Downloaded 30 times
Uploaded byAdrian Sanabria
Security and DevOps Overview
This document discusses DevSecOps and the changing role of security in IT. It notes that IT is changing fast due to factors like cloud, DevOps, and agile methodologies while attackers are also adapting quickly. However, security tools and processes are often slow to change. The document explores what DevOps is and where security fits within modern IT approaches. It argues that security practitioners must adapt and change how they work, moving from standalone roles to being integrated within development and operations teams in order to keep up with the pace of change and help ensure security is built into systems from the start.
More Related Content
Similar to Security and DevOps Overview
More from Adrian Sanabria
![Governance, Deployment & Methodologies for Agentic Automation [2/3]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/agenticcommunityseries-day2-251112135038-a386476d-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Security and DevOps Overview
- 1. SecDevOps DevSecOps DevOps Which is it? Andwhat is DevOps? And where does security fit?
- 2. In case youdidn’t already know...
- 3. Why are wehere? • IT is changing fast. Attackers are changing fast. Defenders don’t. • Security tools must change • Security processes must change • Security practitioners must change
- 4. What is DevOps? (Noreally – what is it? Discuss.)
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8. Words: what dothey mean? • ‘Full stack’ • Automation Engineer • DevOps Engineer • Agile • Waterfall • Lean • Cloud • DevOps
- 10.
- 11. There is anew IT: what is it? 11 Agile/Lean Business Cloud DevOps people and processestools and products results
- 12. Welcome to thenew IT: key trends Speed 10x faster to prod Agility Integration Automation Developers Convenience Resilience Going faster requires better safety Success Project success increases by 14%-28% 12 NOTE: Success metrics from 2013 Ambysoft and 2015 Chaos Manifesto survey data, comparing projects using Waterfall vs Agile. Agile project success improvements increase with project size.
- 13.
- 14.
- 16.
- 17.
- 18.
- 19. The New Practitioner •Influence design, architecture standards, processes • Automate tasks • Forensics • Security assessments • Identify gaps and recommend fixes • API integration • Data science • Routing, load balancing, nw protocols The Traditional Practitioner • Monitoring security alerts • Manage network security • Manage endpoint security • IR/Forensics • Pentesting • Vulnerability Scanning • Policies/Standards • Compliance/Regs • Log management • DR/BCP and SecAware The Security Practitioner: old versus new
- 20. The New Practitioner •Influence design, architecture standards, processes • Automate tasks (code) • Forensics • Security assessments • Identify gaps and recommend fixes (code) • API integration (code) • Data science (code) • Routing, load balancing, network protocols The Traditional Practitioner • Monitoring security alerts • Manage network security • Manage endpoint security • IR/Forensics • Pentesting • Vulnerability Scanning • Policies/Standards • Compliance/Regs • Log management • DR/BCP and SecAware The Security Practitioner: old versus new
- 22. Understanding security’s roleby understanding IT Traditional approach to security: • Security is always a secondary or enabling layer • Security must have direct knowledge and experience with the underlying layer in order to be effective at protecting it or recommending feasible solutions • Direct experience in core technical disciplines goes a long way in earning respect and cooperation Physical Security OS Layer Network Layer Service Desk Dev, QA, Test Web/App Layer Ops
- 23. Understanding security’s roleby understanding IT Issues with the traditional approach: • Few security teams can ever be ‘well-rounded’ enough • Security team isn’t qualified to advise much of IT • Adversarial/dysfunctional relationships common • IT changes often; attackers adapt quickly • Defenders and security tools adapt slowly Physical Security OS Layer Network Layer Service Desk Dev, QA, Test Web/App Layer Ops
- 24. Security Security’s changing role Anexample: going ‘cloud-first’ • Lower-level IT layers are outsourced • Most security practitioner knowledge lies in these layers • Infrastructure-heavy security skillsets lose value • Concept of bi-modal IT further confuses things • As IT changes, so must security Physical Security OS Layer Network Layer Service Desk Dev, QA, Test Web/App Layer Ops
- 25. Security’s changing role Cloudand DevOps – an opportunity to redesign security: • Smaller ‘well-rounded’ groups • Dev, ops, infrastructure and security roles are shared • Everyone working towards a clear, common goal • Relationship between security and developers is crucial • Security can’t impact delivery schedule Physical OS Layer Network Layer Service Desk Dev, QA, Test; Web/App Layer; Ops Security
- 26. Questions What should security’sfuture role be? • Security is redistributed into IT for all operational tasks • Dedicated security staff performs • high-level design, design/architectural input • monitor changes in risk/attackers/landscape • instruct/consult individual SMEs as needed Physical OS Layer Network Layer Service Desk Dev, QA, Test; Web/App Layer; Ops Security SME Internal Security Team Security SME Security SME Security SME
- 27. New rule: ifyou own it, own it “Whomever is responsible for an asset – be it data, infrastructure, code, or people – must secure it”
- 28. Why make assetowners responsible? • No one knows and understands the opportunities, constraints and dependencies of the asset better • Security becomes a bottleneck for performance, progress and often, even security • Little to no time wasted on remediation conflict: what to fix, how to fix it, when and at what priority level • Likely that fewer security issues will occur* • Drives the cost of securing systems down, in terms of labor, efficiency and efficacy** * I’ll explain later ** I’ll explain after that
- 29. Better Testing, WorseQuality? Study done in 2000 by Elizabeth Hendrickson Reads like a short version of the Phoenix Project
- 30. Better Testing, WorseQuality? Study done in 2000 by Elizabeth Hendrickson • Creating an independent testing group can encourage counterproductive culture • “Don’t do today what you can push off onto someone else’s plate” • Document and address low hanging fruit • Schedule time for developers to test and fix bugs • To improve code quality, stop the problem at the source • Everyone should understand what they’re building and why • Get testers involved earlier in the process • Bottleneck testing resources and developers are forced to ship higher quality code http://testobsessed.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/btwq.pdf
- 31. Better Testing, WorseQuality? Study done in 2000 by Elizabeth Hendrickson • Could this apply to InfoSec? • Surely not. • In fact, it might be quite worse. • We’ve convinced everyone not just that security is our job, but that we’re the only ones that can do it properly. • What if they believed us?
Editor's Notes
- #8 Just read the tweet.
- #12 DevOps is a combination of culture, processes and principles. This is the most challenging aspect of what we’re talking about today, because it fundamentally transforms how IT works And ultimately the combination of DevOps and new technologies like cloud are having a permanent impact on how businesses operate.
- #13 Speed: First production release going out in the time it took hardware to ship to our doorsteps Agility: The ability to add/remove/change infrastructure at will without significant capital expense Resilience: Could also be thought of as “survivability”. With this much automation, the application must be resilient, and IT must plan for a range of contingencies. Bonus: you’ve planned for DR/BCP simultaneously! Success
- #14 Why DevOps? It isn't a fad, it is simply the most efficient, reliable and successful way we've found so far to build and run software. In the beginning, IT led the charge as an experiment and a way to fix/alleviate issues. Now that the business has seen the value in it, it has gone from fad/trend to requirement and permanent change. There’s no going back.
- #20 I'm talking about people, but this is all text, it's a list Focus on the message - again, try to use icons Right now, the slide doesn't show the differences very well Don't necessarily need to use the lists Could ask the audience what differences they see, and then reveal the actual differences - look at how diff tools show the difference visually
- #21 I'm talking about people, but this is all text, it's a list Focus on the message - again, try to use icons Right now, the slide doesn't show the differences very well Don't necessarily need to use the lists Could ask the audience what differences they see, and then reveal the actual differences - look at how diff tools show the difference visually
- #23 We could also throw some other things in here as well. People (security awareness training) HR Data Supply Chain/Third party partners Compliance/regulation Design/Architecture Identity
- #24 We could also throw some other things in here as well. People (security awareness training) HR Data Supply Chain/Third party partners Compliance/regulation Design/Architecture Identity
- #25 We could also throw some other things in here as well. People (security awareness training) HR Data Supply Chain/Third party partners Compliance/regulation Design/Architecture Identity
- #26 We could also throw some other things in here as well. People (security awareness training) HR Data Supply Chain/Third party partners Compliance/regulation Design/Architecture Identity
- #27 Just an idea – doesn’t have to be precisely like this. Depends on the business, the culture, trial/error and a hundred other factors. The general idea though, is to get security responsibility and expertise closer to where the work is done.
- #30 Introduced an independent test unit, which made the number of bugs go up and software quality go down.
- #31 Findings More QA = more bugs and longer cycles Created the psychological impact of telling developers that quality is someone else’s problem Insulting; percieved lack of empathy and respect for the developer Solution Tight relationships necessary between QA and Dev QA remains, but with an artificial bottleneck Developers still responsible for deadlines and therefore have to ‘budget’ time for QA Devs write better code to ensure it goes through QA quickly Devs need to be given 10% extra time to ensure better quality code.
- #32 Also, remember – the two are inseparably linked. When we talk about code quality, we’re also often talking about security - issues with quality is where vulnerabilities come from, right?