评估开发人员在跨不同云提供商的平台中采用的安全策略。

IF 3.5 2区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
Empirical Software Engineering Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1007/s10664-024-10610-0
Alexandre Verdet, Mohammad Hamdaqa, Leuson Da Silva, Foutse Khomh
{"title":"评估开发人员在跨不同云提供商的平台中采用的安全策略。","authors":"Alexandre Verdet, Mohammad Hamdaqa, Leuson Da Silva, Foutse Khomh","doi":"10.1007/s10664-024-10610-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cloud computing has become popular thanks to the widespread use of Infrastructure as Code (IaC) tools, allowing the community to manage and configure cloud infrastructure using scripts. However, the scripting process does not automatically prevent practitioners from introducing misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, or privacy risks. As a result, ensuring security relies on practitioners' understanding and the adoption of explicit policies. To understand how practitioners deal with this problem, we perform an empirical study analyzing the adoption of scripted security best practices present in Terraform files, applied on AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. We assess the adoption of these practices by analyzing a sample of 812 open-source GitHub projects. We scan each project's configuration files, looking for policy implementation through static analysis (Checkov and Tfsec). The category <i>Access policy</i> emerges as the most widely adopted in all providers, while <i>Encryption at rest</i> presents the most neglected policies. Regarding the cloud providers, we observe that AWS and Azure present similar behavior regarding attended and neglected policies. Finally, we provide guidelines for cloud practitioners to limit infrastructure vulnerability and discuss further aspects associated with policies that have yet to be extensively embraced within the industry.</p>","PeriodicalId":11525,"journal":{"name":"Empirical Software Engineering","volume":"30 3","pages":"74"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11868142/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the adoption of security policies by developers in terraform across different cloud providers.\",\"authors\":\"Alexandre Verdet, Mohammad Hamdaqa, Leuson Da Silva, Foutse Khomh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10664-024-10610-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Cloud computing has become popular thanks to the widespread use of Infrastructure as Code (IaC) tools, allowing the community to manage and configure cloud infrastructure using scripts. However, the scripting process does not automatically prevent practitioners from introducing misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, or privacy risks. As a result, ensuring security relies on practitioners' understanding and the adoption of explicit policies. To understand how practitioners deal with this problem, we perform an empirical study analyzing the adoption of scripted security best practices present in Terraform files, applied on AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. We assess the adoption of these practices by analyzing a sample of 812 open-source GitHub projects. We scan each project's configuration files, looking for policy implementation through static analysis (Checkov and Tfsec). The category <i>Access policy</i> emerges as the most widely adopted in all providers, while <i>Encryption at rest</i> presents the most neglected policies. Regarding the cloud providers, we observe that AWS and Azure present similar behavior regarding attended and neglected policies. Finally, we provide guidelines for cloud practitioners to limit infrastructure vulnerability and discuss further aspects associated with policies that have yet to be extensively embraced within the industry.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11525,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Empirical Software Engineering\",\"volume\":\"30 3\",\"pages\":\"74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11868142/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Empirical Software Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-024-10610-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Empirical Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-024-10610-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于基础设施即代码(IaC)工具的广泛使用,云计算变得流行起来,它允许社区使用脚本来管理和配置云基础设施。然而,脚本编写过程并不能自动防止从业者引入错误配置、漏洞或隐私风险。因此,确保安全性依赖于从业者的理解和明确策略的采用。为了了解从业者如何处理这个问题,我们执行了一项实证研究,分析了在AWS、Azure和谷歌Cloud上应用的Terraform文件中脚本化安全最佳实践的采用情况。我们通过分析812个开源GitHub项目的样本来评估这些实践的采用情况。我们扫描每个项目的配置文件,通过静态分析(Checkov和Tfsec)寻找策略实现。类别访问策略是所有提供商中最广泛采用的策略,而静态加密策略是最容易被忽视的策略。关于云提供商,我们观察到AWS和Azure在参与和忽略策略方面表现出类似的行为。最后,我们为云计算从业者提供了限制基础设施漏洞的指导方针,并讨论了与行业内尚未广泛接受的策略相关的进一步方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing the adoption of security policies by developers in terraform across different cloud providers.

Cloud computing has become popular thanks to the widespread use of Infrastructure as Code (IaC) tools, allowing the community to manage and configure cloud infrastructure using scripts. However, the scripting process does not automatically prevent practitioners from introducing misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, or privacy risks. As a result, ensuring security relies on practitioners' understanding and the adoption of explicit policies. To understand how practitioners deal with this problem, we perform an empirical study analyzing the adoption of scripted security best practices present in Terraform files, applied on AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. We assess the adoption of these practices by analyzing a sample of 812 open-source GitHub projects. We scan each project's configuration files, looking for policy implementation through static analysis (Checkov and Tfsec). The category Access policy emerges as the most widely adopted in all providers, while Encryption at rest presents the most neglected policies. Regarding the cloud providers, we observe that AWS and Azure present similar behavior regarding attended and neglected policies. Finally, we provide guidelines for cloud practitioners to limit infrastructure vulnerability and discuss further aspects associated with policies that have yet to be extensively embraced within the industry.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Empirical Software Engineering
Empirical Software Engineering 工程技术-计算机:软件工程
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
12.20%
发文量
169
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Empirical Software Engineering provides a forum for applied software engineering research with a strong empirical component, and a venue for publishing empirical results relevant to both researchers and practitioners. Empirical studies presented here usually involve the collection and analysis of data and experience that can be used to characterize, evaluate and reveal relationships between software development deliverables, practices, and technologies. Over time, it is expected that such empirical results will form a body of knowledge leading to widely accepted and well-formed theories. The journal also offers industrial experience reports detailing the application of software technologies - processes, methods, or tools - and their effectiveness in industrial settings. Empirical Software Engineering promotes the publication of industry-relevant research, to address the significant gap between research and practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信