Skip to content

Reviewing the release request

Two output checkers independently review each file and record their decisions using the buttons within Airlock. Whilst viewing a file in an Airlock release request, they have the option of:

  • Approve — output meets disclosure requirements and is safe to be released
  • Reject — output is not currently acceptable for release.

Retrictions for authors

Airlock does not permit users to approve or reject files that are part of release requests they created themselves.

Viewing release requests on Airlock🔗

  1. After logging into Airlock, output checkers navigate to the Requests list to view all open requests awaiting review. Note that if an output checker is the author of a request, they will not see it in the outstanding requests list.
  2. Output checkers identify the request by workspace name and requester username. A user can have at most one active request per workspace.
  3. Output checkers can view the files included in the request via the file browser within Airlock. If required (e.g. in order to perform calculations in a spreadsheet), output checkers can also downloaded files from Airlock.

Downloading restrictions

Please note that only request files (not workspace files) can be downloaded. Downloading is permitted only for the purposes of output checking. Request authors are not permitted to download files from their own requests, even if they are also output checkers.

Dealing with discrepancies and rejected files🔗

Output checkers and researchers can add comments on each file group to request information and discuss discrepancies. Comments are recorded and displayed on the file group with the user's username and a timestamp.

Researchers should withdraw any files that have been rejected in order for their release request to progress. They can add further files, including revised versions of rejected files, and then ask the output checkers for further review.

Files require approval by two output checkers in order to be released. If the two output checkers do not agree on whether a file should be approved or rejected, and there is no way to satisfy the rejecting output checker, it is possible for a third output checker to supply the second approving review.