One chestnut from my history in lottery game development:

While our security staff was incredibly tight and did a generally good job, oftentimes levels of paranoia were off the charts.

Once they went around hot gluing shut all of the “unnecessary” USB ports in our PCs under the premise of mitigating data theft via thumb drive, while ignoring that we were all Internet-connected and VPNs are a thing, also that every machine had a RW optical drive.

    • Machindo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      At my current company all changes have to happen via GitHub PR and commit because we use GitOps (ex: ArgoCD with Kubernetes). Any changes you do manually are immediately overwritten when ArgoCD notices the config drift.

      This makes development more annoying sometimes but I’m so damn glad when I can immediately look at GitHub for an audit trail and source of truth.

      It wasn’t InfoSec in this case but I had an annoying tech lead that would merge to main without telling people, so anytime something broke I had his GitHub activity bookmarked and could rule that out first.

      • shastaxc@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can also lock down the repo to require approvals before merge into main branch to avoid this.

        • Machindo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Since we were on the platform team we were all GitHub admins 😩. So it all relied on trust. Is there a way to block even admins?

          • shastaxc@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hm can’t say. I’m using bitbucket and it does block admins, though they all have the ability to go into settings and remove the approval requirement. No one does though because then the bad devs would be able to get changes in without reviews.