DSB Maintenance Iteration 22: Meeting Notes (5 March 2025) - ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards GitHub Wiki

Meeting Notes

Release Plan

Discussion Notes on MI Candidates

Note: To focus on the detail of unresolved issues in standards maintenance consultation, the DSB assumes proposed solutions can be taken forward in a Decision Document for the Chair; unless there are opposing views raised before the final call of the iteration. The DSB encourages participants to post their views on issues as early as possible.

Maintenance Iteration 22

#683 - Maintenance Iteration 22 Holistic Feedback

  • Not discussed.
  • Refer to recent comments.

CX

#674 - CX Guidelines - Updates stemming from 2024 Consent Review changes

  • Not discussed.
  • Refer to latest comments on the issue for updates.

#684 - CX Guidelines - ADI or NBL to hold CDR data as a DH

  • Not discussed.
  • Refer to latest comments on the issue for updates.

Security

#650 - Weaken JARM Encryption Requirements for ADRs

  • Biza posted these comments confirming numbers of Data Holders thought to be affected.
  • The outcome of the proposed change is that Data Holders cannot require authorization response encryption.
    • OUTSTANDING ACTION Data Holders to raise any concerns with the removal of the 'MAY' statement.

Register

#679 - Update SSA specification-

  • ACCC is exploring the option to limit updates to the SSA fields that need to be modified.
  • ACCC analysis indicates as few as 7 Data Holder Brands could be affected and therefore is the least amount of work.
    • ACTION Data Holders to raise any concerns with making some SSA fields modifiable to support ADR updates.

#682 - Spec alignment - OpenID Provider Configuration and issuer value

  • The ACCC recognises the misalignment with specifications and proposes to adopt Option 2.
    • ACTION ACCC to advise anticipated implementation dates in Meeting 4 on 19 March.

#671 - Remove deprecated Register scope detail

  • Deprecated sector-specific scope detail will be removed.
  • Not discussed.

Energy

#680 - Jurisdiction Code of ISO

  • Proposing to close this issue, ISO value not expected to be shared.
  • Not discussed.

#677 - Energy transaction fields should be conditional

  • Support for a non-breaking change noted.
  • Not discussed.

#662 Extend Get Generic Plan Detail to include a new field: tariffCode

  • One participant provided an overview of the challenges, in the comparator space, to identify with accuracy which plans are available based on a tariff assigned to a meter, also described in this comment.
  • Adopting the proposed change would allow certainty in definition of available plans.
  • Another participant agreed with the points made and suggested 'seamless switching' for energy account holders would be closer to reality if the change was made.

NFR

#660 - Revise the Availability Requirements NFRs

  • There is support for providing additional detail, such as types of outages and specific endpoints affected, in the outages API, particularly where partial outages occur.
  • DSB discussion on circumstances where DHs cited Privacy Safeguard 11 as the reason for outages is ongoing and DSB hopes to post a response when concluded.
    • ACTION DSB will post more detail on Options 1 - 3 including the addition of a consumer notification channel for specific outage types.

Banking

#656 - A status of POSTED should indicate the final update for a transaction

  • Issue was discussed.
  • An update on the wording was an attempt to provide clarity on analysis and investigation into the compliance efforts where participants are seeing POSTED transactions that don't appear to have affected the balance available at that time.
    • ACTION ANZ supportive of proposed solution and will comment on the issue.

#553 - Running balance available under transaction detail

  • Issue was discussed.
  • Support for a mandatory 'effectiveAt' field stating the date and time the balance values were calculated by the data holder.
  • One participant called out Schedule 3 Rules where they require time for transactions but not balances, requesting guidance from ACCC.
  • Proposing field is conditional therefore where value is absent indicates real time, useful for low velocity accounts like home loans and term deposits.
    • ACTION CBA anticipating to post comments on the issue.
    • ACTION ACCC to provide guidance on interpretation of rules for data holders to include time for balances.
    • ACTION Create a new issue for the proposed solution make the change clearer. This has been done, refer #687.

#681 - Retirement date for Get Transaction Detail V1

  • Not discussed.
  • Retirement date proposed as 10 November 2025.

#678 - New Error Code for Product Data Requests where the Data Holder does not hold the required Product Reference Data

#642 - Update guidance for Banking account rate detail

  • Not discussed.
  • Change to guidance regarding provision of rate fields.

Potential new issue relating to issue #471 - Additional credit card fields

  • Not discussed.
    • OUTSTANDING ACTION SISS Data Systems to create a more specific CR to be considered as a candidate in this or a future MI.

Potential new issue relating to banking issues included, but deferred in Decision 338

  • Not discussed.
    • ACTION Frollo to summarise of key aspects from issues #283, #284, #567 and #569 in a new CR to be considered as a candidate in this or a future MI.

Other Business