Azure Security Benchmark ASBv3-DS-4: Integrate static application security testing into DevOps pipeline

What else in your programme already covers this

This control maps to 33 controls across 17 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.

NIST SP 800-218 · 6 controls

SP800-218-PO.3.3 Toolchain Generates Security Artifacts
SP800-218-PO.4.1 Criteria for Software Security
SP800-218-PW.5.1 Secure Coding Practices
SP800-218-PW.7.1 Code Review
SP800-218-PW.7.2 Perform Code Review and Analysis
SP800-218-RV.1.2 Review and Analyze Code for Vulnerabilities

FedRAMP High · 3 controls

CM-3(2) Testing, Validation, and Documentation of Changes
SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation
SA-11(1) Developer Testing and Evaluation | Static Code Analysis (SA-11(1))

FedRAMP Moderate · 3 controls

CM-3(2) Testing, Validation, and Documentation of Changes
SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation
SA-11(1) Developer Testing and Evaluation | Static Code Analysis (SA-11(1))

PCI DSS 4.0 · 3 controls

6.2.3 6.2.3 Code review before release
6.2.3.1 6.2.3.1 Manual code review independence and approval
6.2.4 6.2.4 Engineering techniques against common software attacks

C5 (Germany) · 2 controls

C5-DEV-06 Testing changes
C5-PSS-02 Identification of Vulnerabilities of the Cloud Service

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 · 2 controls

CCM-AIS-05 Automated Application Security Testing
CCM-CCC-02 Quality Testing

ISO 27001:2022 · 2 controls

8.28 Secure coding
8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance

ISO 27002:2022 · 2 controls

8.28 Secure coding
8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 · 2 controls

NIST-CSF-ID.RA-01 Vulnerabilities in assets are identified, validated, and recorded
NIST-CSF-PR.PS-06 Secure software development practices are integrated, and their performance is monitored throughout the software development life cycle

AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar · 1 control

SEC11-BP02 Automate testing throughout the development and release lifecycle

Australia Consumer Data Right - Banking (CDR) · 1 control

AUCDR-IS-4 Formal vulnerability management program

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) · 1 control

CFTC-SS-5 Systems Development and Quality Assurance Category

CIS Controls v8 · 1 control

CIS-16.12 Implement Code-Level Security Checks

ISO 27701:2019 · 1 control

6.11.2 Security in development and support processes

NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 · 1 control

161R1-SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation

NIST SP 800-172 · 1 control

3.14.7e Verify Correctness of Security Functions

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 · 1 control

NIST800-SA-11 SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation

Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.

You are reading one control. How much of Azure Security Benchmark have you already done?

Azure Security Benchmark ASBv3-DS-4 is one control. If you already hold one of the frameworks below, a reviewed crosswalk already says how much of Azure Security Benchmark your existing evidence covers. Hold NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and 71 of 85 Azure Security Benchmark controls already carry evidence.

If you hold NIST SP 800-53 Rev 583.5% covered · 14 gaps If you hold FedRAMP Moderate78.8% covered · 18 gaps If you hold Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.172.9% covered · 23 gaps If you hold ISO 27002:202269.4% covered · 26 gaps If you hold C5 (Germany)65.9% covered · 29 gaps If you hold ISO 27001:202261.2% covered · 33 gaps

Each report names every control your existing framework evidences, every one it does not, the reasoning behind each claim, and the claims that were argued against and rejected. 0 were rejected on the NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 pair alone.

See the released pairs, $299 each Browse the graph free