devopsy.kinsta.cloud

Category: DevSecOps

  • The Role of AI in Securing Software and Data Supply Chains

    The Role of AI in Securing Software and Data Supply Chains

    Supply-chain vulnerabilities loom large on the cybersecurity landscape, with threats and attacks such as SolarWinds, 3CX, Log4Shell and now XZ Utils underscoring the potentially devastating impact of these security breaches. The latter examples of Open Source Software (OSS) attacks are a growing attack vector. Capterra’s research reveals that software supply-chain attacks impacted almost two-thirds (61%) of all U.S. businesses from April 2022 to April 2023.

    Expect attacks on the open source software supply chain to accelerate, with attackers automating attacks in common open source software projects and package managers. Many CISOs and DevSecOps teams are unprepared to implement controls in their existing build systems to mitigate these threats. In 2024, DevSecOps teams will migrate away from shift-left security models in favor of “shifting down” by using AI to automate security out of the developers’ workflows.

    Here are the factors fueling the increase in software supply-chain attacks and the role of AI in helping developers work more efficiently while creating more secure code.

    Attacks on the Open Source Software Supply Chain Will Accelerate

    Open source libraries and languages are the foundation of over 90% of the world’s software. In a U.S. survey of nearly 300 IT and IT security professionals, 94% reported their companies use open source software, and 57% employ multiple open source platforms. Exactly half of the respondents say the threat level is “high” or “extreme,” while another 41% view it as “moderate.” At the time of writing, details of the backdoor implanted in the XZ library and several other OSS packages have just been published. The ubiquity of open source worldwide is one key factor fueling the rise of supply chain attacks.

    Data Governance and the Data Supply Chain Will Become Critical Issues

    Security pros must also consider how security vulnerabilities extend to their data supply chains. Although organizations typically integrate externally developed software through their software supply chains, their data supply chains often need clearer mechanisms for understanding or contextualizing data. In contrast to software’s structured systems or functions, data is unstructured or semi-structured and faces a wide array of regulatory standards.

    Many companies are building AI or ML systems on top of enormous data pools with heterogeneous sources. ML models on model zoos are published with minimal understanding of the code and content used to produce the models. Software engineers need to handle these models and data just as carefully as they do the code going into the software they’re creating, with attention to its provenance.

    DevSecOps teams must assess the liabilities of using data, especially when building LLMs to train AI tools. That demands careful data management within models to prevent the accidental transmission of sensitive data to third parties like OpenAI.

    Organizations should adopt strict policies outlining the approved usage of AI-generated code, and when incorporating third-party platforms for AI, conduct a thorough due diligence assessment ensuring that their data will not be used for AI/ML model training and fine-tuning

    AI Security Automation Will Help Organizations Transition From ‘Shift-Left’ to ‘Shift-Down’

    The industry adopted the shift-left concept a decade ago to address security flaws early in the software development lifecycle and to enhance developer workflows. Defenders of systems have long been at a disadvantage. AI has the potential to level the playing field. As DevSecOps teams navigate the intricacies of data governance, they must also assess the impact of the evolving shift-left paradigm on their organizations’ security postures.

    Companies will begin moving beyond shift-left to embrace AI to fully automate security processes and remove them from the developer’s workflow. This is called “shifting-down,” because it pushes security into automated and lower-level functions in the tech stack instead of burdening developers with complicated and often difficult decisions.

    GitLab’s Global DevSecOps Report: The State of AI in Software Development found that developers only spend 25% of their time on code generation. AI can elevate their output by optimizing the remaining 75% of their workload. That’s one way to leverage AI’s capacity to solve specific technical issues and improve the efficiency and productivity of the entire software development life cycle.

    Expect to look back on 2024 as the year that the escalating threats OSS ecosystems adversely affecting global software supply chains, catalyzed substantial changes in cybersecurity strategies, including a heightened dependence on AI to safeguard digital infrastructures. The cybersecurity landscape is already transforming, with a growing focus on mitigating supply chain vulnerabilities, enforcing data governance and incorporating AI into security measures. This transformation promises to steer DevSecOps teams toward software development processes with efficiency and security at the forefront.

  • JFrog Survey Surfaces Raft of DevSecOps Challenges

    JFrog Survey Surfaces Raft of DevSecOps Challenges

    A global survey of 1,224 security, development, and IT operations professionals published today by JFrog finds that 60% typically spend four days or more remediating application vulnerabilities in a given month.

    JFrog security researchers, however, noted it’s probable most of those vulnerabilities are not as severe as they have been rated. After analyzing 212 vulnerabilities, the JFrog Security Research team downgraded the severity of 85% of the vulnerabilities rated as critical and 73% of one rated as high.

    JFrog researchers also found that 74% of the reported common vulnerabilities and exposure (CVEs) with high and critical CVSS scores assigned to the top 100 Docker Hub community images weren’t actually exploitable.

    Only 17% of the vulnerabilities analyzed enabled remote code execution, compared to 44% that could enable a denial of service (DoS) attack, the researchers noted.

    Stephen Chin, senior director for developer relations for JFrog, said that analysis suggests organizations are arguably spending too much time on application security at the expense of productivity. Tools that generate alerts based on severity rather than also rating exploitability are creating too much noise simply because they don’t provide enough contextual analysis, he added.

    Conversely, in the absence of that level of detailed analysis, it’s possible a low-level vulnerability that might be especially severe in a specific IT environment, also known as a false negative, might not be further investigated, noted Chin.

    Security concerns, however, also limit innovation, with 40% of the survey respondents noting that because of security reviews, it typically takes a week or longer to get approval to use a new package/library.

    Nearly half of IT professionals (47%) say they use between four and nine application security tools, with 90% reporting they use some type of tools that rely on machine learning algorithms or other forms of artificial intelligence (AI) to scan, identify and remediate vulnerabilities.

    Less than a third (32%), however, work for organizations that use AI to write code. That relatively low level suggests many organizations are still not comfortable with the quality of the code generated, noted Chin. Of course, individual developers may still be using those tools without approval.

    More than half (53%) say their organization uses between four to nine programming languages, with nearly a third (31%) reporting they use 10 or more.

    The most frequently used tools are static application security testing (61%), dynamic application security testing (58%), software composition analysis testing (56%), and application programming interface (API) security (56%).

    A full 89% said their organization has adopted a security framework such as OpenSSF or Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA).

    Finally, the survey finds little consensus concerning when to run security scans, with 42% saying it’s best to perform security scans as code is being written versus 41% that prefer to perform scans on new software packages before installing them. A total of 41% said runtime is the least desirable place to run scans. More than half (56%) said their organization applies security scans at both the code and binary scanning levels.

    The degree to which DevSecOps best practices are being adopted will naturally vary from one organization to the next. The challenge is to prioritize remediation efforts in a way that enables developers to spend more time writing, for example, business logic versus patching vulnerabilities are not actually a material threat. In that context, the quality of the vulnerability analysis generated by scanning tools matters because of the unnecessary toil that might be eliminated, noted Chin.

    It may be a while before most organizations are able to strike the right balance when it comes to DevSecOps, but as a greater appreciation for the nuances of application security continues to take hold, the less stress there should hopefully one day be for all concerned.

  • appCD Launches Platform to Securely Provision Cloud Infrastructure

    appCD Launches Platform to Securely Provision Cloud Infrastructure

    appCD this week launched a namesake platform that analyzes an application about to be deployed to automatically generate the code needed to provision the IT infrastructure required.

    Fresh from raising $6 million in seed funding, appCD CEO Sachin Aggarwal said that approach makes it possible to consistently create secure code for provisioning IT infrastructure versus requiring developers with little to no cybersecurity to manually write it.

    Instead, appCD reviews Python or Java code to understand intent, identifies dependencies and then infers application programming interface (API), service configuration, ingress/egress and other environment variables. Terraform code or Helm charts are then automatically generated based on the static analysis of the code that has been reinforced using artificial intelligence (AI) learning techniques.

    That approach also makes it simpler for platform engineering teams to centrally manage the provisioning of IT infrastructure using a set of pre-defined policies that are automatically implemented each time an application is deployed to ensure security by default, he added.

    DevOps teams can also use appCD to visualize the deployment environment before and after an application is deployed, said Aggarwal.

    While infrastructure-as-code (IaC) tools have accelerated the rate at which cloud infrastructure can be provisioned, they are also often the root cause of the security issues that plague cloud computing environments. Developers often misconfigure cloud infrastructure by, for example, inadvertently leaving ports open. The appCD platform reduces the potential such mistakes will be made, noted Aggarwal.

    That capability also eliminates the need to attach cybersecurity specialists to a DevOps team because issues are automatically resolved by the guardrails enforced by appCD, he added.

    In theory, at least, there may soon come a day when AI routinely improves the quality of the code being used to both build and deploy applications. The more the code used to train a large language model (LLM) is vetted, the more reliable the output becomes. In the meantime, platforms such as appCD are combining static analysis with AI reinforcement learning to achieve that same goal in a use case that is specific to generating code to provision IT infrastructure.

    Each DevOps team will naturally need to determine the best path forward, but as regulations pertaining to securing software supply chains become more stringent, it’s only a matter of time before organizations will be required to embrace DevSecOps workflows. In the meantime, DevOps teams should assume that given the probability cloud infrastructure has been misconfigured, it’s all but certain there will be multiple cloud security incidents. In fact, cybercriminals are actively scanning for misconfigurations that they have already created playbooks to specifically exploit in a matter of minutes.

    In the absence of being able to prevent all those issues from arising, the immediate priority becomes remediating as many issues as possible before cybercriminals exploit those vulnerabilities. However, it’s also important to draw a proverbial line in the sand to ensure that all cloud infrastructure being provisioned in the future is much more secure than it has tended to be thus far.

  • Cycode Acquires Bearer to Extend ASPM Platform

    Cycode Acquires Bearer to Extend ASPM Platform

    Cycode today announced it had acquired Bearer, a provider of a set of tools for static application security testing (SAST), discovering application programming interfaces (APIs) and identifying sensitive data.

    The provider of an application security posture management platform (ASPM) plans to integrate the Bearer tools into its core platform to enable DevSecOps teams to further consolidate tooling.

    Cycode CEO Lior Levy said the acquisition of Bearer gives Cycode access to a set of tools that take advantage of generative artificial intelligence (AI) to surface suggestions that enable DevSecOps teams to more easily secure modern applications based on, for example, a microservices-based architecture.

    Bearer achieves that goal by continuously scanning for application security issues as developers are writing code, he added. Overall, Bearer claims its approach to scanning is 31% faster than rival tools while simultaneously leveraging tools such as Bearer Assist, currently in beta, to provide more context concerning the level of risk to the business any issue discovered actually represents.

    Those capabilities will be infused into the Risk Intelligence Graph (RIG) that Cycode developed for its ASPM platform.

    Cycode earlier this year added generative AI capabilities to its platform to make it simpler for DevSecOps teams to identify the root cause of vulnerabilities in complex distributed computing environments. The company uses the generative AI platform created by OpenAI to provide a natural language interface for RIG. As part of that effort, Cycode is making available an executive dashboard that, based on all the dependencies uncovered, provides summaries of risks that make it easier to discern what is occurring across an application environment.

    The company is at the forefront of developing ASPM platforms that continuously ingest data to identify and assess application security risks. Those platforms also provide a foundation for consolidating many of the tools that DevSecOps teams currently rely on to secure applications before they are deployed in production environments.

    It’s not clear how quickly organizations are embracing DevSecOps best practices, but given the number of vulnerabilities that continue to be discovered, there is still much work to be done. The challenge is that legacy tools that lack AI capabilities were not designed to enable organizations to practically shift more responsibility left toward application development teams that typically don’t have a lot of cybersecurity expertise, noted Levy. AI makes it possible to now provide those teams with the context required to address application security issues as they write code versus just before applications are deployed, he added.

    In theory at least, the applications deployed today should be significantly more secure than previous generations of applications. In effect, IT environments are steadily becoming more secure. Less apparent, however, is the rate at which modern applications are being deployed to replace legacy applications that are, all too often, rife with known vulnerabilities that cybercriminals can easily exploit. Given the rate at which vulnerabilities can be discovered and patched in those legacy applications, it may take the better part of the rest of this decade to address those issues once and for all.

  • Survey Sees Limited DevSecOps Progress Being Made as Vulnerabilities Mount

    Survey Sees Limited DevSecOps Progress Being Made as Vulnerabilities Mount

    A survey of 2,037 IT and security professionals conducted by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) on behalf of Dazz, a provider of a platform for mapping cloud computing environments, finds well over a third of respondents (38%) estimated that 21-40% of their code contains vulnerabilities, while 19% estimated 41-60% of their code contains vulnerabilities. Another 13% estimated they have vulnerabilities in 61-80% of their code.

    As a result, organizations on average have 55.5 security vulnerabilities each day in their remediation queue, with typically at least one being deemed critical, the survey finds. Overall, the average number of vulnerabilities that could be addressed is 1,025 per month, but organizations typically only address 270 within a month.

    In general, there are four phases to a remediation with each phase, on average, requiring between three to six hours so it easy to see how some organizations with limited resources can reach a point where they never catch up. The report noted that more than half of the vulnerabilities that have been remediated reoccur within a month, often because the root cause was never adequately addressed.

    Hillary Baron, senior technical director for research for CSA, said the high number of vulnerabilities that need to be regularly addressed suggested that progress in adopting DevSecOps best practices remains limited. While not every vulnerability is equally critical, it’s clear application development and cybersecurity teams are not yet proactively addressing application security issues, she noted.

    In fact, the survey found that less than a third (30%) of respondents reported there is a good working relationship between the application development teams that typically provision cloud computing environments and the cybersecurity teams that usually are held accountable for maintaining cloud security. Just under half of respondents (49%) said their vulnerability remediation teams comprised four to six members. Most respondents (60%) found it somewhat difficult to identify code owners, with an additional 24% facing moderate difficulty and 5% that found it highly challenging.

    Dazz CTO Tomer Schwartz said the more dynamic application development becomes, the bigger the DevSecOps challenge. Most organizations lacked the visibility required to proactively correlate their DevSecOps practices, he added. For example, more than three-quarters (77%) of respondents said they lacked full transparency into their cloud computing environments, and 6% had no visibility at all.

    In total, the survey finds organizations typically employ a variety of scanning and detection tools to safeguard their cloud environments, with 32% using five to six tools while another 29% report using three to four tools.

    More than three-quarters of respondents (76%) also noted that one in 10 of the alerts these tools generate is a false positive.

    Just under 75% of respondents also noted security teams spend more than 20% of their time performing manual tasks when addressing vulnerabilities, even though 83% reported using at least some automation in their remediation process. A full 61% also noted their organization is using three to six different detection tools, with nearly half (45%) considering increasing their security budgets in 2024, so it’s likely that many will be adding additional tools. In total, 22% dedicated less than 20% of their budget to cloud security, compared to 31% that allocated 21-40% of their budget and 27% that invest 41-60% of their budget to securing cloud environments.

    Unfortunately, less than a quarter (24%) said they feel very prepared for the cybersecurity threats their organization faces. Much of that uncertainty stems from knowing just how many vulnerabilities there really are in production environments and that they are being attacked with greater frequency each day.

  • Securing the DevOps Pipeline: Tools and Best Practices

    Securing the DevOps Pipeline: Tools and Best Practices

    The DevOps pipeline refers to the set of practices and tools designed to automate and integrate the processes between software development (Dev) and IT operations (Ops) teams. This pipeline facilitates continuous integration (CI), continuous delivery (CD) and rapid deployment practices, aiming to shorten the development life cycle and provide continuous delivery with high software quality. 

    The DevOps pipeline typically includes planning, coding, building, testing, releasing, deploying, operating and monitoring, enabling teams to develop and deploy software more efficiently and with fewer errors.

    By automating workflows and integrating various development and operational activities, the pipeline supports the rapid iteration of software releases. This not only accelerates the pace of software development but also ensures that quality and performance standards are met throughout the application’s life cycle.

    Due to the critical nature of the DevOps pipeline, security is becoming a top priority. Some of the most devastating cyberattacks in recent years were related to breaches in DevOps pipelines, which led to global-scale supply chain attacks.

    The Need for Security in DevOps

    DevOps, by its very nature, encourages speed and efficiency. However, this drive for rapid software development and deployment can sometimes overlook the critical aspect of security. That’s why it’s essential to weave security into the fabric of the DevOps pipeline, an approach known as DevSecOps. By doing so, we can ensure that security isn’t an afterthought but an integral part of the development process.

    Incorporating security into the DevOps pipeline offers multiple benefits. First, it helps identify and rectify security vulnerabilities early in the development process, reducing the risk of security breaches. It also fosters a culture of shared responsibility, where the development, operations and security teams work together toward the common goal of creating secure software.

    Tools for Securing the DevOps Pipeline

    Securing the DevOps pipeline requires a set of tools that align with the DevOps philosophy of automation and continuous improvement. Let’s explore some of these tools.

    Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

    SAST, also known as white-box testing, is a tool that helps locate security vulnerabilities in the codebase without executing the application. It makes it possible to identify issues early in the development process, even before the code is run.

    SAST works by analyzing the source code, bytecode or binary code, looking for patterns that might indicate a security flaw. The strength of SAST lies in its ability to pinpoint the exact location of the security vulnerability in the codebase. This makes it easier to fix the issue, thus saving time and resources.

    Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

    DAST, a type of black-box testing, involves testing the application in its running state. It’s designed to find security vulnerabilities that can’t be spotted during static analysis.

    DAST works by simulating attacks on the application and observing its response. It can identify security issues like cross-site scripting (XSS), SQL injection and security misconfigurations. The beauty of DAST is that it views the application from an attacker’s perspective, thus providing a real-world assessment of its security. However, DAST can’t identify vulnerabilities in the source code and relies on the application being in its running state for testing.

    Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

    Software composition analysis (SCA) is designed to provide visibility into the open source components used in the software. It helps identify any security vulnerabilities, licensing issues or outdated libraries in the open source components.

    SCA works by creating a bill of materials (BOM) that lists all the open source components used in the software. It then compares this list against various databases that track open source vulnerabilities. If a match is found, SCA flags the component, allowing the developers to take necessary actions.

    Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

    Endpoint detection and response (EDR) is a cybersecurity technology that addresses the need for continuous monitoring and response to advanced threats. EDR tools continuously monitor endpoint and network events and record the information in a central database where further analysis, detection, investigation, reporting, and alerting take place.

    EDR is like a surveillance system for your DevOps pipeline. It keeps an eye on endpoint activity, and if it detects a potential threat, it alerts developers and security staff. EDR is not just about detection; it also provides tools for responding to security incidents. It helps isolate affected systems, block malicious activities and even roll back systems to their pre-attack state.

    Container Security Tools

    In a DevOps environment that increasingly relies on containerization, container security cannot be overlooked. Container security tools provide a means to enforce security policies and protect containerized applications.

    These tools offer functionalities like image scanning, runtime protection and network segmentation. Image scanning helps identify vulnerabilities in the container images. Runtime protection monitors the container’s activities in real-time, looking for any signs of compromise. Network segmentation allows for isolating containerized applications, thus limiting the blast radius in case of a security incident.

    Best Practices for Securing the DevOps Pipeline

    Integrate Security Early (Shift Left)

    The concept of ‘shifting left’ in DevOps refers to integrating security measures early in the development process. Instead of treating security as an afterthought, it becomes a part of the software development life cycle from the get-go.

    Implementing security early allows us to identify and address potential vulnerabilities before they become a significant issue. It saves us time and resources by preventing security breaches instead of responding to them. Besides, it fosters a proactive approach to security, emphasizing prevention over remediation.

    SAST and DAST are useful in integrating security early. SAST tools analyze code in its static state to identify vulnerabilities, while DAST tools test applications in their running state to detect security flaws.

    Automate Security Processes

    Automated security scans can be incorporated into the continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) pipeline. Each time a code push occurs, these scans are triggered, allowing for immediate feedback on potential security issues. Automated scans can detect a broad range of vulnerabilities, from code defects to configuration errors.

    Configuration management tools like Chef, Puppet, Ansible and Terraform can help manage configurations and enforce security policies. They ensure that all systems are configured correctly and consistently, reducing the risk associated with manual configuration.

    Regular Security Audits and Compliance Checks

    Regular security audits and compliance checks are essential in securing the DevOps pipeline. They provide an opportunity to review and update security measures, ensuring they are effective and up-to-date.

    Security audits should be comprehensive, covering all aspects of the DevOps pipeline. They should evaluate security controls, identify potential vulnerabilities, and recommend remedial measures. Compliance checks ensure that security practices align with relevant regulations and standards.

    In conclusion, securing the DevOps pipeline requires a holistic approach that integrates security into every aspect of the development process. It involves shifting security left, automating security processes, conducting regular audits and compliance checks and fostering a culture of collaboration.

  • Why DevOps is Key to Software Supply Chain Security

    Why DevOps is Key to Software Supply Chain Security

    DevOps is designed to increase business value and responsiveness through rapid, high-quality service delivery, made possible through fast-paced, iterative IT service delivery. The term DevSecOps emerged as a way to remind us that security was always intended to be part of the software delivery process. However, with the barrage of attacks on the software supply chain showing no signs of abating, the question now is whether even the tightest DevOps pipelines can maintain the pace-protection balance.

    It’s important to note that the term “software supply chain” has been used primarily to refer to the tools and processes used to build and deploy software applications. Now, however, with the rise of infrastructure-as-code (IaC), the term also refers to tools and processes used to build and deploy IT infrastructure.

    Meet Mandates, Reduce Risk

    Software supply chain attacks such as SUNBURST, HTTP/2 Rapid Reset or the breaches associated with the MOVEit vulnerability have fed news cycles for the last few years, and that likely won’t change anytime soon. Attacks on the software supply chain increased 742% since 2020. What we are seeing as a result are new concerns about supply chain security and DevOps requirements. This has led to confusion and often a mish-mash of tooling that may exacerbate rather than mitigate supply chain security issues.

    Arguably the most impactful salvo over the software supply chain security line was president Biden’s 2021 Executive Order 14028, which established new mandates, including the delivery of SBOMs, as minimum requirements for software used by the U.S. federal government. More recently, the FDA has mandated that “all medical devices running software must create and maintain” SBOMs. I expect to see government and industry requirements increase over time.

    These are just a couple of relatively recent examples. There are many more—and no doubt many more to come.

    So, if you’re moving at the speed of DevOps, how do you address these current and future mandates for software supply chain security, as well as the continually emerging vulnerabilities and attacks? I would venture to say that only by moving at the speed of DevOps—and within the parameters of the DevOps model—can organizations not only meet mandates but also effectively reduce risk for the business.

    Indeed, it’s not a matter of whether DevOps is viable within the current security climate but what requirements need to be added to support and enhance current DevOps work.

    New Guidelines, New Processes, New Tools and New Data

    In response to these new threats and regulations, the software community has been working on developing and updating guidelines to help organizations improve the security of their supply chains—for example, SLSA, NCSC UK supply chain security guidance and NIST cybersecurity supply chain risk management. However, these new guidelines can be complicated and require new processes and new tools.

    Before adding any new tooling or changing any processes, it’s critical to examine existing tools to determine whether and to what extent they satisfy supply chain security mandates. Organizations must also evaluate how well existing processes work to protect the business, then strategically add/subtract from there as needed.

    No matter what solutions are leveraged, more and different tools generate reams of more and different data. What’s important — and to whom? How do I manage the data? When can I trust it? Where do I store it? What problems does the new data help me solve? Organizations will need a way to effectively sift this information and deliver the right data to the right teams at the right time. To preserve the ability to quickly and continuously innovate, it will be important to focus on shifting security left as well as integrating automation whenever and wherever possible.

    As new security metadata becomes available, such as from SBOMs, new solutions for managing that metadata will be key. An open source initiative sponsored by Google, GUAC is designed to integrate software security information, including SBOMs, attestations and vulnerability data. Users can query the resulting GUAC graph to help answer key security concerns, including proactive, preventive and reactive concerns.

    Continue to Shift Security Left

    Another way that organizations can maintain their DevOps momentum while protecting the software supply chain is to continue to invest in shifting security left in the software supply chain. The software community has been talking about this for some time, but many organizations struggle to implement impactful changes. Security teams must work to understand how software is built and collaborate with development and DevOps teams to ensure that improvements are made to both application and infrastructure-as-code supply chains.

    We need to go beyond shift-left vulnerability analysis to ensure that we are evaluating the quality of configuration-as-code (for both applications and infrastructure), that we are taking advantage of new recommendations, and that we are leveraging new attestation solutions designed to work with pipelines such as sigstore and Tekton Chains. After all, the sooner an issue is discovered, the more quickly it can be addressed and the less disruptive and costly it is to fix it.

    No One-Size-Fits-All Solution

    While all of these solutions mentioned here are helpful, there is no single product or framework that will enable organizations to maintain the security-innovation balance. Success, rather, will require a focus on agility, flexibility and effective communication and collaboration—the very hallmarks of the DevOps model.

    Rather than being obviated by the demands of software supply chain security, DevOps provides the opportunity to integrate the kinds of protections that can prevent or mitigate supply chain vulnerabilities and breaches. DevOps also enables organizations to quickly and effectively respond to new threats and new requirements.

    With that said, there’s no doubt that organizations will need to think differently about how they manage software security, including the strategic evaluation and integration of tools that will meet current and future regulatory mandates and, more importantly, protect the business over time. Organizations may also need to think about weighing security over speed, at least until all of the pieces of the software supply chain protection puzzle are in place—but also when future circumstances warrant a fresh look at how to best balance the DevOps pace-protection balance.