@Dash who approved the vendor onboarding for the payments processor, and was anything changed after it was approved?
Live in Slack or Microsoft Teams
Show who approved what and what changed
When a control is questioned, Dash reconstructs the approval trail: who signed off, at what time, on which version, and what was edited after approval, so a compliance answer can be proven rather than asserted.
Get started for free Chat with Dash, the AI teammate that works inside Slack and Microsoft Teams.
Approved 3 June at 2:41 PM by the head of finance, on version 2 of the request. And yes, something changed after.
Trail
- 28 May · request raised, version 1
- 1 June · security review completed, two conditions attached
- 2 June · version 2 created, conditions incorporated
- 3 June · approved by the head of finance on version 2
- 11 June · data scope field edited from "transaction metadata" to "transaction metadata and cardholder name"
The edit on 11 June happened after approval and widened the data scope. It was not re-approved. Whoever answers the audit question needs to know that the approval on record covers the narrower scope, not the one in effect today.
Who made the 11 June edit?
The record names the editor and the timestamp, and I have posted both. What the record does not contain is any reason or ticket for the change, so I cannot tell you whether it was a correction, a scope expansion, or a mistake.
The honest version for the auditor is: approved at the narrower scope, widened later by a named person, with no re-approval and no recorded justification.
Teams @Dash who approved the vendor onboarding for the payments processor, and was anything changed after it was approved?
Approved 3 June at 2:41 PM by the head of finance, on version 2 of the request. And yes, something changed after.
Trail
- 28 May · request raised, version 1
- 1 June · security review completed, two conditions attached
- 2 June · version 2 created, conditions incorporated
- 3 June · approved by the head of finance on version 2
- 11 June · data scope field edited from "transaction metadata" to "transaction metadata and cardholder name"
The edit on 11 June happened after approval and widened the data scope. It was not re-approved. Whoever answers the audit question needs to know that the approval on record covers the narrower scope, not the one in effect today.
Who made the 11 June edit?
The record names the editor and the timestamp, and I have posted both. What the record does not contain is any reason or ticket for the change, so I cannot tell you whether it was a correction, a scope expansion, or a mistake.
The honest version for the auditor is: approved at the narrower scope, widened later by a named person, with no re-approval and no recorded justification.