Category: DevSecOps

  • What is DevSecOps?

    What is DevSecOps?

    While traditional development practices have long separated security and compliance, DevSecOps as a series of best practices integrates security into every phase of the DevOps software development life cycle. DevSecOps introduces and automates security in the earlier phases of the software development life cycle rather than bolting it on at the end. The approach saves money, saves time on tedious manual tasks, helps organizations meet regulatory compliance requirements and significantly reduces the risk of critical security bugs being found after an application’s final build. DevSecOps promotes the use of, for example, active penetration testing, security audits and other security tools within an agile development process.

    The goal of DevSecOps is to create a collaborative environment between developers and security professionals that enables organizations to build secure code faster and more easily. By emphasizing security from the very beginning of the process, it becomes a priority in the app dev process rather than an afterthought. Over time, developers become more familiar with the common weaknesses in software that today result in more insecure applications being deployed than most anyone really wants to admit. The end goal is to create secure applications by making it easier for developers, security experts and operations professionals to collaborate throughout every stage of application development.

    Minimizing Application Vulnerabilities

    It may seem tedious and expensive to integrate security into the development process, but it’s become essential for organizations to embrace DevSecOps to minimize the number of application vulnerabilities that cybercriminals might exploit. When applied throughout the development process, scanning and reporting can take place within a matter of minutes rather than holding up deployment at the end of the process to review the entirety of an application.

    Leaving security to either the end of the application development process or, worse yet, after an application has been deployed only increases the total cost of ownership. It’s much more expensive to remediate a vulnerability after an application has been deployed than it is to address an issue during the application development process.

    Implementing DevSecOps requires organizations to set up workflows that are managed via a continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) platform. Most critically, developers must understand the role security plays in enabling organizations to identify vulnerabilities as early as possible in the application development life cycle.

    Inserting security audits and penetration testing into the development process, for example, helps ensure the security of an application. When changes are made in a project, scanning, architecture reviews and penetration testing can be triggered within the development flow to save time and resources.

    DevSecOps Adoption

    However, there are many technical and cultural challenges ranging from tool integration to a lack of trust between developers and security teams that can impede the adoption of DevSecOps. Security professionals are tasked with identifying and preventing vulnerabilities in applications. Acceptance test criteria, user designs and threat models should be created by security professionals. The development team then needs to define a code review system to ensure uniformity.

    Despite those concerns, the most important thing is to simply get started. Ideally, development and security teams should work together to create a safe application development and software development environment. There is no need to create separate teams or apply different policies.

    The biggest benefit of DevSecOps is that it eliminates silos between development and operations. As a result, software engineers integrate cybersecurity processes from the start of the development process. This includes ensuring that every component, configuration item, and installation process is securely patched and documented. This concept of shifting security to the left allows the security team to identify and remediate security threats early on.

    In the longer term, however, adopting DevSecOps best practices will ensure security remains a top priority in the wake of a series of high-profile cybersecurity breaches. In short, there is now more focus on DevSecOps with the goal of securing software supply chains.

  • TikTok Shuns Russia | War on Patent Trolls | Chrome is ‘Faster than Safari’

    TikTok Shuns Russia | War on Patent Trolls | Chrome is ‘Faster than Safari’

    Welcome to The Long View—where we peruse the news of the week and strip it to the essentials. Let’s work out what really matters.

    This week: ByteDance restricts TikTok in Russia, Unified Patents escalates the fight against trolls, and Google Chrome beats the magic 300.

    1. Not for your For You Page

    First up this week: Russian TikTok users won’t be able to view or upload new content. For users in Russia, TikTok has frozen its catalog of cringe.

    Analysis: Emotional damage

    Putin’s vague new “fake news” law is concentrating minds in Beijing’s ByteDance. Is your organization exposed too? To protect its employees—and perhaps its users, too—it’s hitting the Safe Mode button.

    Dan Milmo: TikTok restricts service in Russia

    Chinese-owned TikTok said it would block livestreaming and uploading of new content in Russia after the Kremlin criminalised the spreading of what it deems to be fake news about its invasion of Ukraine. … The BBC, CNN and other global media outlets have temporarily suspended reporting in Russia to protect their journalists.
    …
    TikTok spokesperson Hilary McQuaide said the app in Russia now appears in “view-only” mode and won’t let people post or see new videos or livestreams. They can still see older videos, but not if they came from outside the country.
    …
    She said, “The safety of employees is our top priority,” … adding that the video-sharing service—part of China-based tech company ByteDance—did not want to put either its Russian employees or users at risk of severe criminal penalties.


    With more on that head-scratching law, here’s Aimee Chanthadavong:

    Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a new law on Friday that bans what the country calls “fake” news about the military. This law will target any statements referring to the invasion of Ukraine as an “invasion”, any attempt to discredit the armed forces, or calls for sanctions on Russia. Those found to be spreading so-called fake news could face up to 15 years in prison.
    …
    TikTok’s in-app messaging service will not be affected. … “We will continue to evaluate the evolving circumstances in Russia to determine when we might fully resume our services with safety as our top priority,” TikTok added.


    And Scott Nover thinks about the effects on Russian citizens:

    Russia’s fake news law is a severe step for a country whose government is already antagonistic to … a free press. … The country has blocked Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube proactively, but TikTok beat Russia to the punch. The result is the same, however: The people of Russia … will be locked out from another window into the real-life consequences of Putin’s war.


    2. Patent Trolls Still Attacking

    “Patent assertion entities,” also known as “non-practicing entities,” are organizations that don’t produce anything, but simply acquire and hoard patents—later asserting them against unsuspecting organizations. The aim is to extort money from those they claim are infringing.

    The problem? Many of those patent claims are as weak as a sickly kitten.

    Analysis: PAEs aka NPEs are NBG—SNAFU

    You might think you’re safe, but trolls also go after the users of the disputed technology. Examples include podcasting, JPEG images, order-confirmation emails, geo-locating a car and even caching data.

    Steven Vaughan-Nichols: Open Source Zone grinds away at patent trolls

    Patent trolls, aka Patent Assertion Entities (PAEs), have plagued … software for ages. … The attacks keep mounting up. The reason is simple: It’s profitable.
    …
    [But] Unified Patents, an international organization of over 200 businesses … brings the fight to the trolls. It deters patent trolls from attacking its members by making it too expensive for the troll to win. … With United Patents’ high success rate in knocking out bad patents, slowly but surely the patent trolls are being driven back.
    …
    For example, an Accelerated Memory Tech patent 6,513,062, was used by the troll IP Investments Group to claim … Redis, which manages cache resources on the cloud, violated the patent. [The troll] went after Hulu, Citrix Systems, Barracuda Networks, Kemp Technologies, and F5 Networks for their use of Redis software. IP Investments Group gave up rather than fighting it out. Everyone who uses Redis wins.


    Ban software patents? Beware of throwing out the baby with that bathwater, thinks WierdUncle:

    Patents themselves are a good idea: … Inventive people should be rewarded for their contributions to the economy.
    …
    [But] patent trolls are parasites who contribute nothing to the prosperity of citizens. … The patent troll business plan is unfortunately quite viable. You don’t invent anything, or fund new developments. You have sufficient funds to clobber anybody who challenges you, by having better lawyers.


    The underlying issue is weak patents. Here’s nzkbuk:

    Start suing the patent office for damages against wrongly issued patients. It would then be in their best interest to set up this sort of thing as an alternative where the patient can be investigated first.


    3. Google Gloats on Chrome Mac Perf

    Google Chrome on macOS boasts a better benchmark score than Safari on an M1 MacBook Pro. Hilariously, this is using Apple’s own Speedometer benchmark tool.

    Analysis: Benchmarks aren’t the be-all and end-all

    Great PR, and popcorn-worthy Cupertino trolling. But aren’t there better optimizations Google could be making?

    Frederic Lardinois: Chrome on macOS is now faster than Safari

    Version 99 of Chrome on macOS manages to score 300 points on the Speedometer benchmark, which was originally developed by Apple’s WebKit team. This, Google points out, is the fastest performance of any browser.
    …
    It’s been a while since competition in the browser market focused on speed. … When a new chip comes along, though, there’s always room for optimization. Originally, Chrome on Apple’s M1 chips had passable performance, but … Chrome now runs 43% faster on them.
    …
    Speedometer 2.0 tests for responsiveness, which makes it a good proxy for user experience. … It doesn’t take much to make software feel more responsive, so the 43% on M1 Macs will surely make you feel more productive.


    How? Try not to gloat, Max Christoff:

    Building on many performance changes over the last year, we enabled ThinLTO in M99, a build optimization technique that inlines speed-critical parts of the code base, even when they span multiple files or libraries. … Two of the other recent major contributors to Chrome’s speed are the V8 Sparkplug compiler and short builtin calls. Sparkplug is a new mid-tier JavaScript compiler. … Short builtin calls are used by the V8 JavaScript engine to optimize the placement of generated code inside the device’s memory [which] boosts performance by avoiding indirect jumps when calling functions.
    …
    We know that benchmarks are just one of many ways of measuring the speed of a browser. [But] combined with recent graphics optimizations (namely, pass-through decoder and out-of-process rasterization) … Chrome is now 43% faster than … 17 months ago.


    Benchmarks/schmenchmarks, thinks codedokode:

    Browser developers are optimizing the wrong thing. … Optimizing for speed usually causes increased memory consumption, and this increases the chance of invoking swapping. If the system starts swapping, it becomes orders of magnitude slower.
    …
    If the browser could use [half the] memory while using twice amount of CPU time, that would be perfect. Just think how many laptops with 2 or 4 GB of RAM would become usable again.


    The Moral of the Story: Good words shall gain you honor, but good deeds shall gain you friends.


    You have been reading The Long View by Richi Jennings. You can contact him at @RiCHi or tlv@richi.uk.

    Image: Rostislav Artov (via Unsplash; leveled and cropped)

  • Ukraine Asks for DNS Censorship | Ukraine Snapchat Staff Danger | #BoycottKaspersky?

    Ukraine Asks for DNS Censorship | Ukraine Snapchat Staff Danger | #BoycottKaspersky?

    Welcome to Ukraine Week here at The Long View—where we peruse the news of the week and strip it to the essentials. Let’s work out what really matters.

    This week: Censoring the Russian internet, Snap fears for hundreds of Ukrainian employees, and Eugene Kaspersky acts like a ****.

    1. ICANN, but IWONT

    First up this week: Ukraine has asked ICANN to drop Russia from the DNS. Andrii Nabok, the Ukrainian representative of ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee argues a DNS blockage would “help users seek for reliable information in alternative domain zones, preventing propaganda and disinformation.”

    Given today’s confirmation that Muscovite K12 students had been arrested for laying flowers at the Ukrainian embassy, this goal seems all the more laudable. But frankly, a moment’s thought says it’s a bad idea.

    Analysis: “The net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it”

    John Gilmore was right. Such a move would inevitably fail. And there’s a real risk of undesirable, unintended consequences.

    Kat Bouza and Noah Shachtman: Ukraine Pushes to Unplug Russia From the Internet

    Ukraine’s request to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) seeks to revoke domains issued in Russia and shut down primary Domain Name System (DNS) servers in the country. [It] would send a strong message to a regime pumping out digital propaganda.
    …
    The DNS root zone is a crucial element of the overall functionality of the internet, responsible for handling queries to top-level domains — such as .com, and country-specific domains like Russia’s .ru. Removing Russia’s access to this cluster of servers would prevent Russian internet-service providers from communicating.
    …
    But … the unprecedented request has the potential to do more harm than good. … Representatives for ICANN … declined to comment.


    But the request is pretty naïve, thinks this Anonymous Coward:

    All they would have to do is get the ISPs to add a zone to their DNS that says “ru. IN NS x.x.x.x” and then for all their users, any requests for a .ru domain would be directed to x.x.x.x

    OK, the rest of the world would miss out, but I doubt that they would care.


    Is there a better way? ArmoredDragon breathes fire:

    A better way … is to ask western certificate authorities to revoke all [Russian] certificates. Then ask the major OS and browser vendors to remove any CAs that don’t comply.

    That would really **** with them because there’s nothing [Russia] can do about that. And it would even **** with Russia’s ability to do business with Chinese companies and Chinese customers.


    2. Fear for 300 Ukraine Employees at Snap

    Snap, Inc.—formerly Snapchat—owns the Ukrainian company that created the technology used in the real-time video shenanigans behind “I’m not a cat.” It has hundreds of employees in Kyiv and Odesa.

    Analysis: Solidarity doesn’t Stop Wars, but Sanctions Might

    This very human DevOps story is but a footnote to the wider picture of tech companies acting to echo Western governments’ sanctions. It’ll cause us a little pain, but that’s nothing compared to the suffering felt by Ukrainians. And it’ll be worthwhile if it shortens the war.

    J. Clara Chan: Three hundred Snap employees are from Ukraine

    In a public note, … Snap — the parent company of Snapchat — said … that 300 of Snap’s “most creative and talented team members” are from Ukraine, … the birthplace of Looksery, the augmented reality platform that Snap acquired in 2015. … Snap said it has pledged over $15 million in humanitarian aid to support Ukraine. … The company is also providing emergency assistance to employees who need help safely relocating.
    …
    “We stand in solidarity with our Ukrainian team members and the people of Ukraine. … This is a devastating conflict with far-reaching consequences. … It is a direct threat to many of our team members and their families.
    …
    “Over many years working with our Ukrainian colleagues and friends, we have gotten to know the inventiveness, strength, and resilience of the Ukrainian people. … We will continue to work tirelessly to help our Ukrainian team members and their families, support our Snapchat community, and determine how we can help make positive contributions to the immense humanitarian efforts underway.”


    It’s bang on trend, reports Corinne Reichert:

    Snapchat has followed suit after Facebook, Twitter and YouTube began pausing ads on Friday, saying it has now stopped all advertising running in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. … The Snapchat app remains live in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus, [but] Snap is monitoring the platform for misinformation or other misuse.
    …
    Apple has also halted sales of its products in Russia, as well as online transactions, Apple Pay and some Apple Maps features. Google [is] temporarily disabling some live Google Maps features, adding an SOS alert to Search and blocking Russian state-controlled media. It said Google Pay “may become unavailable.”


    But don’t hang up on Dade “+++ATH” Hayes: [ask your parents]

    In terms of any financial sacrifice from the foregone advertising opportunities, it isn’t clear that all that much is at stake for Snap. … While the company’s stance on the Russia-Ukraine situation clear and emphatic, it is also an easier one for for Snap to take than for many of its tech rivals.


    3. Yevgeny Valentinovich ‘Eugene’ Kaspersky has Chosen the Side of the Oppressor

    The figurehead eponym of AO Kaspersky Lab is being publicly shamed for comments he made about the war in Ukraine. In stark contrast to Snap’s statement, he is accused of overt neutrality, minimizing the war’s severity—and even of shoehorning in some marketing.

    Analysis: #BoycottKaspersky

    Desmond Tutu was right. But, while it’s tempting to “cancel” Eugene, dial down the emotion and think instead about your security posture. If you use Kaspersky products internally, what risks are you exposing your organization to? How might the Russian government exert pressure on the company to compromise your network?

    James Coker: Eugene Kaspersky’s Statement Provokes Controversy

    Cybersecurity industry veteran Eugene Kaspersky has provoked a strong reaction from leading figures in the sector. … Kaspersky, CEO of the Russian-headquartered IT security vendor of the same name, broke his silence on the conflict:
    …
    “We welcome the start of negotiations to resolve the current situation in Ukraine and hope that they will lead to a cessation of hostilities and a compromise. We believe that peaceful dialogue is the only possible instrument for resolving conflicts. War isn’t good for anyone. … The main thing we can do in this situation is provide uninterrupted functioning of our products and services.”
    …
    His description of the conflict as a “situation” and apparent attempt to advertise his firm led to a number of furious responses. … Following Kaspersky’s tweet, the hashtag #BoycottKaspersky appeared.


    With a balanced view, it’s Nick Farrell:

    Kaspersky sits on the fence … in Russia it is not a good idea to have a view. [But] whoever is advising Kaspersky on PR might need to have a rethink.
    …
    After all a compromise is [not] always possible when one side is firing missiles into residential areas. If he applied the same premise with ransomware, he would be suggesting, … “It is better that you talk to the people who are holding your servers hostage.” … How much is Kaspersky, the company, influenced by the Russian government?


    Does your shop use Kaspersky? Nick Lange cuts to the chase:

    I would like to remind all readers that, in case of war, … software with access to companies and the capacity to be updated worldwide in matter of hours at the same time is a high class target to get forced to cooperate by a autocratic government.


    The Moral of the Story: If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.


    You have been reading The Long View by Richi Jennings. You can contact him at @RiCHi or tlv@richi.uk.

    Image: Brandon Morales (via Unsplash; leveled and cropped)

  • Where Has All the Testing Gone?

    Where Has All the Testing Gone?

    Testing has long been a problem child of IT in general, AppDev in particular, and now it is DevOps’ problem. There are things that DevOps can do to improve the chances of tests actually occurring for your application(s). Interestingly, there are some that think we no longer need testing; the argument is that because new releases can be cranked out so quickly if something needs to be fixed that it is irrelevant. Combining feature flags with the ability to roll out a new version and, well, there may be some truth to that—at least for a limited subset of testing.

    If an organization implemented feature flags for user acceptance and new feature testing and then standardized on test-driven development for DevOps development teams, that would leave systems and security testing. Systems testing could, theoretically, be replaced by the ability to roll out a new version. Although systemic issues can be complex and difficult to fix, this is a riskier proposition than extending test-driven development to the systems level. For the sprint, assign a person responsible for the overall integrated system and have the rest of the team support them through the process of making certain all works as expected.

    Testing—particularly systems testing—slows releases. I get that. The rate at which most of us can iterate once DevOps systems and processes are in place is fast enough that you can afford a bit of slowdown. This leaves security testing as the last standalone bit. But some security validation can happen during the development process if DevSecOps tools are being utilized. That still leaves some security issues to test for but does remove a large chunk.

    The key to these last bits is to get them integrated into the process/toolchain. DevOps runs straight through, over and over. Any bit worked into the “runs straight through” will be executed. If today’s iteration falls for the “We ran over, we’ll make the deadline with less testing” mentality; not an issue—it’s one iteration. Just don’t let that become the default answer to someone not completing an iteration’s work on time. Development can have unexpected speed bumps that delay delivery and acknowledging that and documenting what it was for future reference is important. Covering it up by reducing testing time risks a less stable product and does not help overcome the issue in the future.

    So start thinking in terms of DevOpsTest. Make sure the product you are delivering represents the massive time investments you’ve made producing and maintaining it. You’re rocking it—and something like integrated testing ensures that users see how great you are rocking it and not an error page.

  • What to Expect When Transitioning to DevSecOps

    What to Expect When Transitioning to DevSecOps

    How do you ensure your DevOps pipeline is secure? Does DevSecOps protect you against serious breaches or is it just a way to allay the concerns of stakeholders about security in DevOps?

    A data breach can cost an average of $3.92 million USD, as per IBM’s study Cost of a Data Breach. In this report, health care was found to be the most expensive industry, with breach fines averaging $6.45 million USD.

    While DevOps delivers on the promise to increase the rate of delivery, the traditional CI/CD framework does not emphasize security. For the sake of speed, misconfigurations and known vulnerabilities may be allowed to pass through the development pipeline to production. 

    Security and testing are generally a low-priority activity, which means these vulnerabilities are fixed retroactively. This takes more time, effort and money. With rampant, unverified integration of open source tools, you open up the software to attackersthat could compromise the security of your apps, systems and users’ data.

    DevSecOps is an upgrade to DevOps, allowing you to deliver security and compliance testing continuously. These checks get integrated within the CI/CD pipeline to enable the delivery of more secure code faster.

    From DevOps to DecSecOps: What to Expect

    The automated nature of DevOps delivers several benefits that enable teams to realize the true power of DevOps as silos break and delivery rates skyrocket.

    As DevOps practices span the entire delivery pipeline, it provides the necessary mechanism to deliver audit, compliance and security requirements along with speed and efficiency. 

    There are many benefits of upgrading from DevOps to a dedicated DevSecOps practice, and they are important to understand before you embark on that journey.

    1. No Restrictive Access Control Policies for Developers

    Access to infrastructure assets must be strictly controlled and monitored to enforce requisite security measures. This means approval gates, secure configuration parameters and other security measures.

    With DevSecOps built into the pipeline, these access controls can be automatically applied. This enables on demand access to infrastructure resources for the team and reduces their dependence on factors outside the team. 

    For example, many organizations have started deploying internal DevOps teams that enable automated access to a shared pool of deployment processes, tools, repositories, workflows, etc. 

    This team is usually separate from the IT team but enforces security mechanisms with the same rigor. It ensures that access to all the infrastructure instances required by development, QA or production is automatically tracked, monitored and controlled as per the guidelines. Additionally, inconsistent processes or misconfigurations are also controlled.

    Often called the shadow IT team, the idea of this team is not to circumvent the IT department but to create an additional team that matches the agility of the DevOps team. 

    2. Seamless Security and Compliance Testing

    Traditionally, security and compliance testing happened all at once at the end of the release cycle close to the release date. This typically meant that a large spreadsheet of issues is sent to the development team to be fixed immediately, since maintaining a consistent release velocity is the key to DevOps success. 

    This requires the development team have at least one dedicated resource to work on those issues. When metrics are tracked, to no one’s surprise, this method resulted in negative impacts on the velocity of the next release cycle.

    DevSecOps applies all the security and compliance checks in batches. So, testing for security and compliance is shifted left and spread out across the pipeline.

    This makes the security feedback loops shorter and more frequent, thus aligning security and compliance testing with the DevOps philosophy. As more secure code is committed every time, the possibility of security and compliance errors reported by the QA team is minimized.

    A second, more personalized approach is using the integrated development environment (IDE) itself to take security and compliance checks to the developers. With regular and automated security and compliance baked right into the development process, this process is sped up considerably and the development team becomes self-reliant.

    3. Overcoming the Risks Associated With Open Source Software

    The 2019 State of The Software Supply Chain report from Sonatype showed that, on average, 85% of the codebase among modern applications uses open source components. While open source components enable innovation, they also come with considerable security risks. As more of these open source tools are added to the software supply chain, it increases the risks on the cybersecurity front.

    The same report showed evidence to back up the need for greater open source software security checks and processes. Companies that managed their open source components released 55% less vulnerable components than those who had no verifiable open source management process.

    While many of these open source components released frequent patches, it is also important for the DevSecOps team to step in and regulate the open source components. Some of the ways DevSecOps teams can do this are:

    • Create a formal component management plan which makes sure that when employees leave, the practice doesn’t go away with them. Having a documented plan lets you look at the bigger picture of your pipeline and find vulnerable components that may be skipped without a formalized process. Incremental improvements to this plan are also possible if it’s well-documented.
    • Use scanning tools like Gemnasium and Snyk that help regularly check for vulnerabilities.
    • If vulnerabilities are detected or reported in a component, look at either updating or replacing the component.
    • Enable quick approval for new open source software. Alternatively, prepare developers to test new components using security and compliance checklists.

    4. Overall Cost Reduction and Acceleration of the Delivery Rate

    An integrated security and compliance framework in DevOps prevents breaches and guarantees faster recovery when breaches do happen. As developers don’t have to set aside a large chunk of time to work on security and compliance violations, this shortens release cycles and ensures more secure code at the same time. 

    The fewer breaches you identify and fix, the more money you save on overcoming security disasters. 

    5. Automated Compliance Reporting

    DevSecOps automates your security and compliance tests and it also logs and documents all the tests. DevOps automation platforms collect large amounts of information for the build, test, integration and deployment phases. This data can be used to create an end-to-end audit trail without any manual intervention or extra time spent scouring through various tools to prepare compliance reports. 

    A fantastic advantage of DevSecOps is the complete traceability from day one and automated compliance reporting. DevSecOps also focuses on the automation of testing, allowing you to deliver a secure development framework on a continuous basis.  

    DevSecOps is the Future of DevOps

    The rapid release velocity DevOps enables is not without its disadvantages. In particular, the unchecked use of open source tools in the pipeline can expose your applications and systems to many known vulnerabilities, increasing the probability of a breach. Combined with a general lack of focus on security, this is a recipe for an expensive security incident. 

    To counter this, DevSecOps radically transforms the pipeline by shifting security and compliance testing left. Developers check the code before every commit. With fast feedback loops, they fix any reported vulnerabilities along with other errors in the app. 

    With DevSecOps, compliance and security checks are not done all at once; instead, developers chip away at vulnerabilities and security flaws with every release.

  • Akamai: Buying Linode | Firefox: Not OK | Gone: Google Vaccine Mandate

    Akamai: Buying Linode | Firefox: Not OK | Gone: Google Vaccine Mandate

    Welcome to The Long View—where we peruse the news of the week and strip it to the essentials. Let’s work out what really matters.

    This week: Linode gets bought by Akamai, Firefox market share is “measly,” and Google brings staff back to the office.

    1. Akamai + Aker = ‘Synergy’

    First up this week: Why is Akamai buying Linode? Whatever the reason, it’s a big payday for its solitary shareholder: Not far off a billion dollars.

    Analysis: There goes the neighborhood?

    The 100 lb gorilla of edge computing and CDNs is promising not to mess with Linode’s winning open source cloud formula: No change, steady as she goes, etcetera. But how many times have we heard that before?

    Here’s local scribbler Paige Gross: Linode’s $900M acquisition by Akamai is a ‘game changer’

    A household name in the Philly tech scene … CEO Christopher Aker founded the company in 2003, and it’s been bootstrapped ever since, growing to about 250 employees. … Aker has owned 100% of Linode since he founded it.
    …
    Aker said the deal brings the company closer to solving evolving challenges “as cloud services become all-encompassing, including compute, storage, security and delivery from core to edge. … We’ve been talking about ‘alternative cloud’ — alternative to the big guy — and now we’ve sort of validated ourself in this market.”
    …
    The Old City company maintains “well over a million accounts” but has anywhere around 150,000 active users of its platform at any particular time. Linode’s HQ, the bank building at Third and Arch Streets, remains. … For clients and Linode employees, there won’t be too much noticeable change [Linode] says.


    Why does Akamai want Linode? Jonathan Greig asked the CEO:

    Akamai CEO Tom Leighton [explained] that Linode has great customer support and is already in 11 locations, which Akamai is going to “dramatically” expand. … Leighton also noted the September 2021 acquisition of Israel-based Guardicore, a cybersecurity company that offers a micro-segmentation solution to reduce the potential attack surface of corporate networks, secure applications, and meet compliance standards.
    …
    According to Leighton, the company is expecting the cloud compute category — which includes edge applications, its net storage business, and Linode — to reach “well over half a billion dollars in 2023. … We were pioneers in edge computing and now we’re taking a big step forward in cloud computing with Linode.”


    But here’s a worried-sounding zoid.com:

    Well good for them but I hope [Akamai] don’t screw it up. Linode is a great hosting company.


    2. Firefox isn’t OK

    Last week, a journalist innocently asked, “Is Firefox OK?” And people lost their minds.

    Analysis: No, not OK—it’s a big problem for DevOps and the web.

    We need Firefox and Gecko. A Chromium monoculture is bad for the web and bad for DevOps. (Before you ask: No, the existence of WebKit doesn’t change things, thanks to Apple’s ridiculous policies). Much as I tried to say something nice about Firefox last month, its market share is, frankly, pathetic.

    Matt Burgess: Is Firefox OK?

    In the two decades since Firefox launched from the shadows of Netscape … the browser has slid to less than 4 percent of the market—on mobile it’s a measly half a percent. … Its fate also has larger implications for the web as a whole.
    …
    Each year Google pays Mozilla hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties. … In its 2020 financial results … Mozilla listed its total revenue as $496 million. … The Google-Mozilla deal was last renewed in 2020 and is expected to expire in 2023. … Mozilla and Firefox acknowledge that for its long-term future it needs to diversify the ways it makes money.
    …
    Firefox still matters: … The browser market is dominated by Google’s Chromium codebase and its underlying browser engine, Blink. … Microsoft’s Edge Browser, Brave, Vivaldi, and Opera all use adapted versions of Chromium. Apple [has] its WebKit browser engine [but] other than that, Firefox’s Gecko browser engine is the only alternative.


    Firefox, how do we love thee? Let not_count_zero count the ways:

    I still use Firefox because:
    a) I remember Internet Explorer and the standards wars. …
    b) I don’t trust Google. …
    c) Most sites work well.
    …
    I do have questions though. … They’re currently getting around a half a billion‽ What are they doing with it? … This seems really off—really, really off.


    But heed a deeply worried Thom Holwerda:

    The decline and potential demise of Firefox is a massive problem that everybody seems to be kind of tiptoeing around—too afraid to acknowledge that if Firefox were indeed to disappear, we’d be royally screwed. We’d end up right back where we started 20 years ago, with Chrome being the new IE6.
    …
    The situation is especially dire for … Linux users, developers, and distribution makers. … Gnome Browser or KDE’s Falkon can barely be taken seriously, and … are based on Apple’s WebKit, which isn’t a great position to be in.


    3. Google’s Return to Work Plan Drops Vaccine Mandate

    Google is planning “celebrations” to welcome back employees after being fully remote. And in practice—unlike at IBM—this doesn’t mean a vaccine mandate.

    Analysis: Vocal minority wins—or do they?

    It was just three months ago that Google said it “firmly stands behind our vaccination policy.” What changed? It’s unlikely to have been due to a tiny minority of staff publishing a manifesto.

    Jennifer Elias: Google relaxes mandates

    The company will no longer require vaccination as a condition of employment … as it prepares to bring workers back to the office … at least three days a week for a “hybrid” work model. … The company [had previously] told employees that they must comply with vaccine policies or they’d face loss of pay and eventually loss of employment.
    …
    According to Google spokesperson Lora Lee Erickson … the company dropped the requirement … after removing the Jan. 18 deadline it had set for employees to either get vaccinated or get exemption approval. She declined to provide further details on the policy or the reasons for the reversal.
    …
    Google Real Estate and Workplace Services VP David Radcliffe [said Google] is preparing to begin its 30-day transition period to the hybrid work week if conditions continue to improve. He said his team is planning “celebrations” to welcome back employees. … Unvaccinated employees who are approved to enter offices will still need to follow additional protocols, including testing and wearing a mask.


    It’s too simplistic to say the anti-mandate brigade are also anti-vaxxers. For example, raxxorrax:

    I am vaccinated and HR knows this. … But if they officially demanded a certificate, I think I would have called it quits. Many people don’t have that option [but] there are consequences for such unreasonable demands.
    …
    I understand a mandate for vaccinations in certain occupations relating to health. It is something you have to personally accept if you want to work in the field.


    Although a few others are way over at the end of the bell curve. Greg Jinkerson:

    Don’t get excited, [Google is] still evil and stupid. … Now they’re backing down for some reason, [but] this is barely anything notable as far as a rollback of restrictions. [It] is not any kind of encouraging news.


    The Moral of the Story: Failure is the foundation of success—and the means by which it is achieved.


    You have been reading The Long View by Richi Jennings. You can contact him at @RiCHi or tlv@richi.uk.

    Image: Aleksey Kuprikov (via Unsplash; leveled and cropped)

  • How to Mitigate Software Supply Chain Risks

    How to Mitigate Software Supply Chain Risks

    As new vulnerabilities are discovered on a daily basis, DevOps teams must integrate security into the early stages of the development lifecycle and be vigilant about what elements are incorporated into their applications.

    The Log4J vulnerability has dominated the headlines since it was discovered in December and it continues to send shock waves through the industry. Any application that uses Log4J is subject to the identified family of attacks known as Log4Shell.

    Many tech companies have been impacted by the Log4J vulnerability and it has become a major concern for DevOps teams.

    On March 1, cybersecurity experts from Snyk will come together at Know Your Code: Open Source and Supply Chain Summit to discuss future strategies for maintaining security throughout your software supply chain and the security of open source packages.

    The experts will lead a live panel based on the learnings from the Log4Shell vulnerability and several real-world remediation approaches as well as other fixes outside of code. The panel features demos on container and IaC hacks and Java-based game hacks.

    The sessions explore the software supply chain as an attack vector, how developers are targeted as a vehicle for malware distribution, how immensely we depend on open-source maintainers to release timely security fixes and how the race to the cloud creates new security concerns for developers to cope with, as computing resources turn into infrastructure as code.

    Meet the Speakers

    • Mic McCully, field director at Snyk
    • Simon Maple, field CTO at Snyk
    • Micah Silverman, director of developer acceleration at Snyk

    Agenda

    • Welcome (11 a.m. to 11:05 a.m. ET)
    • Are We Forever Doomed By Software Supply Chain Risks? (11:05 a.m. to 12 p.m. ET)
    • Coffee Break (12 p.m. to 12:05 p.m. ET)
    • Log4Shell Live Hack: A Hands-on, Actionable Fix Guide (12:05 p.m. to 1 p.m. ET)
    • Break (1 p.m. to 1:05 p.m. ET)
    • Mitigating Risks in Software Supply Chain Security (1:05 p.m. to 2 p.m. ET)

    For more information and to register, please visit the Know Your Code: Open Source and Supply Chain Summit website.

  • Can Regulatory Mandates Secure Software Development?

    Can Regulatory Mandates Secure Software Development?

    Software companies have a long history of delivering incomplete and insecure products. This happens for a couple of reasons. Fast time-to-market has always been a business priority, taking precedence over security, especially as DevOps has become the norm in software development methodologies. And software, by nature, is easy to update and change, so some defects or oversights could be allowed to slide through with the thought that “We can always fix it later.”

    Unlike car manufacturers that put a premium on including safety features upfront (or face the heavy hand of regulators), software makers have typically emphasized speed to market as a way to stay competitive.

    But the other shoe often drops on that approach in the form of costly recalls, extensive patch programs, cybersecurity breaches, and other issues. The fix-it-later mentality in software has become increasingly challenging in recent years with the emergence of connected/IoT devices that are harder to keep current and have a greater impact. Connected closed-circuit surveillance cameras, for example, are frequently hunted and exploited on the internet to spy on people. Internet of things (IoT) devices operating at dams or nuclear power plants can now be hacked (as seen at the Bowman Avenue Dam in New York, or three utility companies in Ukraine hit by BlackEnergy malware). And, across the board, the cost of data breaches continues to rise.

    A White House executive order (EO) from 2021 is also putting pressure on software manufacturers, DevOps and DevSecOps professionals to improve quality, with a mandate for U.S. federal agencies to enforce secure software development through their contracts and acquisitions as part of efforts to secure the software supply chain. The core difference between this effort versus previous attempts such as FISMA, is the visibility into the software development process.

    The attention being paid to secure software development is a step in the right direction, but ultimately it’s still up to the industry rather than regulatory bodies, to change the mindset toward building secure software from the ground up.

    Technology is Faster Than Mandates

    The EO represents a shift in the landscape, mandating not just secure products, but secure development practices. Although it applies officially to federal civilian agencies and their contractors, federal regulations and other government mandates often become global standards, as has happened with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the EU’s privacy and security law.

    But regulatory mandates aren’t enough. They often move too slowly to be a real solution, especially in a software development environment that is moving steadily towards more agile, fast-paced environments where continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) is the norm. The timelines for new regulations typically require a two-year window for implementation; if a company already has an applicable product in use, it could be up to five years before they’re required to be in full compliance, such as in the payment industry. By that time, the key elements of the industry best practices have already changed. Simply put, technology moves too fast for regulatory bodies to keep up.

    What’s more, the regulations themselves could ultimately fall short if they are perceived to have a high cost burden of compliance. This is specifically true if the technology used in the software development life cycle can’t keep pace with the needs of compliance. In support of the EO, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released Draft Special Publication (SP) 800-218, and, as is routine, accepted open public comments. The feedback from industry consortiums in these situations often includes considerations about the costs of implementing new regulations and can sometimes lead to softening of some aspects, arguing, for example, that the new regulations put an unfair burden on small and mid-sized companies. The final set of regulations can sometimes leave the door open for ways to address compliance without addressing the issues that led to the regulation in the first place.

    For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) is widely hailed as the nation’s strictest set of privacy protections, yet it still has its weaknesses. The most commonly cited weakness is that the law makes it extremely difficult for consumers to take advantage of the new regulations when they feel they have been wronged.

    Industry Must Make it Happen

    Ultimately, it is up to software manufacturers and the industry to improve the security of their software. They should adopt best practices to build secure procedures into the design, development, testing and validation of new software, as well as its deployment and use. NIST’s Secure Software Development Framework is one example of guidance, being drawn from recommendations from groups like BSA, OWASP, and SAFECode. Industry groups, such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), could adopt standards for development and certification similar to the universally accepted UL standards for electrical products.

    The rising demand for secure development requires a substantial shift in attitudes toward how software is made. A lot of these things can be more easily implemented if organizations invest in the adaptation of new technologies faster.

    The threat landscape has become too sophisticated and pernicious for the problem of insecure software to be ignored. Fix-it-later is no longer a valid option if organizations want to protect their networks and, especially, their data, which has become the lifeblood of operations in every sector. While regulatory mandates help, the job ultimately falls to the software industry itself and its consortium of like-minded people bridging the gap between developers and DevOps teams of competing companies to ultimately deliver what’s best for the consumers.

  • How to Seamlessly Transition to DevSecOps

    How to Seamlessly Transition to DevSecOps

    In the last few months, the cybersecurity world has been taken by storm following the discovery of the Log4Shell vulnerability. The zero-day had the potential to put much of the connected world at risk and left security teams scrambling to quickly apply security patches to software just before Christmas 2021.

    As a result of the chaos caused by Log4Shell, many organizations kicked off the new year by carrying out security assessments to identify ways to improve detection and mitigation of future vulnerabilities. One approach that is gaining a lot of attention is DevSecOps.

    DevSecOps introduces and automates security in the earlier phases of the software development life cycle rather than bolting it on at the end. The approach saves money, saves time on tedious manual tasks, helps organizations meet regulatory compliance requirements and significantly reduces the risk of critical security bugs being found after an application’s final build.

    However, when it comes to kicking off DevSecOps projects, there are a few challenges application security teams need to overcome first to ensure their programs fit seamlessly into CI/CD pipelines.

    DevSecOps Isn’t Simple

    While moving to DevSecOps delivers organizations clear benefits in the way of security, one of the key concerns for business leaders is that it slows down the delivery pipeline of software and applications. Today, being an agile software delivery machine is essential and a critical part of an organization’s survival, so no business leader wants to put development velocity at risk because of security testing.

    Application security teams are tasked with ensuring DevSecOps fits seamlessly into software and application delivery, without causing delays or adding more pressure onto already over-stretched DevOps teams. As a result, they need to identify which tools are needed for security testing and integrate them into development stages seamlessly as well as which ones can be automated and which can scale to meet the demands of CI/CD pipelines.

    The great news for application security teams is there are hundreds of security tools available; the bad news is choosing which to use and learning how to use them is a minefield, even for those with the right training and know-how.

    A DevSecOps automation program needs lots of technical aspects to come together to make it work. Security teams need static analysis tools to check the code, third-party library analysis to check the dependencies, separate analysis to check the infrastructure-as-code configuration, scanners to check the containers for issues, tools to test the running system, cloud security checks and infrastructure testing for patches and ports. They also need to match these tools up to the right technology each team is using and keep up with the constant changes.

    So, what are the most important features that application security teams should look for in DevSecOps security testing tools?

    Tips for Approaching DevSecOps

    Security teams need a way to manage their security tools so that tedious tasks are removed but collaboration with development teams is streamlined. They need a platform that handles the automation process, flags only the issues they want to flag and presents them in a way that is accessible to everyone, from execs to board members to developers.

    You’re Going to Need a lot of Security Tools

    We commonly see teams using 10+ tools to cover the needed checks, so be prepared to chain together multiple security tools. Some to check each source code language the development teams are using, more to check your containers, cloud setup and dynamic testing against the staging system, etc. 

    Tip: Be prepared to do some up-front analysis to establish which security tools are going to make up your DevSecOps initiative.

    Think of the Day-to-Day ‘Security-as-a-Service’

    How are you, or your teams, going to work with the security tools? Is someone going to check the output of 10 tools in every build? Are they going to compare each set of issues against the last to see what’s new? How will they handle the open source tools that don’t track false positives? This is a major part of the DevSecOps process, and a very common place where we see processes fail—if the automation of the tools leads to awkward handling of vulnerabilities, it’s doomed.

    Tip: Have tools send their vulnerabilities to a centralized store for ease of use.  

    Tip: Track the difference between runs so it’s easy to see new and high-risk issues.  

    Tip: Think of how developers and security teams can more easily collaborate on issues.  

    Tip: Think of how false positives, duplicates or non-issues can be handled and tracked so developers are not flooded with the same issues over and over again.

    Be Flexible With Your Security Tools

    No matter how you intend to integrate security tools, know that different teams are going to need different tools. Some will use Docker, for example, others won’t. Often, different development teams end up working in different coding languages, which means there will also be different security tools required to scan. Some teams will be up and running with DevOps, others won’t be there. Keeping security testing consistent and repeatable is difficult.

    Tip: Whatever DevSecOps platform you use or build, make sure you can slot in the right tools for the right job. If you’re too rigid, you’ll waste time running tools and dealing with nonsense issues and no one will want to play with you.

    Work With the Existing SDLC Environment

    If your teams use Jira to track development tickets, for example, work with that and have new issues entered and tracked there. If they use five different DevOps pipeline platforms, be prepared to integrate and work with each of them. If you have metrics for security, know how you’re going to track changes per repo, project, team, division, etc. for each pipeline run and all the various categories of tools.

    Tip: Run your DevSecOps implementations where your development teams are, work with their systems and make security an easy extension of their existing workflows.  

    Tip: Be able to track historical metrics across categories of issues and tools, so you can show what good progress you’ve made, and where your security investments are (and are not) working.

  • Merging Secrets Management and Configuration

    Merging Secrets Management and Configuration

    Fresh from picking up $5.25 million in funding, CloudTruth CEO Greg Arnette talks with Mike Vizard on this episode of the View With Vizard about why configuration and secrets management need to converge. The video is below, followed by a transcript of the conversation.

    Announcer: This is Digital Anarchist.

    Mike Vizard: Thanks for the throw. We’re here with Greg Arnette, who’s the CEO for CloudTruth, they just raised $5.25 million to help us with these configuration issues that seem to plague us. Greg, welcome to the show.

    Greg Arnette: Thank you. It’s great to be here, and thanks for the opportunity to tell your audience about CloudTruth.

    Mike Vizard: So, what is the configuration problem, and why does it not seem to wanna go away? It’s been around for a while, things appear to be getting worse, and what’s to be done about it?

    Greg Arnette: Exactly. So, that ties into the history of founding this company. Both myself and my Co-founder were prior CTOs and DevOps leaders for several cloud-based SaaS companies, and we saw that our DevOps teams were continuing to build internal tools to address issues around configuration sprawl and complexity. And these tools tend to be the weak links in terms of solid deployments, good up time, good security, and basically, slows teams down.

    So, the history of kind configuration sprawl and what we see as the challenges is sort of driven by a number of macro trends—first, the fast rise of Kubernetes; everyone wants to get on the Kubernetes bandwagon. That introduces new complexities around configuration management, new sets of tools that haven’t been sort of well adopted inside of DevOps shops. Another trend is the breakup of monoliths to microservices adds lots of new dimensions on configuration complexity. And then there are the traditional needs around provisioning infrastructure, configuring your apps, and managing secrets are the sort of legacy challenges around configuration management. And as the cloud gets more mature and with more capabilities, configuration is not getting easier, but getting more difficult.

    So, CloudTruth is here to address those concerns. We heard, during our product market fit research where I interviewed over 500 cloud and DevOps leaders on their challenges managing configuration, that this over reliance upon tribal knowledge in terms of how a system is configured and why it’s configured a certain way is just held in key team members’ heads, and that’s not a very durable strategy for going forward or for on boarding new folks. So, there’s an element of CloudTruth that provides collaboration and sharing around configuration settings and context to help reduce that need of, or that sort of burden of the cognitive load to keep track of how are things configured, where is the data, how can I change it, what changed recently—that type of thing.

    Mike Vizard: You guys also acquired a company in this process in the secrets management space, so where does configuration and secrets management converge and how do we think about that?

    Greg Arnette: That’s a great question. So, we acquired Tuono, we’re thrilled to bring in the Tuono team, including Jesse St. Laurent, who was the CTO, who joins us as our Chief Product Officer. Jim King, Mike Healey, Mike Stack all joined us, they were the founding engineers at Tuono.

    And what we did was, we took the Tuono secret management engine, which was cloud native and we’ve now included that in the CloudTruth platform which rounds out our offering. So, CloudTruth, while it is also a configuration data hub to synchronize your configuration settings from all these multiple tools is also itself a parameter store and secret store that customers can use if they don’t already have existing parameter stores or secret stores in their environment.

    Mike Vizard: And in that context, what does cloud native mean? Because some will people say, you know, it runs in the cloud; other people will say that it only runs on Kubernetes, it’s optimized for microservices and containers. Or is there some middle ground there and what do we think about cloud native—what context are we using that phrase?

    Greg Arnette: Yeah, when we use cloud native, we mean or refer to the capabilities that are provided as part of core services at Amazon, Azure, and Google. So, an example is, Amazon themselves provide a parameter store, they call it AWS Parameter Store. Google and Azure provide the same kind of internal capabilities. Customers can also bring their own parameter store, like run something like Console on top of the cloud or using Vault sometimes as a general-purpose parameter store.

    So, the cloud native offerings like AWS Parameter Store, Secret Manager, and the equivalent on the other clouds are things that customers can use, they have different price points. We provide a layer of management and visibility and observability to all that config data stored inside of all these different systems.

    Mike Vizard: And when you talk about unifying configuration, are we replacing Terraform and CloudFormation, or are we just finding some way to layer some form of abstraction around them that makes the whole process easier to manage? Walk me through that a little bit.

    Greg Arnette: Yeah, you know, we’re not replacing Terraform or CloudFormation. We’re designed to coexist with the customers’ existing investments and their configuration tooling. So, whether it’s provisioning tools like Terraform, CloudFormation, Pulumi, or app config tools like Ansible, Puppet, Chef, Saltstack, or secret tools like Vault or the cloud native versions of those capabilities. We coexist and become a metadata wrapper around those different tools.

    Now, if customers don’t have some of those capabilities, we have functionality in our platform that can fill the gap, but more and more customers already have these systems in place. They’re not looking to rip everything out and replace it, but they’re looking to address these issues around configuration sprawl that leads to a misconfiguration causing unplanned down time or a security incident.

    Mike Vizard: We have been talking about DevOps and DevSecOps forever, and the idea has always been that we’re shifting more responsibility for the IT environment to the left of the developer. Sometimes they like that, sometimes they don’t.

    But I wonder, are we not approaching some sort of concern or maybe a backlash where folks are saying, “Hey, you know what? This isn’t really working. We have all this misconfiguration out there, we’re maybe running faster, but things are less secure, and we have more risk than ever.” So, is there a balance to be struck, or what’s your sense of where are we on this journey?

    Greg Arnette: That’s a very interesting question. This is something that we hear all the time in our outreach to our customer audience is what their journey looks like for adopting shift left or GitOps types of operating principles. We’ve seen a number of patterns emerge over our hundreds of interviews. Specifically, most teams do want to give developers more capabilities to do things themselves and reduce that burden on the Ops team, but they still want Ops or DevOps teams to have the overall sort of judgment and enforce the guardrails that were put in place by the security and compliance teams and by the other teams that are sort of deciding what are the best practices.

    So, with CloudTruth, we’re kinda serving both audiences in a purposeful way. You have centralized control and visibility that DevOps wants. They wanna build and enforce lockdowns, enforce default settings that can only be overridden with a permission or an override that’s allowed as part of a workflow. But you also provide capabilities for core developers to manage the config for their own environments and to suggest configuration changes that then can be adopted more system wide.

    So, we’re serving that duality that exists today. We’re gonna let the customer decide on where they ultimately land about developing shift left principles and moving that direction. But we see a lot of interest in that, and it helps to reduce that—you know, again, that cognitive load and that context switching on the DevOps professionals. Because so many times, they’re being bothered by other folks and other developer teams, like, “What’s the setting for this Redis cluster? Why is our Mongo configured this way? How do I tune my elastic search test cluster to match production?”

    That information will all be self-serviceable and findable inside the CloudTruth platform. And our role based access control permissioning system allows view only, read only, read/write access to the appropriate areas, and then DevOps teams can sort of wall off the production systems from other people having chances of changing those settings.

    Mike Vizard: Mm-hmm. What is the role of the security team as we go forward? It feels like, if we shift everything left to the developers, what are those guys doing?

    Greg Arnette: They still need to be involved in terms of ensuring that no bad information gets in and no good information gets out. So, we provide a number of views into configuration data that are helpful to security teams. First is, what changed most recently in terms of your compliance management reports for SOC 2 and other requirements and keeping track of changes. That’s really hard in a dynamic environment, especially cloud-based where you have microservices firing left and right, coming up and down. The old traditional CMDBs that were popular in the on prem world don’t really fit well in the new way that we’re using the cloud.

    And so, CloudTruth is a self-documenting change management control system that is, behind the scenes, keeping track of all the version settings of every configuration value that we’re monitoring, and then we provide views into that data that can be consumed by the security or compliance teams to get better insights for their needs without having to bother the DevOps teams.

    Mike Vizard: Do you feel like the bad people, otherwise known as cyber criminals, are getting better at scanning for misconfigurations and looking for these vulnerabilities to exploit? And we hear a lot about software supply chains these days—it seems like, in a lot of cases, the root cause of the problem is just misconfigurations.

    Greg Arnette: It’s true. We’ve found, in our own research, that 75 percent of unplanned down time or security incident was caused by a misconfiguration when you ultimately read the root cause analysis and do all the internal tracing.

    So, what we wanna provide are the best practices as early as possible in the software development life cycle process to implement good config hygiene. And then secondary to that is, once config is out there in the wild, provide monitoring and insight into how it could affect security vulnerabilities or security posture. Since everything these days is defined as infrastructure as code, it’s all about analyzing all the different locations where config values are stored, making sure those are secure and locked down, and then being able to use any kind of pattern recognition to understand where certain areas can be vulnerable to being taken advantage of by the nefarious factors out there in the world.

    Mike Vizard: Do you think we’ll get to the point where we can use automation to kinda get ourselves out of this mess? We have APIs and CLIs and everything else that’s out there—shouldn’t we, at some point, have enough intelligence in the work flows to say, “Hey, this thing you’re about to deploy is misconfigured, so don’t do it”?

    Greg Arnette: That’s part of our goals down the road is, we have a very thoughtful strategy how we wanna launch CloudTruth as a full configuration data management platform. So, the first goal is to get inserted into a company’s work flows where we have access to the data and can provide value with reports and work flows. The second goal is then, once we’re now managing this data on behalf of the customer, to apply AI and ML, looking for patterns, recommending optimizations, best practices, vetting what we see from a customer perspective against best practices being published by other standards bodies that are looking at this from different perspectives.

    One goal of CloudTruth is to be that configuration data layer management system that we think most companies using the cloud need these days.

    Mike Vizard: We also hear a lot about artificial intelligence—will that get applied to this space? Is there any scenario where we’ll just have a bunch of machine learning algorithms running around, figuring out what’s going on?

    Greg Arnette: We firmly believe that that is definitely gonna be happening a few years down the road. I think the maturity model is just getting started. The first act in getting that up and running is getting access to the data for trending the models and analyzing the trending results, optimizing the model. So, a full observe-orientate-decide-act OODA loop is involved here in terms of making sure those models are accurate, but we think that’s gonna be a big benefit in what we can provide down the road.

    Mike Vizard: So, what’s your best advice to folks? What should they be focusing on today to get to that nirvana tomorrow? Is there same way I should be organized, is there some way I should be talking to my developers? What do you think?

    Greg Arnette: There’s a couple themes that come to mind. The first is—which sounds almost obvious these days—is make sure you are able to do infrastructure as code ideas at all levels that you can, and that’s tied into automation. So, it’s a big portion to continuous deployment, CI/CD pipelines. Once you start the development of those types of workflows that accelerate getting what developers are creating out in front of the customers, whether it’s an internal app or external SaaS or mobile app, accelerating that team velocity is really a key element in terms of making that possible.

    The other area is this notion that you wanna implement systems that reduce the amount of copy and paste. So, that’s what we call the Do Not Repeat Yourself, the DRY approach to infrastructure as code management. So, that’s a key theme behind CloudTruth is, we provide capabilities that let you manage your multiple environments with the faults, inheritances, and overrides from a centralized capability, but still allow flexibility in your environment tree to manage certain sub-environments in different ways as needed.

    So, different developers can have their own custom environment, but they’re gonna inherit default values that are sanctioned by the architecture team or the security team. And then the overrides have to be allowed by a permission basis.

    So, there’s a couple sort of themes that are coming together as we go through 2021 around automation, infrastructure as code, shift left, and the DRY approach to managing input values to all the IAC tools.

    Mike Vizard: Hey, Greg, thanks for being on the show.

    Greg Arnette: Thank you very much. Have a great day.

    Mike Vizard: Alright, awesome. Hey, guys, we learned a lot about security there and things we didn’t know and—hey, there’s hope for the future. Back to you guys in the studio.

    [End of Audio]