FAQ-000530 - Custom Settings and Configuration Security / Security Review and Compliance

To provide adequate justification for custom fields flagged by name-based security rules in the AppExchange Security Review: 1. **Document the Use Case**: Clearly explain the purpose of the flagged fields and why they don't pose a security risk. 2. **Highlight Security Measures**: If the fields are encrypted, stored in protected custom settings, or aren't accessible through standard user interfaces, include these details. 3. **Align with Salesforce Guidelines**: Ensure your explanation follows Salesforce's security standards. 4. **Provide Supporting Documentation**: Include false-positive reports or details about field-level security configurations to strengthen your justification. By addressing these points, you can effectively justify the flagged fields during the review process.

The original FAQ was well-structured and accurate, requiring only minor tone improvements to align with the conversational voice guidelines. The main changes were: 1) Simplified 'do not' to the more conversational 'don't' and 'are not' to 'aren't' for better readability. 2) Used more direct, positive phrasing throughout while maintaining all original content points. Regarding security rules selection: AvoidHardcodedCredentialsInFieldDecls directly relates to the FAQ's focus on custom fields that get flagged by name-based security rules - this rule specifically flags field declarations that might contain sensitive information based on their names. AvoidHardcodedCredentialsInVarDecls and AvoidHardcodedCredentialsInVarAssign are related as they cover similar name-based detection patterns for variables that might also apply to field naming conventions. ProtectSensitiveData is relevant because the FAQ discusses justifying fields that 'do not pose a security risk' and implementing security measures like encryption - this rule focuses on protecting sensitive data which is exactly what the justification process aims to address.