Parity gap: no CODEOWNERS (IcebergCTI has one)
Cross-repo parity review of the Iceberg family (IcebergCTI / IcebergTTX / IcebergEBS). This repo has no CODEOWNERS; the sibling IcebergCTI ships one that assigns review ownership, with explicit owners on security-sensitive paths so those changes always route to the right reviewer.
IcebergCTI baseline: .github/CODEOWNERS with a default owner plus explicit entries for the auth code, audit/SIEM services, /.github/, SECURITY.md, and the Dockerfile.
Current state (this repo): no CODEOWNERS at root, .github/, or docs/; require_code_owner_reviews is off in branch protection.
Acceptance criteria
Reverse-parity: adopting a practice IcebergCTI already has. (Note: IcebergCTI's own CODEOWNERS still uses a personal handle — see its issue #154 — so use an org team here from the start.)
Parity gap: no CODEOWNERS (IcebergCTI has one)
Cross-repo parity review of the Iceberg family (IcebergCTI / IcebergTTX / IcebergEBS). This repo has no
CODEOWNERS; the sibling IcebergCTI ships one that assigns review ownership, with explicit owners on security-sensitive paths so those changes always route to the right reviewer.IcebergCTI baseline:
.github/CODEOWNERSwith a default owner plus explicit entries for the auth code, audit/SIEM services,/.github/,SECURITY.md, and theDockerfile.Current state (this repo): no
CODEOWNERSat root,.github/, ordocs/;require_code_owner_reviewsis off in branch protection.Acceptance criteria
.github/CODEOWNERSwith a default owner (an@IcebergAIteam, not a personal handle) and explicit owners for security-sensitive paths (auth, any audit/security services,.github/,SECURITY.md,Dockerfile, deploy manifests).require_code_owner_reviewsonmainonce the file is in place.Reverse-parity: adopting a practice IcebergCTI already has. (Note: IcebergCTI's own CODEOWNERS still uses a personal handle — see its issue #154 — so use an org team here from the start.)