Category: Blogs

  • Secure Code Warrior Defines Security Rules for AI Coding

    Secure Code Warrior Defines Security Rules for AI Coding

    Secure Code Warrior has made available a set of security rules for application developers using artificial intelligence (AI) tools to generate code.

    Company CTO Matias Madou said the AI Security Rules made available on GitHub are intended to encourage developers to review code generated by AI for security issues that these tools may inadvertently introduce. Most AI tools were trained using samples of code that were randomly collected from across the web. As such, they can introduce vulnerabilities simply because they were trained using code that contains similar flaws, noted Madou.

    Additionally, the AI Security Rules encourage developers to establish guardrails that steer AI away from risky patterns and common security missteps, such as insecure authentication flows or failure to use parameterized queries.

    Previously, Secure Code Warrior has made available AI security training courses for application developers that Madou said will continue to be expanded.

    In general, AI coding tools have, from a cybersecurity perspective, plusses and minuses. AI coding tools are, for example, unlikely to introduce a SQL Injection vulnerability. In fact, there may come a day when this particular vulnerability is completely eliminated as AI coding tools become more widely used, noted Madou. However, AI coding tools also introduce other potential security concerns, including hallucinations.

    It’s not clear to what degree developers are relying on AI tools to generate code, but a recent Futurum Group survey finds that 41% of respondents expect generative AI tools and platforms will be used to generate, review and test code.

    Additionally, The Futurum Group finds organizations are exploring multiple paths to employing artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities across the software development lifecycle (SDLC). Over the next 12 to 18 months organizations plan to increase spending on not only AI code generation (83%) and agentic AI technologies (76%), but also existing familiar tools that have been augmented with AI.

    In effect, there is now a battle underway between incumbent providers of tools and startup rivals for the hearts and minds of software engineers.

    Regardless of how code is written, an application developer remains accountable for its quality. The challenge is that over time there is often a tendency to trust the output of an AI coding tool too much. Inevitably, the code generated might not only contain vulnerabilities but might also be deeply flawed in ways that might prevent an application from running at all. Just as challenging, AI coding tools might not be of much help when updating existing application environments simply because they might not have enough context to generate code that will work, noted Madou.

    On the other hand, there are many developers that only have a rudimentary appreciation for security issues. AI coding tools in those instances can significantly improve the quality of the code that might otherwise have been created by an application developer.

    There is, of course, no going back. AI coding tools are here to stay. The real issue is putting the guardrails in place that minimize any security vulnerabilities or other types of flaws that might compromise the security of an application.

  • Chronosphere Streamlines Management of Log Data to Reduce Costs

    Chronosphere Streamlines Management of Log Data to Reduce Costs

    Chronosphere today added additional capabilities to its log management platform that enable DevOps teams to both reduce costs and surface more actionable insights.

    Alok Bhide, head of product innovation for Chronosphere, said Chronosphere Logs 2.0 provides DevOps teams with more granular control over how log data is collected and stored. The overall goal is to make it simpler for DevOps teams to not only leverage analytics to identify which log data is actually being used but also more easily correlate it with metrics, events and traces, he added.

    Additionally, Chronosphere has added a Logs Quotas tool that enables DevOps teams to enforce budget restrictions on individual teams all the way down to specific datasets.

    Most DevOps teams are already being overwhelmed by the amount of telemetry data being collected, an issue that will only become more challenging to manage as more cloud-native and artificial intelligence (AI) applications are deployed in production environments.

    There is, of course, no shortage of observability platforms, but as IT environments become more complex, the need for tools that go well beyond simple monitoring of pre-defined metrics to troubleshoot applications has become a lot more pressing. The challenge is observability platforms collect data at levels of scale that from a cost perspective quickly add up. As a result, managing telemetry data has become a significant challenge. Unfortunately, most DevOps teams are not going to be able to hire someone to optimally manage the flow telemetry data. Instead, that needs to be a core capability of the observability platform.

    Less clear in the longer term is to what degree observability will become a task assigned to an artificial intelligence (AI) agent rather than a DevOps engineer. There is no doubt DevOps engineers will need to review the findings of an AI agent that has investigated an incident, but much of the tedious effort required to sort through metric, events, logs and traces should become increasingly automated. Each DevOps engineering team will then need to decide how comfortable they are allowing another set of AI agents to automatically remediate issues as they are uncovered, noted Bhide.

    In the meantime, organizations have never been more dependent on software than they are today, but even as the number of applications being deployed increases, the size of the DevOps teams tasked with maintaining them continues to remain relatively stagnant. In fact, in an AI era where more applications are expected to be deployed in the next few years than the entire last decade, supporting all those applications will require an ability to investigate and, if necessary, remediate anomalies within minutes of being discovered. Legacy monitoring tools were never intended to provide forensics insights in near real time.

    Of course, convincing business leaders to invest in observability platforms can be a challenge. DevOps teams need to be certain that the cost of storing massive amounts of telemetry does not outweigh the benefits. After all, no matter how many issues an observability prevents, someone in the finance team will still be closely monitoring the cost of a platform that over time only continues to grow.