## Chapter 10 — A responsibility page is not the clinic's contract ### Lesson map Lesson 10. Map, example, EX056. ```mermaid flowchart TD P["Three public responsibility pages"] --> U["The provider name is unrecorded"] C["Customer-side sharing setting"] --> F["The filter reads that setting"] U --> Q{"May one vendor diagram be pasted as Oakfield's contract?"} Q -->|No| K["Leave the provider unnamed"] ``` The split is cited. The party is not identified. ### Logical drawing ```text recorded services: storage, email, hosted booking platform recorded hardware: the clinic owns no servers not recorded: which provider, which region, which ticket ``` ### Learning outcomes After this chapter, you should be able to: 1. Place the sharing mistake on the customer side of the cited pages. 2. Leave Oakfield's provider unnamed. 3. Refuse a service-model score and a lock-in measurement. ### 10.1 Three public pages, and no named supplier. The references include the Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud descriptions of shared responsibility. Each page draws a split between provider infrastructure and customer configuration. The manuscript never says which of those firms hosts Oakfield. Pasting one diagram into the note would invent a contracting party. What the clinic recorded is enough for the split it actually used. The storage setting was chosen inside the clinic's account. Changing it did not require a repair of the provider's platform. Email and the hosted booking platform are the other two services in the inventory. None of the three is given a NIST service-model label in the file. SP 800-145 defines cloud computing and also distinguishes service models; this book uses the definition and does not print a model assignment for those three services. Armbrust and colleagues (2010) discuss confidentiality and lock-in among the obstacles of cloud computing. Oakfield did not measure either obstacle. Deleting one old archive is not a portability test. No ticket number and no region are on the page. ### 10.2 Worked example | Added sentence | Problem | Decision | |---|---|---| | The sharing setting is the clinic's control | Matches the cited split | May stay | | "Oakfield's contract is the AWS diagram." | The provider is unnamed | Reject | | "SP 800-145 scored the email service as SaaS." | No model label was stored | Reject | | "Lock-in was measured when the zip was deleted." | Armbrust is not this log | Reject | > **Synthetic case.** The three provider pages stay references. They are not a purchase record. ### Errors and limits Do not file a complaint against an unnamed platform for a setting the account holder chose. ### Apply - **EX056 — Unnamed provider.** A leaving note names one of the three vendors as Oakfield's host, assigns SaaS to the email service, and calls the zip deletion a lock-in measurement. What may the note keep? *Rubric:* 3 = reject the vendor, the service-model label, and the lock-in claim; the sharing mistake stays on the clinic's side; the three services stay storage, email, and the hosted platform; the clinic owns no servers;; 2 = reject the invented contract and keep the split;; 1 = one rejection;; 0 = none. ### Continue studying — lesson 10 (chapter 10 of 20) [← Chapter 09](#ch-09) · [Course chapter index](../SUBJECTS.md) · [Chapter 11 →](#ch-11) Continue to the next authored lesson. ## Worked answers **EX056.** Reject the named vendor, the SaaS label, and the lock-in measurement. The sharing mistake stays on the clinic's side. The services stay storage, email, and the hosted platform. The clinic owns no servers.