers but rather standards developers. |
| − | * Review latest cMHAFF edits (ballot comment disposition textual changes) | + | * Review latest cMHAFF edits (ballot comment disposition textual changes). Vanessa made several suggestions, that David incorporated. |
| − | * | + | * Nathan will report back on North Carolina Department of Health use cases at the next meeting. |
| − | + | * The April 24 and May 1st meetings are cancelled. Next meeting will be May 8th. | |
| + | |||
| + | David uploaded the latest version of the document to the cMHAFF Wiki. | ||
Revision as of 21:43, 17 April 2017
Attendees: Vanessa Batoon, Serafina Versaggi, David Tao
Agenda:
- Discuss next steps on HITRUST agreement and evaluation -- Serafina pointed out that there are many publicly available documents on the HITRUST website, that may be useful, while we deliberate over the CSF 8.1 (which requires limited license agreement)
- Since cMHAFF is a framework, we should consider if there is a particular risk assessment guideline that we can reference, rather than just saying "an accepted risk management framework." The HL7 Security Cookbook describes such a framework, but the way it's written, it's targeted not for software developers but rather standards developers.
- Review latest cMHAFF edits (ballot comment disposition textual changes). Vanessa made several suggestions, that David incorporated.
- Nathan will report back on North Carolina Department of Health use cases at the next meeting.
- The April 24 and May 1st meetings are cancelled. Next meeting will be May 8th.
David uploaded the latest version of the document to the cMHAFF Wiki.
