Continuous Compliance vs Manual Compliance Audits

Developers should learn and implement Continuous Compliance when working in regulated industries (e meets developers should learn and use manual compliance audits when working in environments with strict regulatory requirements, such as gdpr, hipaa, or pci-dss, to ensure software and data handling meet legal standards. Here's our take.

Continuous Compliance

Nice Pick

Developers should learn and implement Continuous Compliance when working in regulated industries (e

Pros

• g
• Related to: devsecops, ci-cd-pipelines

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Manual Compliance Audits

Developers should learn and use manual compliance audits when working in environments with strict regulatory requirements, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS, to ensure software and data handling meet legal standards

Pros

• It's crucial for roles in security, quality assurance, or DevOps where verifying compliance manually is necessary for audits, certifications, or risk management, especially in cases where automated tools may miss nuanced or context-specific issues
• Related to: risk-management, security-auditing

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

Use Continuous Compliance if: You want g and can live with specific tradeoffs depend on your use case.

Use Manual Compliance Audits if: You prioritize it's crucial for roles in security, quality assurance, or devops where verifying compliance manually is necessary for audits, certifications, or risk management, especially in cases where automated tools may miss nuanced or context-specific issues over what Continuous Compliance offers.

The Bottom Line

Continuous Compliance wins

Developers should learn and implement Continuous Compliance when working in regulated industries (e