Integration Security Review Clause Samples

Integration Security Review. SFDC may conduct periodic security evaluations of the Integration (“Security Reviews”), which may include a qualitative assessment involving review of a questionnaire completed by Partner, an interview with appropriate Partner personnel, and/or security testing. SFDC conducts such Security Reviews for its own benefit and Partner may not rely on, publicly disclose, or promote an Integration's successful passage of such Security Review. Partner shall not distribute an Integration unless such Integration has successfully passed the Integration Security Review. There may be fees associated with such review. If the Integration, in whole or in part, runs outside SFDC’s systems, security testing may include remote application-level security testing of the Integration, and network-level security testing including a vulnerability threat assessment. SFDC may conduct such testing itself or through a third party. SFDC will provide reasonable notice to Partner before starting such testing. SFDC will cooperate reasonably with Partner to mitigate the effects of such testing on Partner’s business and operations. Partner agrees to cooperate reasonably with such testing. Despite the foregoing, such testing may in rare cases cause downtime or other adverse effects on the Integration or Partner’s systems. Partner agrees that SFDC and its agents or contractors conducting the testing will bear no responsibility or liability arising from such testing. Any Partner Confidential Information to which SFDC obtains access in the course of a Security Review will be subject to Section 5 (Confidentiality).
View SourceView Similar (5)

Related to Integration Security Review

  • System Security Review All systems processing and/or storing County PHI or PI must have at least an annual system risk assessment/security review which provides assurance that administrative, physical, and technical controls are functioning effectively and providing adequate levels of protection. Reviews should include vulnerability scanning tools.

  • Integration The Company shall not sell, offer for sale or solicit offers to buy or otherwise negotiate in respect of any security (as defined in Section 2 of the Securities Act) that would be integrated with the offer or sale of the Securities for purposes of the rules and regulations of any Trading Market such that it would require shareholder approval prior to the closing of such other transaction unless shareholder approval is obtained before the closing of such subsequent transaction.

  • Monitoring Services IDT staff shall, using methods that include face-to-face and other contacts with the member, monitor the services a member receives. This monitoring shall ensure that: a. The member receives the services and supports authorized, arranged for and coordinated by the IDT staff; b. The services and supports identified in the MCP as being provided by natural and community supports are being provided; and c. The quality of the services and supports received is adequate and still necessary to continue to meet the needs and preferences of the member and support the member’s outcomes identified in the MCP.

  • Project Monitoring The Developer shall provide regular status reports to the NYISO in accordance with the monitoring requirements set forth in the Development Schedule, the Public Policy Transmission Planning Process Manual and Attachment Y of the OATT.

  • Aviation Security 1. In accordance with their rights and obligations under international law, the Parties reaffirm that their obligation to each other to protect the security of civil aviation against acts of unlawful interference forms an integral part of this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of their rights and obligations under international law, the Parties shall in particular act in conformity with the provisions of the Convention on Offenses and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, done at Tokyo September 14, 1963, the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, done at The Hague December 16, 1970, the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, done at Montreal September 23, 1971, and the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation, done at Montreal February 24, 1988. 2. The Parties shall provide upon request all necessary assistance to each other to prevent acts of unlawful seizure of civil aircraft and other unlawful acts against the safety of such aircraft, of their passengers and crew, and of airports and air navigation facilities, and to address any other threat to the security of civil air navigation. 3. The Parties shall, in their mutual relations, act in conformity with the aviation security standards and appropriate recommended practices established by the International Civil Aviation Organization and designated as Annexes to the Convention; they shall require that operators of aircraft of their registry, operators of aircraft who have their principal place of business or permanent residence in their territory, and the operators of airports in their territory act in conformity with such aviation security provisions. 4. Each Party agrees to observe the security provisions required by the other Party for entry into, for departure from, and while within the territory of that other Party and to take adequate measures to protect aircraft and to inspect passengers, crew, and their baggage and carry-on items, as well as cargo and aircraft stores, prior to and during boarding or loading. Each Party shall also give positive consideration to any request from the other Party for special security measures to meet a particular threat. 5. When an incident or threat of an incident of unlawful seizure of aircraft or other unlawful acts against the safety of passengers, crew, aircraft, airports or air navigation facilities occurs, the Parties shall assist each other by facilitating communications and other appropriate measures intended to terminate rapidly and safely such incident or threat. 6. When a Party has reasonable grounds to believe that the other Party has departed from the aviation security provisions of this Article, the aeronautical authorities of that Party may request immediate consultations with the aeronautical authorities of the other Party. Failure to reach a satisfactory agreement within 15 days from the date of such request shall constitute grounds to withhold, revoke, limit, or impose conditions on the operating authorization and technical permissions of an airline or airlines of that Party. When required by an emergency, a Party may take interim action prior to the expiry of 15 days.