2024-11-26 Meeting Notes

Attendees

Gem Stone-Logan, California Digital Library (chair)
Gillian Keleher, UC Santa Cruz
Ross Anastos, UC Merced
Steven Chong, UC Berkeley
Todd Grappone, UC Los Angeles (SILS LG liaison)

Regrets

Adrian Petrisor, UC Irvine (vice-chair)

Absent

Nick Hansard, UC Merced

Meeting Recordings

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1za_o8b6GZGzv0iVriWgI5jv5kePaLW-O

	Item	Desired Outcome	Time	Who	Notes	Decisions	Actions

	Item	Desired Outcome	Time	Who	Notes	Decisions	Actions
1	Announcements/Updates
2	Review Release Notes		10	Gem	Selected Release Notes Alma November Release Notes December Release Notes Primo VE November Release Notes December Release Notes Should Design Analytics users be reviewed with an eye for limiting their roles (and therefore what data/information they have access to)?	The format/layout looks good but keeping up with a review of each release could be a big ask. We’re a fan of keeping the review narrow instead of starting much wider. We shouldn’t be informing each campus on what their policy should be, but instead providing an answer to questions though our lens.	Next time a review is done, stick with the “big features” section and if someone sees something that’s otherwise noteworthy, please call it out. Gem: reach out to Disco OST re: Primo VE RA and if their group has questions/concerns about privacy issues it can be brought to us. UCB can determine the appropriateness of the new DA roles.
3	Broader Security Updates		5	Team
4	Team Charter		10	Team	Do the broad concepts make sense? Should anything be added or deleted? Typically in SILS, roles rotate each year. Do we want to do that for this group? If so, does the vice-chair automatically become chair the next year? Do we want a steering-committee to meet more often for planning purposes?	Group may not follow traditional SILS OST formats since we operate as more of a “check-in” and not necessarily action oriented. Vice Chair doesn’t necessarily have to become Chair. No steering-committee is needed.	Todd: will confirm membership commitment duration (3 years?) Fist of 5 vote approved the Team Charter.
5	Review Acknowledgment of Data Privacy and Security Responsibilities for Authorized Users of UC Alma Environments	Determine Next Steps	30	Team	Anything we need to work on before this? We had talked about starting with the scope and severity of a security incident. How do we want to approach reviewing this? Can we answer OT’s question, “Does the current data privacy form cover the use of patron data from all UC institutions and not just the home institution for appropriate business use?”	We feel comfortable reviewing and answering this question now. Want to ensure there are no concerns from the official privacy perspective, and/or perhaps a UCOP legal perspective. Then add language to make it clear that the form covers all UC institutions and not just the home institution.	All: Will follow up with this topic during our next meeting.
6	Next Meeting		10		No December Meeting Next Meeting January 28
7	Wrap up	Review actions and decisions	5	Gem
8	Parking Lot	Capture important topics for future discussion			How quickly must Ex Libris disclose a security incident to us? According to p.31 of our contract, Ex Libris should inform us no later than 2 business days after they “reasonably believe” a breach has or may have occurred of non-public information. How should this group work with Siren?
9		Total	x/x