Security As A Bolt On vs Security By Design
Developers should learn about this concept to understand why it's problematic and avoid it in practice, as it can result in insecure software, increased technical debt, and costly fixes post-deployment meets developers should adopt security by design when building applications that handle sensitive data (e. Here's our take.
Security As A Bolt On
Developers should learn about this concept to understand why it's problematic and avoid it in practice, as it can result in insecure software, increased technical debt, and costly fixes post-deployment
Security As A Bolt On
Nice PickDevelopers should learn about this concept to understand why it's problematic and avoid it in practice, as it can result in insecure software, increased technical debt, and costly fixes post-deployment
Pros
- +It's particularly relevant in scenarios where rapid development or legacy systems lead to security being neglected, such as in startups or when maintaining older codebases
- +Related to: devsecops, security-by-design
Cons
- -Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case
Security By Design
Developers should adopt Security By Design when building applications that handle sensitive data (e
Pros
- +g
- +Related to: threat-modeling, secure-coding
Cons
- -Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case
The Verdict
Use Security As A Bolt On if: You want it's particularly relevant in scenarios where rapid development or legacy systems lead to security being neglected, such as in startups or when maintaining older codebases and can live with specific tradeoffs depend on your use case.
Use Security By Design if: You prioritize g over what Security As A Bolt On offers.
Developers should learn about this concept to understand why it's problematic and avoid it in practice, as it can result in insecure software, increased technical debt, and costly fixes post-deployment
Disagree with our pick? nice@nicepick.dev