Produce a removal report that names remaining exceptions
The proposed confirmation says all your data is deleted even when a declared backup copy or unavailable provider remains.
- Focused work estimate
- 4h 30m + prerequisites
- Priority in the scenario
- Medium
- Engineering practice
- Privacy communication · Auditability
Estimated field mix
- Privacy engineering80%
- Site reliability20%
Field percentages are editorial estimates of the ticket's engineering focus. They total 100%; they are not measured time, proficiency scores, or ownership evidence.
Review it, then add it to your workspace.
The board opens an editable draft; nothing is saved until you confirm it. Sign-in and workspace permissions apply, and Demo boards remain ephemeral.
Project context
A fictional collaboration product lets a member request removal of their personal profile. Search, notifications and cached displays retain copies after the primary row disappears. The exercise uses a documented product deletion policy and synthetic identities.
Setup prerequisites
- Create local profile, search-index and notification fixtures with controlled provider failures.
- Define synthetic members, organizations and a current-session authorization fixture.
Preceding work
Complete these dependencies, or supply their agreed outputs before taking this ticket.
- RDELETE-101 · Separate profile removal from leaving one organization
- RDELETE-102 · Verify the current member before accepting profile removal
- RDELETE-103 · Make repeated removal requests return the same active operation
- RDELETE-104 · Stop new profile-derived writes after removal begins
- RDELETE-105 · Remove profile documents from search using the removal generation
- RDELETE-106 · Track notification and cache cleanup separately from the primary profile row
- RDELETE-107 · Keep the removal status page useful after the profile is gone
- RDELETE-108 · Reapply profile suppression before a restored backup becomes readable
- RDELETE-109 · Retry a removal operation after losing a provider acknowledgement
Acceptance criteria
- Generate a bounded report of completed locations, retained policy exceptions and unresolved outcomes.
- Bind the report to the operation and policy versions and distinguish requested time from observed completion time.
- Avoid claiming global erasure or legal compliance beyond the declared local scope.
Implementation constraints
- The report is workflow status, not noCV Outcome Evidence or Ownership Evidence; practice completion grants neither.
Verification to include
- Generate reports for complete, partial and backup-exception fixtures and compare their language with actual store state.
- Attempt report access as another subject and verify no operation details leak.
Deliverables
- Truthful completion report and scope/authorization tests
Rollout and recovery
Use the report only after reconciliation; corrections append a new status record rather than rewriting earlier confirmations.
Value of the work
For the engineer: Practice distributed cleanup, identity scope, idempotency and accurate user-facing lifecycle states.
For the team: Produce a reviewable deletion workflow and copy inventory for adaptation to an approved company policy.
Evidence boundaries
Outcome Evidence: Tests, patches, and runbooks are requested deliverables. They become Outcome Evidence only through a qualified Mission and immutable Evidence IDs.
Ownership Evidence: Independent adaptation must be observed under a declared verification policy and cite immutable Evidence IDs. Completing a planning ticket establishes no Ownership Evidence.