Greater flexibility in watermarking configuration
Based on our documentation:
Rasterized watermarking only (default) - Provides increased security, but no resolution scaling, no searchability, no clickable links, a moderate file size overhead, and reduced usability. This watermark type can't be removed without damaging the underlying content.
Customers that want to follow a higher level of security protocol when watermarking files currently have to choose which approach is more important at an EID level.
Watermarking configuration should have greater flexibility so that the choice of rasterized or vector based watermarking is done at either a folder level OR via the shield policy assignment OR both.
This provides customers the option to choose the more security oriented approach or performance based approach depending on the needs.
If this is a moot point because vector has been enhanced to avoid security issues associated with it, then we need to update our documentation and educate our customers of that fact