DevSecOps & Security
Scans, signed artifacts, and evidence on the build, so a reviewer can check the release.
Who this is for
- Reviewers who cannot trace a production artifact back to a build
- Teams whose scanner output is ignored
- A release that still collects evidence by hand
Gates developers will keep
Secrets and critical issues fail the build. Medium findings stay as comments until the team has cleared the backlog. A gate people bypass every week is worse than no gate.
Evidence for the reviewer
Scan results, SBOMs, and approval metadata travel with the release. A reviewer queries the artifact instead of assembling a spreadsheet.
What the control maps to
Where a review asks for secrets scanning, container scanning, or an approved base image, that check becomes a stage on the pipeline you already have.
Capabilities
- SAST, dependency, and container scanning (SonarQube, Trivy)
- Secrets scanning and signed artifacts
- SBOMs and approval metadata on the release
- Policy checks once the baseline is stable
Example: Air-gapped CI/CD
Common questions
Do you help with pipeline evidence for a review?
Yes. Scan results, an SBOM, and the approval sit on the release, so a reviewer can trace a production deploy back to the build.
Will developers actually accept the gates?
We start with secrets and critical findings as blockers. Medium findings stay as comments until the team clears them. A gate that blocks too much gets bypassed, so stricter gates come only when the team is ready.
Is this a new pipeline?
Usually no. The gates go on the pipeline you have.