Software Security Scoring for Cloud Application Deployment

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current SDLC processes are not designed to comply with security, control, and manageability policies for cloud applications, leading to vulnerabilities and non-compliance, especially in applications with rapid developments and multiple dependencies.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that assesses software applications for security by determining architecture, compliance, and vulnerability scores, providing a security score to ensure secure deployment and continuous validation, using a code compliance system integrated with CI/CD pipelines and security testing tools.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If conventional SDLC processes are used for cloud applications, then development speed and flexibility are maintained, but security compliance and vulnerability prevention deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevelopment speedVSAvoidsecurity compliance
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary security assessments during the development phase by evaluating architecture scores, compliance scores, and vulnerability scores before deployment. This allows security issues to be identified and addressed early in the SDLC process, maintaining development speed while ensuring security compliance through proactive rather than reactive security measures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements continuous feedback loops that provide real-time security scoring and compliance monitoring throughout the development and deployment process. Developers receive immediate feedback on security issues, allowing them to correct problems without halting the overall development workflow, thus maintaining productivity while improving security reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If comprehensive security assessments are performed on all software applications, then security compliance improves, but complexity of the development process increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity complianceVSAvoidprocess complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The comprehensive security assessment is segmented into three independent scoring components: architecture score, compliance score, and vulnerability score. Each component evaluates a specific aspect of security separately, allowing the system to manage complexity through modular assessment while providing complete security coverage. This segmentation enables targeted improvements without requiring complete process redesign.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Measurement precision

If security evaluations are performed for every application update, then vulnerability detection improves, but development time and resource consumption increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevulnerability detection accuracyVSAvoiddevelopment time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs partial security evaluations by focusing on the three critical scoring areas (architecture, compliance, vulnerability) rather than conducting exhaustive security audits for every update. This partial action approach provides sufficient vulnerability detection accuracy for cloud application security requirements while significantly reducing the time and resource overhead compared to comprehensive re-assessments of all security aspects with every update.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS20250021665A1Secured systems development lifecycle of software applications
Publication Date: 2025.01.16 WIZ INC
  • US20250021665A1 patent drawing
  • US20250021665A1 patent drawing
  • US20250021665A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A system and method for securing the development of software applications are provided. The method includes receiving at least one trigger from a software development tool; determining an architecture score, wherein the architecture score measures the degree to which the architecture of the developed software application matches an approved architecture; determining a compliance score, wherein the compliance score measures the compliance of the developed security application to at least a set of one predefined security policy; determining a vulnerability score, wherein the vulnerability score measures the resiliency of the developed software application to at least reported security vulnerabilities; and determining a security score based on the architecture score, the compliance score, and the vulnerability score, wherein the security score is a measure indicating if the developed software application can be securely deployed without harming an environment of an organization executing the developed software application.