<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Technology on Securosis</title><link>/tags/technology/</link><description>Recent content in Technology on Securosis</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="/tags/technology/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Defining Security Invariants</title><link>/research/howto/security-invariants/</link><pubDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>/research/howto/security-invariants/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; This post has been revised to include the new capabilities released by AWS prior to re:Invent 2024.&lt;br&gt;
You can also check out the re:Invent presentation we did with Securosis: &amp;ldquo;Security invariants: From enterprise chaos to cloud order&amp;rdquo; &lt;a href="DEV401_Security-invariants-From-enterprise-chaos-to-cloud-order.pdf"&gt;slides&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aljwG4N5a-0"&gt;video&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Implementing Security Invariants in an AWS Management Account</title><link>/research/howto/payer-invariants/</link><pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 2024 19:41:28 -0500</pubDate><guid>/research/howto/payer-invariants/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;rsquo;ve spoken a lot about &lt;a href="https://www.primeharbor.com/blog/security-invariants/"&gt;Security Invariants&lt;/a&gt;, but all of them have been implemented using Organizational Policies. That&amp;rsquo;s great, but organizational policies don&amp;rsquo;t apply to the Organizational Management Account (aka &amp;ldquo;payer&amp;rdquo;). So how does one implement invariants in a payer account?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;AWS would tell you that you shouldn&amp;rsquo;t be giving anyone access to the payer account, so the need for invariants should be minimal. However, that doesn&amp;rsquo;t reflect the reality that AWS never protected its customers from themselves and prevented the enabling of Organizations or Control Tower in an account with existing workloads. I would say this is a failure of Customer Obsession and demonstrates Security is not the Top Priority. AWS would hide behind shared responsibility and blame the customer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Regardless, there are many cases where workloads are in a payer account, and as a security person, you need to live with those workloads while protecting the rest of the AWS Organization. So, how do we build invariants into a payer account when SCPs and RCPs don&amp;rsquo;t apply?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Enter Permission Boundaries.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Minimally Viable Cloud Governance</title><link>/research/howto/multicloud/</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:02:58 -0500</pubDate><guid>/research/howto/multicloud/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="you-are-multi-cloud-whether-you-like-it-or-not"&gt;You are multi-cloud whether you like it or not.&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Most organizations have a preferred cloud provider. This is the provider where they have the most engineering expertise, have negotiated the best discounts, and have built the paved road experience.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>