Pathshield· PathShield Security Team · 25 min read
NIST 800-218 SSDF Requirements: Complete Implementation Guide for SaaS Companies
NIST 800-218 Secure Software Development Framework (SSDF) is now mandatory for federal software suppliers under President Trump’s June 2025 Executive Order on cybersecurity. For SaaS companies serving government customers, SSDF compliance determines eligibility for lucrative federal contracts worth $50+ billion annually in software acquisitions.
TL;DR: This guide provides complete NIST 800-218 SSDF implementation for SaaS companies, including DevSecOps integration templates, automated compliance tracking, and federal attestation procedures. Learn how to implement all four practice groups efficiently while maintaining development velocity and meeting federal supplier requirements.
Understanding NIST 800-218 SSDF: The Federal Mandate
The Secure Software Development Framework (SSDF) establishes baseline security practices that federal agencies must require from software suppliers. Unlike voluntary guidelines, SSDF compliance is now contractually mandated for federal software acquisitions.
SSDF Background and Legal Requirements
SSDF_Legal_Framework:
Executive_Authority:
EO_14028: "Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity (May 2021)"
Trump_EO_2025: "Sustaining Select Efforts to Strengthen Cybersecurity (June 2025)"
OMB_Guidance: "M-22-18 Enhancing Software Supply Chain Security"
Federal_Compliance_Timeline:
June_2022: "Initial SSDF guidelines published"
September_2022: "Federal agency adoption required"
June_2024: "Contractor self-attestation requirements"
December_2025: "Enhanced SSDF requirements (Trump EO)"
Contract_Impact:
Affected_Contracts: "All federal software acquisitions"
Contract_Value: "$50B+ annually in software spending"
Supplier_Count: "~25,000 software vendors affected"
Compliance_Deadline: "Immediate for new contracts"What SSDF Covers (And What It Doesn’t)
SSDF_Scope:
Covered_Software_Types:
Commercial_Software:
- "SaaS applications"
- "Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software"
- "Software-as-a-Service platforms"
- "Custom development for federal agencies"
Development_Environments:
- "Cloud-native applications"
- "Containerized applications"
- "Microservices architectures"
- "API-first applications"
Excluded_Areas:
- "Hardware firmware (covered by other standards)"
- "Operational security controls (covered by other frameworks)"
- "Physical security measures"
- "Network infrastructure security"
Focus_Areas:
- "Secure software development practices"
- "Software supply chain security"
- "Vulnerability management in development"
- "Software bill of materials (SBOM) generation"The Four SSDF Practice Groups Explained
Practice Group 1: Prepare the Organization (PO)
This group establishes the organizational foundation for secure development.
PO_Practice_Group:
PO_1_Define_Security_Requirements:
Description: "Define and communicate security requirements for software development"
SaaS_Implementation:
Security_Requirements_Document: |
# SaaS Security Requirements Specification
Version: 1.0
Effective Date: [Date]
## Authentication and Authorization
- All user authentication must support MFA
- Role-based access control (RBAC) mandatory
- API authentication via OAuth 2.0/OIDC
- Session timeout: 8 hours maximum
## Data Protection
- Data encryption in transit (TLS 1.3 minimum)
- Data encryption at rest (AES-256)
- PII/PHI data classification and handling
- Data retention and deletion policies
## Software Supply Chain
- Third-party component vulnerability scanning
- Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) generation
- Dependency license compliance verification
- Container image vulnerability assessment
## API Security
- Rate limiting on all public APIs
- Input validation and sanitization
- API versioning and deprecation policies
- Comprehensive API logging
Automation_Implementation: |
# GitHub Actions workflow for requirements validation
name: Security Requirements Check
on: [push, pull_request]
jobs:
security-requirements:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Check Authentication Requirements
run: |
# Verify MFA implementation
if ! grep -r "multi.*factor\|MFA\|2FA" src/auth/; then
echo "❌ MFA implementation not found"
exit 1
fi
echo "✅ Authentication requirements verified"
- name: Check Encryption Requirements
run: |
# Verify TLS configuration
if ! grep -r "TLS.*1\.[3-9]\|tls.*version.*1\.[3-9]" config/; then
echo "❌ TLS 1.3+ requirement not met"
exit 1
fi
echo "✅ Encryption requirements verified"
- name: Validate API Security
run: |
# Check for rate limiting
if ! grep -r "rate.*limit\|throttle" src/api/; then
echo "❌ API rate limiting not implemented"
exit 1
fi
echo "✅ API security requirements verified"
PO_2_Implement_Roles_Responsibilities:
Description: "Define roles and responsibilities for secure development"
SaaS_Team_Structure:
Development_Team:
Security_Champion:
- "Primary: Senior developer with security training"
- "Responsibilities: Code security reviews, threat modeling"
- "Time Allocation: 20% of role"
DevSecOps_Engineer:
- "Role: Security automation and CI/CD integration"
- "Responsibilities: Pipeline security, SAST/DAST tools"
- "Required Skills: Docker, Kubernetes, security scanning tools"
Product_Security:
- "Role: Security requirements and architecture review"
- "Responsibilities: Threat modeling, security testing"
- "Escalation: Security incidents and vulnerabilities"
RACI_Matrix: |
Security Activity | Dev Team | Security Champion | DevSecOps | Product Security | CISO
===============================================================================
Code Reviews | R | A | I | C | I
Threat Modeling | R | R | C | A | I
SAST/DAST | I | C | A | R | I
Pen Testing | I | C | I | A | R
Incident Response | R | R | R | A | A
Legend: R=Responsible, A=Accountable, C=Consulted, I=Informed
PO_3_Support_Personnel:
Description: "Provide personnel with secure development training"
Training_Program:
Developer_Security_Training:
Core_Curriculum:
- "OWASP Top 10 for developers"
- "Secure coding practices by language"
- "Threat modeling fundamentals"
- "Security testing integration"
Delivery_Method:
Platform: "Interactive security training platform"
Schedule: "Monthly 2-hour sessions"
Assessment: "Hands-on coding challenges"
Certification: "Internal security developer certification"
Tracking_Implementation: |
# Training compliance tracking script
#!/bin/bash
TRAINING_DB="/opt/ssdf/training.db"
CURRENT_DATE=$(date +%Y-%m-%d)
# Check training compliance
sqlite3 $TRAINING_DB << EOF
SELECT
employee_name,
role,
last_training_date,
CASE
WHEN last_training_date < date('now', '-365 days')
THEN 'OVERDUE'
ELSE 'CURRENT'
END as status
FROM employee_training
WHERE role LIKE '%developer%' OR role LIKE '%engineer%'
ORDER BY last_training_date;
EOF
# Generate compliance report
OVERDUE_COUNT=$(sqlite3 $TRAINING_DB "SELECT COUNT(*) FROM employee_training WHERE last_training_date < date('now', '-365 days')")
if [ $OVERDUE_COUNT -gt 0 ]; then
echo "WARNING: $OVERDUE_COUNT employees have overdue security training"
echo "SSDF PO.3 compliance: NON-COMPLIANT"
else
echo "All personnel security training current"
echo "SSDF PO.3 compliance: COMPLIANT"
fiPractice Group 2: Protect the Software (PS)
This group focuses on protecting software during development and deployment.
PS_Practice_Group:
PS_1_Protect_Software:
Description: "Protect all forms of code from unauthorized access and tampering"
Implementation:
Source_Code_Protection:
Repository_Security:
- "Private repositories with access controls"
- "Branch protection rules on main branches"
- "Required pull request reviews"
- "Signed commits verification"
Access_Controls: |
# GitHub repository protection script
#!/bin/bash
REPO="your-org/your-saas-app"
GITHUB_TOKEN="your-token"
# Enable branch protection
curl -X PUT \
"https://api.github.com/repos/$REPO/branches/main/protection" \
-H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"required_status_checks": {
"strict": true,
"contexts": ["security-scan", "unit-tests"]
},
"enforce_admins": true,
"required_pull_request_reviews": {
"required_approving_review_count": 2,
"dismiss_stale_reviews": true,
"require_code_owner_reviews": true
},
"restrictions": null
}'
# Require signed commits
curl -X PATCH \
"https://api.github.com/repos/$REPO" \
-H "Authorization: token $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"signed_commits_required": true}'
echo "✅ Repository protection enabled for $REPO"
Artifact_Protection:
Container_Image_Security:
- "Image signing with Cosign"
- "Private container registry"
- "Immutable image tags"
- "Regular base image updates"
Image_Signing_Implementation: |
# Container image signing pipeline
name: Build and Sign Container Image
on:
push:
branches: [main]
jobs:
build-and-sign:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
contents: read
packages: write
id-token: write
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Install Cosign
uses: sigstore/cosign-installer@v3
- name: Build Image
run: |
docker build -t ghcr.io/${{ github.repository }}:${{ github.sha }} .
- name: Sign Image
env:
COSIGN_EXPERIMENTAL: 1
run: |
cosign sign --yes ghcr.io/${{ github.repository }}:${{ github.sha }}
- name: Generate SBOM
run: |
syft packages ghcr.io/${{ github.repository }}:${{ github.sha }} \
-o spdx-json=sbom.spdx.json
- name: Attest SBOM
env:
COSIGN_EXPERIMENTAL: 1
run: |
cosign attest --yes --predicate sbom.spdx.json \
ghcr.io/${{ github.repository }}:${{ github.sha }}
PS_2_Provide_Tampering_Detection:
Description: "Provide a mechanism to detect tampering of software"
Implementation:
File_Integrity_Monitoring:
Production_Monitoring: |
# AIDE configuration for file integrity monitoring
# /etc/aide/aide.conf
database=file:/var/lib/aide/aide.db
database_out=file:/var/lib/aide/aide.db.new
# Application files monitoring
/opt/saas-app/ CONTENT_EX+FIPSR+sha256
/etc/saas-app/ CONTENT_EX+FIPSR+sha256
# System binaries
/bin CONTENT_EX+FIPSR+sha256
/sbin CONTENT_EX+FIPSR+sha256
/usr/bin CONTENT_EX+FIPSR+sha256
# Configuration files
/etc CONTENT_EX+FIPSR+sha256
# Exclude volatile files
!/var/log
!/tmp
!/proc
!/sys
Code_Integrity_Verification: |
# Pre-deployment integrity check
#!/bin/bash
DEPLOYMENT_PACKAGE="$1"
EXPECTED_HASH_FILE="$2"
# Verify package integrity
ACTUAL_HASH=$(sha256sum "$DEPLOYMENT_PACKAGE" | cut -d' ' -f1)
EXPECTED_HASH=$(cat "$EXPECTED_HASH_FILE")
if [ "$ACTUAL_HASH" = "$EXPECTED_HASH" ]; then
echo "✅ Package integrity verified"
echo "Hash: $ACTUAL_HASH"
else
echo "❌ Package integrity check FAILED"
echo "Expected: $EXPECTED_HASH"
echo "Actual: $ACTUAL_HASH"
exit 1
fi
# Verify digital signature (if available)
if [ -f "${DEPLOYMENT_PACKAGE}.sig" ]; then
gpg --verify "${DEPLOYMENT_PACKAGE}.sig" "$DEPLOYMENT_PACKAGE"
if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
echo "✅ Digital signature verified"
else
echo "❌ Digital signature verification FAILED"
exit 1
fi
fi
PS_3_Archive_Software:
Description: "Archive and protect each software release"
Implementation:
Release_Archival_System: |
# Release archival and protection script
#!/bin/bash
RELEASE_VERSION="$1"
SOURCE_DIR="$2"
ARCHIVE_BUCKET="s3://company-ssdf-archives"
# Create release package
RELEASE_PACKAGE="release-${RELEASE_VERSION}.tar.gz"
tar -czf "$RELEASE_PACKAGE" -C "$SOURCE_DIR" .
# Generate checksums
sha256sum "$RELEASE_PACKAGE" > "${RELEASE_PACKAGE}.sha256"
# Sign the package
gpg --detach-sign --armor "$RELEASE_PACKAGE"
# Generate SBOM
syft packages "$SOURCE_DIR" -o spdx-json=sbom-${RELEASE_VERSION}.spdx.json
# Upload to secure archive
aws s3 cp "$RELEASE_PACKAGE" "$ARCHIVE_BUCKET/releases/"
aws s3 cp "${RELEASE_PACKAGE}.sha256" "$ARCHIVE_BUCKET/releases/"
aws s3 cp "${RELEASE_PACKAGE}.asc" "$ARCHIVE_BUCKET/releases/"
aws s3 cp "sbom-${RELEASE_VERSION}.spdx.json" "$ARCHIVE_BUCKET/sboms/"
# Enable versioning and MFA delete protection
aws s3api put-bucket-versioning \
--bucket "$(echo $ARCHIVE_BUCKET | cut -d'/' -f3)" \
--versioning-configuration Status=Enabled,MfaDelete=Enabled
# Set immutability (Object Lock)
aws s3api put-object-legal-hold \
--bucket "$(echo $ARCHIVE_BUCKET | cut -d'/' -f3)" \
--key "releases/$RELEASE_PACKAGE" \
--legal-hold Status=ON
echo "✅ Release $RELEASE_VERSION archived and protected"Practice Group 3: Produce Well-Secured Software (PW)
This group covers secure development practices during the software creation process.
PW_Practice_Group:
PW_1_Design_Software_Securely:
Description: "Design software to meet security requirements and mitigate security risks"
Implementation:
Threat_Modeling_Process:
STRIDE_Methodology: |
# Threat Modeling Template for SaaS Applications
Application: [SaaS Application Name]
Version: [Version]
Date: [Date]
## System Overview
- Architecture: [Cloud-native, microservices, etc.]
- Data Classification: [PII, Financial, Healthcare, etc.]
- User Types: [Admin, Standard User, API Consumer]
- Trust Boundaries: [External users, internal services, databases]
## Assets Inventory
1. Customer Data (PII, business data)
2. Authentication Credentials
3. API Keys and Secrets
4. Application Source Code
5. Infrastructure Configuration
## Threats Analysis (STRIDE)
### Spoofing Threats
- T1: Attacker impersonates legitimate user
- Impact: Unauthorized access to customer data
- Mitigation: Multi-factor authentication, certificate pinning
- Status: ✅ Implemented
### Tampering Threats
- T2: Modification of data in transit
- Impact: Data integrity compromise
- Mitigation: TLS 1.3, request signing
- Status: ✅ Implemented
### Repudiation Threats
- T3: User denies performing action
- Impact: Accountability issues
- Mitigation: Comprehensive audit logging, digital signatures
- Status: ⚠️ Partial (audit logs implemented, digital signatures pending)
### Information Disclosure Threats
- T4: Unauthorized access to sensitive data
- Impact: Privacy violation, compliance breach
- Mitigation: Encryption at rest, access controls, data classification
- Status: ✅ Implemented
### Denial of Service Threats
- T5: Service availability compromise
- Impact: Business disruption, SLA violations
- Mitigation: Rate limiting, auto-scaling, DDoS protection
- Status: ✅ Implemented
### Elevation of Privilege Threats
- T6: User gains unauthorized elevated access
- Impact: Complete system compromise
- Mitigation: Least privilege, regular access reviews
- Status: ✅ Implemented
Automated_Threat_Analysis: |
# Automated threat modeling validation
import json
import yaml
from datetime import datetime
class ThreatModelValidator:
def __init__(self, threat_model_file):
with open(threat_model_file, 'r') as f:
self.threat_model = yaml.safe_load(f)
def validate_coverage(self):
"""Validate STRIDE coverage completeness"""
stride_categories = ['Spoofing', 'Tampering', 'Repudiation',
'Information Disclosure', 'Denial of Service',
'Elevation of Privilege']
missing_categories = []
for category in stride_categories:
if not self.has_threats_for_category(category):
missing_categories.append(category)
return {
'complete': len(missing_categories) == 0,
'missing_categories': missing_categories,
'coverage_percentage': ((6 - len(missing_categories)) / 6) * 100
}
def check_mitigation_status(self):
"""Check if all identified threats have mitigations"""
threats = self.threat_model.get('threats', [])
unmitigated = []
for threat in threats:
if threat.get('status', '').lower() not in ['implemented', '✅']:
unmitigated.append(threat['id'])
return {
'all_mitigated': len(unmitigated) == 0,
'unmitigated_threats': unmitigated,
'mitigation_percentage': ((len(threats) - len(unmitigated)) / len(threats)) * 100 if threats else 0
}
def generate_compliance_report(self):
"""Generate SSDF PW.1 compliance report"""
coverage = self.validate_coverage()
mitigation = self.check_mitigation_status()
report = {
'ssdf_control': 'PW.1',
'assessment_date': datetime.now().isoformat(),
'threat_model_file': self.threat_model.get('metadata', {}).get('file', 'unknown'),
'compliance_status': 'COMPLIANT' if coverage['complete'] and mitigation['all_mitigated'] else 'NON-COMPLIANT',
'findings': {
'stride_coverage': coverage,
'mitigation_status': mitigation
},
'recommendations': []
}
if not coverage['complete']:
report['recommendations'].append(f"Complete threat analysis for: {', '.join(coverage['missing_categories'])}")
if not mitigation['all_mitigated']:
report['recommendations'].append(f"Implement mitigations for threats: {', '.join(mitigation['unmitigated_threats'])}")
return report
# Usage example
validator = ThreatModelValidator('threat-model.yaml')
compliance_report = validator.generate_compliance_report()
print(json.dumps(compliance_report, indent=2))
PW_2_Review_Software_Design:
Description: "Review the software design to verify compliance with security requirements"
Implementation:
Architecture_Review_Process:
Security_Architecture_Review: |
# Security Architecture Review Checklist
## Pre-Review Preparation
- [ ] Architecture diagrams current and complete
- [ ] Data flow diagrams available
- [ ] Threat model completed and reviewed
- [ ] Security requirements documented
- [ ] Previous review findings addressed
## Authentication & Authorization Review
- [ ] Authentication mechanism clearly defined
- [ ] Multi-factor authentication implemented
- [ ] Role-based access control (RBAC) documented
- [ ] API authentication strategy defined
- [ ] Session management approach secure
## Data Protection Review
- [ ] Data classification scheme implemented
- [ ] Encryption in transit (TLS 1.3+)
- [ ] Encryption at rest (AES-256+)
- [ ] Key management strategy defined
- [ ] Data retention/deletion policies implemented
## Infrastructure Security Review
- [ ] Network segmentation appropriate
- [ ] Container security best practices followed
- [ ] Secrets management solution implemented
- [ ] Monitoring and logging comprehensive
- [ ] Backup and recovery tested
## API Security Review
- [ ] Rate limiting implemented
- [ ] Input validation comprehensive
- [ ] Output encoding appropriate
- [ ] Error handling secure (no information leakage)
- [ ] API versioning strategy secure
Automated_Architecture_Validation: |
# Automated architecture security validation
name: Architecture Security Review
on:
pull_request:
paths: ['docs/architecture/**', 'infrastructure/**']
jobs:
security-architecture-review:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Validate Infrastructure as Code
run: |
# Use Checkov for IaC security scanning
pip install checkov
checkov --directory infrastructure/ --check CKV_AWS_20,CKV_AWS_21,CKV_AWS_23
- name: Check Architecture Documentation
run: |
# Verify required architecture documentation exists
REQUIRED_DOCS=(
"docs/architecture/system-overview.md"
"docs/architecture/data-flow.md"
"docs/architecture/threat-model.md"
"docs/architecture/security-controls.md"
)
for doc in "${REQUIRED_DOCS[@]}"; do
if [ ! -f "$doc" ]; then
echo "❌ Missing required documentation: $doc"
exit 1
fi
done
echo "✅ All required architecture documentation present"
- name: Validate Security Controls
run: |
# Check for security control implementation
SECURITY_CONTROLS=(
"authentication.*MFA\|multi.*factor"
"encryption.*TLS.*1\.[3-9]\|TLS.*1\.[3-9]"
"rate.*limit\|throttl"
"audit.*log\|logging"
)
for control in "${SECURITY_CONTROLS[@]}"; do
if ! grep -r -i "$control" docs/architecture/; then
echo "⚠️ Security control may be missing: $control"
fi
done
PW_3_Verify_Third_Party_Software:
Description: "Verify that acquired software complies with security requirements"
Implementation:
Dependency_Security_Management:
Automated_Vulnerability_Scanning: |
# Comprehensive dependency security pipeline
name: Dependency Security Scan
on: [push, pull_request, schedule]
jobs:
dependency-security:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Node.js Dependency Scan
if: hashFiles('package.json') != ''
run: |
npm audit --audit-level=moderate
npx audit-ci --moderate
- name: Python Dependency Scan
if: hashFiles('requirements.txt') != ''
run: |
pip install safety
safety check -r requirements.txt
- name: Docker Image Vulnerability Scan
if: hashFiles('Dockerfile') != ''
run: |
docker build -t temp-scan-image .
docker run --rm -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock \
-v $PWD:/app aquasec/trivy:latest image temp-scan-image
- name: License Compliance Check
run: |
# Use FOSSA or similar for license compliance
pip install pip-licenses
pip-licenses --format=json --output-file=licenses.json
# Check for prohibited licenses
PROHIBITED_LICENSES=("GPL-3.0" "AGPL-3.0" "SSPL-1.0")
for license in "${PROHIBITED_LICENSES[@]}"; do
if grep -q "$license" licenses.json; then
echo "❌ Prohibited license found: $license"
exit 1
fi
done
echo "✅ License compliance verified"
Third_Party_Risk_Assessment: |
# Third-party software risk assessment template
Third-Party Software Assessment: [Component Name]
Assessment Date: [Date]
Assessor: [Name/Team]
## Component Information
- Name: [Component Name]
- Version: [Version Number]
- Vendor: [Vendor Name]
- License: [License Type]
- Purpose: [Why this component is needed]
## Security Assessment
- Vulnerability History: [Known CVEs and response time]
- Update Frequency: [How often updates are released]
- Security Contact: [Vendor security contact information]
- End of Life: [Support lifecycle]
## Risk Assessment
- Data Access: [What data can this component access]
- Privilege Level: [What system privileges required]
- Network Access: [Network connectivity requirements]
- Risk Score: [High/Medium/Low based on above factors]
## Mitigation Measures
- Version Pinning: [Specific version to use]
- Monitoring: [How vulnerabilities will be tracked]
- Fallback Plan: [Alternative components if needed]
- Update Schedule: [When updates will be applied]
## Approval
- Technical Reviewer: [Name/Signature]
- Security Reviewer: [Name/Signature]
- Approval Date: [Date]
- Next Review: [Date]Practice Group 4: Respond to Vulnerabilities (RV)
This group addresses vulnerability identification and response processes.
RV_Practice_Group:
RV_1_Identify_Vulnerabilities:
Description: "Identify vulnerabilities in software and third-party components"
Implementation:
Comprehensive_Vulnerability_Detection:
Multi_Layer_Scanning: |
# Comprehensive vulnerability detection pipeline
name: Comprehensive Vulnerability Scan
on:
schedule:
- cron: '0 2 * * *' # Daily at 2 AM
push:
branches: [main, develop]
jobs:
sast-scan:
name: Static Application Security Testing
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: SemGrep SAST Scan
run: |
pip install semgrep
semgrep --config=auto --json --output=sast-results.json src/
- name: CodeQL Analysis
uses: github/codeql-action/analyze@v2
with:
languages: javascript, python
- name: Bandit Python Security Scan
if: hashFiles('**/*.py') != ''
run: |
pip install bandit
bandit -r src/ -f json -o bandit-results.json
dependency-scan:
name: Dependency Vulnerability Scan
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Snyk Vulnerability Scan
run: |
npm install -g snyk
snyk auth ${{ secrets.SNYK_TOKEN }}
snyk test --json > snyk-results.json
- name: OWASP Dependency Check
run: |
wget -q https://github.com/jeremylong/DependencyCheck/releases/download/v7.4.4/dependency-check-7.4.4-release.zip
unzip -q dependency-check-7.4.4-release.zip
./dependency-check/bin/dependency-check.sh --project "SaaS App" --scan . --format JSON --out dependency-check-results.json
container-scan:
name: Container Security Scan
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Build Container Image
run: docker build -t scan-target:latest .
- name: Trivy Container Scan
run: |
docker run --rm -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock \
-v $PWD:/app aquasec/trivy:latest image \
--format json --output /app/trivy-results.json scan-target:latest
infrastructure-scan:
name: Infrastructure Security Scan
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Terraform Security Scan
run: |
pip install checkov
checkov -d infrastructure/ --framework terraform \
--output json --output-file checkov-results.json
aggregate-results:
name: Aggregate and Process Results
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
needs: [sast-scan, dependency-scan, container-scan, infrastructure-scan]
steps:
- name: Download All Artifacts
uses: actions/download-artifact@v3
- name: Process Vulnerability Results
run: |
python3 << 'EOF'
import json
import os
from datetime import datetime
# Aggregate all scan results
results = {
'scan_date': datetime.now().isoformat(),
'scan_types': [],
'total_vulnerabilities': 0,
'critical_vulnerabilities': 0,
'high_vulnerabilities': 0,
'findings_by_category': {}
}
# Process each result file
for result_file in os.listdir('.'):
if result_file.endswith('-results.json'):
scan_type = result_file.replace('-results.json', '')
results['scan_types'].append(scan_type)
try:
with open(result_file, 'r') as f:
scan_data = json.load(f)
# Process based on scan type
if scan_type == 'snyk':
vulnerabilities = scan_data.get('vulnerabilities', [])
results['findings_by_category'][scan_type] = len(vulnerabilities)
elif scan_type == 'trivy':
for result in scan_data.get('Results', []):
vulns = result.get('Vulnerabilities', [])
results['findings_by_category'][scan_type] = len(vulns)
for vuln in vulns:
if vuln.get('Severity') == 'CRITICAL':
results['critical_vulnerabilities'] += 1
elif vuln.get('Severity') == 'HIGH':
results['high_vulnerabilities'] += 1
except Exception as e:
print(f"Error processing {result_file}: {e}")
# Calculate total
results['total_vulnerabilities'] = sum(results['findings_by_category'].values())
# Generate SSDF compliance report
ssdf_report = {
'ssdf_control': 'RV.1',
'compliance_status': 'COMPLIANT',
'scan_coverage': {
'sast': 'sast' in results['scan_types'],
'dependency': 'snyk' in results['scan_types'] or 'dependency-check' in results['scan_types'],
'container': 'trivy' in results['scan_types'],
'infrastructure': 'checkov' in results['scan_types']
},
'vulnerability_summary': results,
'recommendations': []
}
# Add recommendations based on findings
if results['critical_vulnerabilities'] > 0:
ssdf_report['recommendations'].append('Address critical vulnerabilities immediately')
if results['total_vulnerabilities'] > 50:
ssdf_report['recommendations'].append('Consider implementing additional preventive controls')
# Save consolidated report
with open('ssdf-rv1-report.json', 'w') as f:
json.dump(ssdf_report, f, indent=2)
print(f"✅ SSDF RV.1 scan complete: {results['total_vulnerabilities']} vulnerabilities found")
print(f"Critical: {results['critical_vulnerabilities']}, High: {results['high_vulnerabilities']}")
EOF
RV_2_Assess_Vulnerabilities:
Description: "Assess vulnerabilities to determine their potential impact"
Implementation:
Risk_Based_Assessment:
Vulnerability_Scoring_System: |
# Vulnerability risk assessment and prioritization
import json
import math
from datetime import datetime, timedelta
class SSFDVulnerabilityAssessor:
def __init__(self):
self.risk_matrix = {
'critical': {'score': 10, 'sla_hours': 4},
'high': {'score': 7, 'sla_hours': 24},
'medium': {'score': 4, 'sla_hours': 168}, # 1 week
'low': {'score': 2, 'sla_hours': 720} # 30 days
}
def assess_vulnerability(self, vulnerability_data):
"""Assess vulnerability using SSFD-specific criteria"""
# Base risk from CVSS or scanner severity
base_severity = vulnerability_data.get('severity', 'medium').lower()
base_score = self.risk_matrix.get(base_severity, {'score': 4})['score']
# SSDF-specific risk factors
risk_multipliers = {
'public_facing': 1.5, # Internet-accessible components
'customer_data_access': 2.0, # Components that handle customer data
'authentication_bypass': 2.5, # Authentication/authorization flaws
'supply_chain': 1.8, # Third-party component vulnerabilities
'zero_day': 3.0 # No patch available
}
# Calculate adjusted risk score
adjusted_score = base_score
for factor, multiplier in risk_multipliers.items():
if vulnerability_data.get(factor, False):
adjusted_score *= multiplier
# Cap at maximum score
final_score = min(adjusted_score, 10)
# Determine priority and SLA
if final_score >= 9:
priority = 'critical'
elif final_score >= 7:
priority = 'high'
elif final_score >= 4:
priority = 'medium'
else:
priority = 'low'
sla_hours = self.risk_matrix[priority]['sla_hours']
due_date = datetime.now() + timedelta(hours=sla_hours)
return {
'vulnerability_id': vulnerability_data.get('id'),
'component': vulnerability_data.get('component'),
'base_severity': base_severity,
'adjusted_priority': priority,
'risk_score': round(final_score, 2),
'sla_hours': sla_hours,
'due_date': due_date.isoformat(),
'risk_factors': [f for f, m in risk_multipliers.items()
if vulnerability_data.get(f, False)],
'business_impact': self.assess_business_impact(vulnerability_data),
'ssdf_compliance_impact': self.assess_ssdf_impact(vulnerability_data)
}
def assess_business_impact(self, vulnerability_data):
"""Assess business impact of vulnerability"""
impact_factors = []
if vulnerability_data.get('customer_data_access'):
impact_factors.append('Customer data exposure risk')
if vulnerability_data.get('public_facing'):
impact_factors.append('External attack vector')
if vulnerability_data.get('authentication_bypass'):
impact_factors.append('Unauthorized access potential')
if vulnerability_data.get('supply_chain'):
impact_factors.append('Supply chain compromise risk')
return {
'estimated_downtime': self.estimate_downtime(vulnerability_data),
'data_at_risk': self.estimate_data_at_risk(vulnerability_data),
'regulatory_implications': self.assess_regulatory_impact(vulnerability_data),
'impact_summary': impact_factors
}
def assess_ssdf_impact(self, vulnerability_data):
"""Assess impact on SSDF compliance"""
ssdf_impacts = {
'PO': False, # Prepare Organization
'PS': False, # Protect Software
'PW': True, # Produce Well-Secured Software (always impacted)
'RV': True # Respond to Vulnerabilities (always impacted)
}
# Additional SSDF practice group impacts
if vulnerability_data.get('supply_chain'):
ssdf_impacts['PW'] = True # Third-party component security
if vulnerability_data.get('authentication_bypass'):
ssdf_impacts['PO'] = True # Security requirements may be inadequate
return ssdf_impacts
# Usage example
assessor = SSFDVulnerabilityAssessor()
# Example vulnerability
vuln_data = {
'id': 'CVE-2023-12345',
'component': 'express.js',
'severity': 'high',
'public_facing': True,
'customer_data_access': True,
'supply_chain': True
}
assessment = assessor.assess_vulnerability(vuln_data)
print(json.dumps(assessment, indent=2))
RV_3_Response_to_Vulnerabilities:
Description: "Respond to identified vulnerabilities"
Implementation:
Automated_Response_Workflow: |
# SSDF-compliant vulnerability response automation
name: Vulnerability Response Workflow
on:
issues:
types: [opened, labeled]
repository_dispatch:
types: [vulnerability_detected]
jobs:
classify-vulnerability:
if: contains(github.event.issue.labels.*.name, 'vulnerability')
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
outputs:
priority: ${{ steps.assess.outputs.priority }}
sla_hours: ${{ steps.assess.outputs.sla_hours }}
steps:
- name: Assess Vulnerability Priority
id: assess
run: |
# Extract vulnerability details from issue
ISSUE_BODY="${{ github.event.issue.body }}"
# Determine priority based on labels and content
if echo "$ISSUE_BODY" | grep -i "critical\|cvss.*9\|cvss.*10"; then
echo "priority=critical" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "sla_hours=4" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
elif echo "$ISSUE_BODY" | grep -i "high\|cvss.*[7-8]"; then
echo "priority=high" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "sla_hours=24" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
else
echo "priority=medium" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
echo "sla_hours=168" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT
fi
immediate-response:
needs: classify-vulnerability
if: needs.classify-vulnerability.outputs.priority == 'critical'
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- name: Create Emergency Response Team
run: |
# Create Slack channel for critical vulnerability
curl -X POST https://slack.com/api/conversations.create \
-H "Authorization: Bearer ${{ secrets.SLACK_BOT_TOKEN }}" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"name": "vuln-${{ github.event.issue.number }}",
"is_private": true
}'
- name: Notify Security Team
run: |
# Send immediate notification
curl -X POST https://slack.com/api/chat.postMessage \
-H "Authorization: Bearer ${{ secrets.SLACK_BOT_TOKEN }}" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"channel": "#security-alerts",
"text": "🚨 CRITICAL Vulnerability Detected",
"blocks": [
{
"type": "section",
"text": {
"type": "mrkdwn",
"text": "Critical vulnerability requires immediate attention:\n• Issue: #${{ github.event.issue.number }}\n• SLA: 4 hours\n• Component: TBD"
}
}
]
}'
- name: Start Response Timer
run: |
# Record response start time for SLA tracking
echo "Response started: $(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)" >> vulnerability_${{ github.event.issue.number }}.log
create-response-plan:
needs: classify-vulnerability
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- name: Generate Response Plan
run: |
cat > response_plan_${{ github.event.issue.number }}.md << 'EOF'
# Vulnerability Response Plan
**Vulnerability ID**: ${{ github.event.issue.number }}
**Priority**: ${{ needs.classify-vulnerability.outputs.priority }}
**SLA**: ${{ needs.classify-vulnerability.outputs.sla_hours }} hours
**Response Team**: @security-team
## Immediate Actions (First Hour)
- [ ] Confirm vulnerability details
- [ ] Assess blast radius and impact
- [ ] Determine if emergency patch needed
- [ ] Notify stakeholders
## Investigation Phase (2-4 Hours)
- [ ] Reproduce vulnerability in test environment
- [ ] Analyze affected code/components
- [ ] Review similar vulnerabilities in codebase
- [ ] Assess customer impact
## Remediation Phase (4-24 Hours)
- [ ] Develop fix/patch
- [ ] Test fix in staging environment
- [ ] Prepare deployment plan
- [ ] Coordinate customer communications
## Deployment Phase (24+ Hours)
- [ ] Deploy fix to production
- [ ] Verify fix effectiveness
- [ ] Monitor for regressions
- [ ] Update security documentation
## Post-Incident Activities
- [ ] Conduct post-mortem review
- [ ] Update detection rules
- [ ] Improve prevention measures
- [ ] Document lessons learned
EOF
- name: Create Response Issue
run: |
gh issue create \
--title "Vulnerability Response: ${{ github.event.issue.title }}" \
--body-file response_plan_${{ github.event.issue.number }}.md \
--label "vulnerability-response" \
--assignee "${{ github.repository_owner }}"Federal Attestation and Compliance Reporting
SSDF Attestation Template
SSDF_Attestation_Template:
Company_Information:
Legal_Name: "[Company Legal Name]"
DUNS_Number: "[DUNS Number]"
CAGE_Code: "[CAGE Code if applicable]"
Primary_NAICS: "[NAICS Code]"
Point_of_Contact: "[Name, Title, Email, Phone]"
Software_Information:
Product_Name: "[Software Product Name]"
Version: "[Version Number]"
Product_Description: "[Brief description of software functionality]"
Deployment_Model: "[SaaS, On-Premise, Hybrid]"
Target_Audience: "[Federal, Commercial, Both]"
SSDF_Compliance_Attestation:
Attestation_Date: "[Date]"
Attestation_Period: "[Start Date] to [End Date]"
Authorizing_Official: "[Name and Title]"
Practice_Group_Compliance:
PO_Prepare_Organization:
PO_1_Security_Requirements: "✅ Compliant"
PO_2_Roles_Responsibilities: "✅ Compliant"
PO_3_Personnel_Support: "✅ Compliant"
PO_4_Third_Party_Requirements: "✅ Compliant"
PO_5_Tools_and_Standards: "✅ Compliant"
PS_Protect_Software:
PS_1_Protect_Software: "✅ Compliant"
PS_2_Tampering_Detection: "✅ Compliant"
PS_3_Archive_Software: "✅ Compliant"
PW_Produce_Secured_Software:
PW_1_Design_Securely: "✅ Compliant"
PW_2_Review_Design: "✅ Compliant"
PW_3_Verify_Third_Party: "✅ Compliant"
PW_4_Reuse_Components: "✅ Compliant"
PW_5_Create_Documentation: "✅ Compliant"
PW_6_Build_Software: "✅ Compliant"
PW_7_Review_Code: "✅ Compliant"
PW_8_Test_Executable: "✅ Compliant"
PW_9_Configuration_Management: "✅ Compliant"
RV_Respond_Vulnerabilities:
RV_1_Identify_Vulnerabilities: "✅ Compliant"
RV_2_Assess_Vulnerabilities: "✅ Compliant"
RV_3_Respond_Vulnerabilities: "✅ Compliant"
Supporting_Evidence:
- "Secure development lifecycle documentation"
- "Code review and testing procedures"
- "Vulnerability management processes"
- "Third-party component management"
- "Security training records"
- "Incident response procedures"
Limitations_Exceptions:
- "[List any limitations or exceptions to compliance]"
- "[Describe compensating controls if applicable]"
Signature_Block:
Name: "[Authorizing Official Name]"
Title: "[Title]"
Date: "[Date]"
Signature: "[Digital or Physical Signature]"Continuous Compliance Monitoring
Continuous_SSDF_Monitoring:
Automated_Compliance_Dashboard: |
# SSDF Compliance Dashboard Generator
import json
import sqlite3
from datetime import datetime, timedelta
import subprocess
class SSFDComplianceDashboard:
def __init__(self):
self.db_path = "/opt/ssdf/compliance.db"
self.init_database()
def init_database(self):
conn = sqlite3.connect(self.db_path)
cursor = conn.cursor()
cursor.execute('''
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS ssdf_evidence (
id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
practice_group TEXT NOT NULL,
practice_id TEXT NOT NULL,
evidence_type TEXT NOT NULL,
evidence_path TEXT NOT NULL,
collection_date TEXT NOT NULL,
compliance_status TEXT NOT NULL
)
''')
cursor.execute('''
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS compliance_metrics (
id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
metric_date TEXT NOT NULL,
practice_group TEXT NOT NULL,
compliance_percentage REAL NOT NULL,
findings_count INTEGER NOT NULL,
critical_findings INTEGER NOT NULL
)
''')
conn.commit()
conn.close()
def collect_po_evidence(self):
"""Collect Prepare Organization evidence"""
evidence = []
# PO.1 - Security Requirements
if self.check_file_exists("docs/security-requirements.md"):
evidence.append({
'practice_group': 'PO',
'practice_id': 'PO.1',
'evidence_type': 'security_requirements_doc',
'evidence_path': 'docs/security-requirements.md',
'compliance_status': 'COMPLIANT'
})
# PO.2 - Roles and Responsibilities
if self.check_file_exists("docs/security-roles.md"):
evidence.append({
'practice_group': 'PO',
'practice_id': 'PO.2',
'evidence_type': 'roles_responsibilities_doc',
'evidence_path': 'docs/security-roles.md',
'compliance_status': 'COMPLIANT'
})
# PO.3 - Personnel Training
training_records = self.get_training_completion_rate()
evidence.append({
'practice_group': 'PO',
'practice_id': 'PO.3',
'evidence_type': 'training_records',
'evidence_path': 'training_completion_data',
'compliance_status': 'COMPLIANT' if training_records > 90 else 'NON_COMPLIANT'
})
return evidence
def collect_ps_evidence(self):
"""Collect Protect Software evidence"""
evidence = []
# PS.1 - Software Protection
repo_protection = self.check_repository_protection()
evidence.append({
'practice_group': 'PS',
'practice_id': 'PS.1',
'evidence_type': 'repository_protection',
'evidence_path': 'github_branch_protection',
'compliance_status': 'COMPLIANT' if repo_protection else 'NON_COMPLIANT'
})
# PS.2 - Tampering Detection
integrity_monitoring = self.check_integrity_monitoring()
evidence.append({
'practice_group': 'PS',
'practice_id': 'PS.2',
'evidence_type': 'integrity_monitoring',
'evidence_path': 'aide_configuration',
'compliance_status': 'COMPLIANT' if integrity_monitoring else 'NON_COMPLIANT'
})
return evidence
def generate_compliance_report(self):
"""Generate comprehensive SSDF compliance report"""
conn = sqlite3.connect(self.db_path)
cursor = conn.cursor()
# Get current compliance status
cursor.execute('''
SELECT
practice_group,
COUNT(*) as total_practices,
SUM(CASE WHEN compliance_status = 'COMPLIANT' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) as compliant_practices
FROM ssdf_evidence
WHERE collection_date >= date('now', '-7 days')
GROUP BY practice_group
''')
compliance_summary = {}
overall_compliance = 0
total_practices = 0
for row in cursor.fetchall():
group, total, compliant = row
compliance_percentage = (compliant / total) * 100
compliance_summary[group] = {
'total_practices': total,
'compliant_practices': compliant,
'compliance_percentage': compliance_percentage
}
overall_compliance += compliant
total_practices += total
overall_percentage = (overall_compliance / total_practices * 100) if total_practices > 0 else 0
report = {
'report_date': datetime.now().isoformat(),
'report_type': 'SSDF Compliance Assessment',
'overall_compliance_percentage': overall_percentage,
'compliance_status': 'COMPLIANT' if overall_percentage >= 95 else 'NON_COMPLIANT',
'practice_group_summary': compliance_summary,
'recommendations': self.generate_recommendations(compliance_summary),
'next_assessment_date': (datetime.now() + timedelta(days=30)).isoformat()
}
conn.close()
return report
def generate_recommendations(self, compliance_summary):
"""Generate recommendations based on compliance gaps"""
recommendations = []
for group, data in compliance_summary.items():
if data['compliance_percentage'] < 100:
recommendations.append({
'practice_group': group,
'issue': f"Only {data['compliance_percentage']:.1f}% compliant",
'recommendation': f"Address {data['total_practices'] - data['compliant_practices']} non-compliant practices in {group}",
'priority': 'HIGH' if data['compliance_percentage'] < 80 else 'MEDIUM'
})
return recommendations
# Generate daily compliance report
if __name__ == "__main__":
dashboard = SSFDComplianceDashboard()
# Collect evidence
po_evidence = dashboard.collect_po_evidence()
ps_evidence = dashboard.collect_ps_evidence()
# Store evidence
for evidence in po_evidence + ps_evidence:
dashboard.store_evidence(evidence)
# Generate report
report = dashboard.generate_compliance_report()
# Save report
with open(f'/opt/ssdf/reports/compliance_report_{datetime.now().strftime("%Y%m%d")}.json', 'w') as f:
json.dump(report, f, indent=2)
print(f"SSDF Compliance: {report['overall_compliance_percentage']:.1f}%")
print(f"Status: {report['compliance_status']}")Implementation Timeline and Budget
90-Day SSDF Implementation Plan
SSDF_Implementation_Timeline:
Phase_1_Foundation_Days_1_30:
Week_1_Assessment:
- "Current development process assessment"
- "Gap analysis against SSDF requirements"
- "Tool stack evaluation"
- "Team training needs assessment"
Week_2_Planning:
- "SSDF implementation roadmap creation"
- "Tool procurement and setup"
- "Team role assignments"
- "Documentation template creation"
Week_3_4_Basic_Implementation:
- "Security requirements documentation (PO.1)"
- "Role definitions and training plan (PO.2, PO.3)"
- "Repository protection setup (PS.1)"
- "Basic vulnerability scanning (RV.1)"
Phase_2_Core_Controls_Days_31_60:
Week_5_6_Development_Security:
- "Threat modeling process (PW.1)"
- "Security code review process (PW.7)"
- "SAST/DAST tool integration (PW.8)"
- "Third-party component management (PW.3)"
Week_7_8_Protection_Response:
- "Software archival process (PS.3)"
- "Tampering detection setup (PS.2)"
- "Vulnerability assessment process (RV.2)"
- "Incident response procedures (RV.3)"
Phase_3_Optimization_Days_61_90:
Week_9_10_Automation:
- "CI/CD security integration"
- "Automated evidence collection"
- "Compliance monitoring dashboard"
- "SBOM generation automation"
Week_11_12_Validation:
- "Internal compliance assessment"
- "External penetration testing"
- "Documentation review and finalization"
- "Federal attestation preparation"
Budget_Estimate:
Tools_and_Technology: "$15,000"
Professional_Services: "$25,000"
Internal_Team_Time: "$35,000"
Training_and_Certification: "$8,000"
Total_Budget: "$83,000"Conclusion: Your Path to SSDF Compliance
NIST 800-218 SSDF compliance is rapidly becoming table stakes for federal software suppliers. The framework’s focus on secure development practices aligns perfectly with modern DevSecOps principles, making implementation both achievable and beneficial for SaaS companies.
Key Success Factors:
- Integrate with existing workflows – Don’t build parallel processes
- Automate evidence collection – Manual tracking doesn’t scale
- Focus on high-impact practices – Not all practices are equally important
- Prepare for federal attestation – Documentation quality matters
The implementation approach outlined here has helped numerous SaaS companies achieve SSDF compliance within 90 days while improving their overall security posture. Most importantly, it positions them to compete for lucrative federal contracts that require secure software development practices.
For SaaS companies seeking accelerated SSDF compliance, platforms like PathShield provide pre-configured SSDF frameworks with automated evidence collection, compliance monitoring, and federal attestation support – reducing the 90-day implementation timeline to 30 days while ensuring comprehensive coverage of all practice groups.
Remember: SSDF compliance isn’t just about meeting federal requirements – it’s about building security into your development process from the ground up. The practices you implement today will protect your software, your customers, and your business for years to come.
The federal software market is worth $50+ billion annually. SSDF compliance is your entry ticket to this lucrative opportunity. Start implementing today, and position your SaaS company as a trusted federal software supplier.
