Tag: nick galbreath

  • DevOps: The Last Great Hope for Application Security?

    DevOps: The Last Great Hope for Application Security?

    Once upon a time, there was a great battle between speed and security.  Development wanted to go fast.  But, Security wanted to slow down and be safe.

    “We must protect our gilded apps”, cried the application security team.

    “Speed is cherished by our people”, declared the development team.

    For years, they endured the pain of testing late in the lifecycle, sorting through reams of false positive reports, and dealing with the added cost of pushing bad software out the door.  They knew there had to be a better way…

    And then came, The DevOps Revolution.  The DevOps team had an answer.  “Let’s bring Application Security and Development closer together — and shift its focus further to the left”.  The DevOps team knew that by introducing awareness of security vulnerabilities and policies early in and across the software development lifecycle — without creating a time-consuming tax on development — that both teams could win.

    During an evening event named “Wining Not Whining” at the RSA Conference 2014, we gathered some of the top DevOps experts and influencers and asked them “Why is application security so important to the DevOps revolution?”

    Listen to what they had to say:

  • DevOps Is For Horses: Stop Making Excuses For Starting

    DevOps Is For Horses: Stop Making Excuses For Starting

    While DevOps practices may be spreading throughout organizations both large and small, often times the most visible success stories are also the most exceptional. Organizations like Netflix, Etsy and Google are brought up in conversations about DevOps time and again because they offer the most stark examples of the benefits that the model can bring to businesses. But the scale of their operations can often be intimidating to the everyday IT person.

    “People will tell me, ‘Well, these are unicorns—special companies. We’re not like that. What works there will not work here,’” says Jez Humble, a principal for the consultancy ThoughtWorks and co-author of Continuous Delivery: Reliable Software Releases through Build, Test, and Deployment Automation. “I think that’s a fallacy.”

    According to Humble, two phrases that he hates the most as excuses for not adopting DevOps or continuous delivery principles are ‘That can’t work here,’ and ‘But we’ve always done it that way!’ He’s one of a growing contingent of DevOps pundits who argue that it is plenty possible for even the most run-of-the-mill organizations to engage in DevOps.

    “DevOps is also for horses,” says Gene Kim, author of The Phoenix Project. “In fact, every unicorn was once a horse. Amazon in 2001, Google in 2004, Twitter in 2009 and LinkedIn in 2010—they all had huge monolithic code bases and inconsistent deploys.”

    Humble agrees that these so-called unicorns “have the same problems as everyone else.” But no matter how remarkable the scale of their solutions to those problems, other organizations should be able to learn at least one very valuable lesson from their case studies.

    “The critical piece is they’re always working to improve what they do, and that’s something that works everywhere,” Humble says.

    That’s Nick Galbreath’s philosophy. As the former director of engineering at Etsy, Galbreath saw first hand the transformation that the organization was able to make using DevOps patterns. He’ll assure any organization that it didn’t all happen in a day. Which is why when people ask ‘How do you get started with DevOps?’ his answer is simply to start.

    “If you have a sympathetic management ear, ask ‘Why don’t we try to cut deployment time in half?’” says Galbreath, who is now the vice president of engineering at IPONWEB philosophy. “Because the other way is to say ‘Deployment time takes too long, let’s do half as many.’ Wrong direction.”

    Setting up a goal like cutting deployment times in half will get an organization streamlining and weeding out junk processes. It’ll also have the team working to move those processes from inside a select few peoples’ heads and into things like a batch script or even just a simple document so that they’re easily repeatable across the team and that more can be done in parallel.

    “Cutting that work that adds no value in half, you’re really going to empower your group and your team to come up with innovative solutions,” he says.

    In a similar vein, DevOps for normal folks could also be chunked up incrementally on a project-by-project basis or automation tool-by-automation tool basis, says Josh Corman, CTO of Sonatype.

    “You don’t have to do an enterprise-wide shift hard left to DevOps,” he says. “You can do it in little projects or little small automations that free up time so you can achieve more competence.”

    In addition to incrementalism, Humble suggests providing a leadership environment that encourages taking chances and learning from mistakes.

    “Create safe situations so that when people make mistakes we can actually learn from them rather than engage in finger pointing,” he says.

  • Busting The 4 Biggest DevOps Security Myths

    Busting The 4 Biggest DevOps Security Myths

    Last month when the IT security world convened in San Francisco for the annual RSA confab, a number of security experts tackled DevOps in talks that covered the crossover between continuous improvement and risk management. Among them was a lively panel mythbusting some of the most prevalent misconceptions about DevOps held by the security community.

    Moderated by Dwayne Melancon of Tripwire, the panel was made up of Josh Corman, CTO of Sonatype, Nick Galbreath, vice president of engineering at IPONWEB, Gene Kim, author of The Phoenix Project, and David Mortman chief security architect and distinguished engineer for Dell Enstratius, all of them security professionals and very active DevOps evangelists. The banter backed-and-forthed between the participants, with four myths bubbling to the surface as particular highlights from the discussion.

    Myth #1: DevOps Pace Will Leave Security In The Dust

    One of the most prevalent myths about DevOps within the security community is that the rapid deploys of the approach will throw all risk management precautions to the wind and leave security practices behind as a result. Quite the contrary, panelists argued. They believe that DevOps patterns make it more possible than ever to bake security practices into IT processes more than before, when it is frequently bolted on “at the end of the caboose,” as Galbreath puts it.

    “You’re not throwing out your current security system,” he said. “What you’re doing is removing a lot of the junk work that eats up so much time and keeps people underwater. You’re really enabling different teams to all improve security together.”

    As Corman explained, security people say all the time that complexity is the enemy of security.

    “It also happens to be the enemy of stability,” he said. “That is the reason DevOps people come willingly with open arms to the security community.”

    Not to mention, Kim added, “because you can’t be highly available and have stuff coming continuously through the pipeline if it is not secure.

    Myth #2: DevOps Destroys Compliance And Control Frameworks

    This myth came up during the audience Q&A portion of the panel, where one audience member from the financial industry wondered at how possible it would be to institute DevOps in a highly regulated industry. According to Mortman, as seemingly chaotic and fast-and-furious as the DevOps pace can seem to the uninitiated, it is actually far more process-oriented than people realize.

    “People say ‘Oh, there’s no process to this.’ But it is actually very process oriented,” he said. “It’s just not very bureaucracy-oriented. There’s not a lot of paperwork. In its very guts, it is very service-oriented and very delivery-oriented.”

    As he puts it, every compliance framework in the planet says you need to log, audit and approve changes. But none of them stipulate a workflow where each change has to be approved one at a time.

    “The workflow can be ‘Please approve the following list of actions that I can do without notifying you first,’” he explained, “and as long as you have an audit trail showing that that has been done properly, I have yet to meet an auditor who will not buy into that.”

    Myth #3: DevOps Gives Developers Too Much Power

    Many dyed-in-the-wool security pros fear DevOps because they believe it is a cowboy environment that gives developers too much power.

    “I’ll be honest, when i first started observing DevOps patterns, developers doing their own deploys seemed immoral to me; irresponsible, reckless, just shouldn’t be done,” Kim said. “No sane person would want to be associated with that, right?”

    The thing was, after Kim dove in and also did a benchmark study with Tripwire several years ago across 4,000 organizations, he found that when comparing groups where ops did the deploys to those where developers shepherded code through deploys, change success rates and mean time to repair were not adversely affected, and in fact, “it is often considered indispensible that developers take code all the way through the deployment pipeline and you know they are getting great outcomes.”

    And from a security controls perspective, the truth is that in a DevOps situation developers “are not logging individually into each server and SSH’ing the code up, untarring it and installing it,” Mortman said. Instead these actions are being done by automated systems.

    “They’re actually going to give you much better timestamps, much more accuracy, and more consistent results and visibility than a manual process being done by someone in ops,” Mortman said. “So, actually, you’re getting better change management out of that system than you are in other situations.”

    Myth #4: DevOps Cuts Important Testing

    One discussion point also brought up during audience Q&A was the possibility that DevOps would somehow excise important testing functionality from the IT process. The panel quickly put that one to bed.

    “You can do bad testing in any model,” Corman said. “If DevOps starts eliminating any kind of testing, its a bad DevOps program. I think that’s orthogonal to some of the benefits or opportunities of DevOps.”

    Kim pointed to Google as an example of how testing fits into the DevOps methodology.

    “So, Google does about 5,500 code commits per day, they have about 15,000 software engineers, and 75 million hours of testing is run each day,” he said. “You can’t get that massive amount of deployment frequencies without a tremendous amount of testing.”