How can stakeholders ensure security architecture reviews are effective?

Security architecture review involves engagement of mutliple stakeholders aligned to follow clearly articulated processes. Prerequisites for a security architecture review: — Well defined HLD and LLD (High/Low level design document) — Data flow diagrams — Network diagram — Application tech stack Detailed Security review report to include: — Identity and access management for workloads and application — Security tools and process integration (Anti virus/ Golden AMI etc) — Secure software development lifecycle (SAST / DAST and PT findings) — Network ACL’s and DDOS protection strategies — Defining data segmentation boundaries — Defining application logs for security investigation — Defining Incident and detection response

Architecture review is the best way to diagnose the gaps in current design and data flow. HLD/LLD - Detailed design flow doc. You must have sound knowledge of the underlying infra & IAAS Platform's keys services i.e used as part of architecture. Bifurcate flows in two parts public facing and air gap. Bifurcate services as per your best efforts considering biz team overview. Assign severity considering biz critical or reputation sensitive data Prioritize the public facing infra while doing gap analysis !! Listen carefully what tech team demonstrating as they own app architecture. Write the key points wrt design flow and gaps which you observe during demonstration for the key services. Share your report to the respective team.

Clearly articulate the purpose and boundaries of the security architecture review, stating what it aims to achieve and what areas it will cover.

You should determine in which level you need to review the architecture and specify which component you need to review and all related or attached component. put s SMART goal based on compliance requirement you need to achieve

Once the scope has been defined, the next step is to gather the information needed to conduct the review. This may involve reviewing documentation, interviewing stakeholders, and conducting technical assessments. For example, stakeholders can gather information about the network architecture using tools like SolarWinds Network Performance Monitor.

With the information in hand, stakeholders can begin conducting the analysis needed to identify potential security risks and vulnerabilities. This may involve using tools like vulnerability scanners, penetration testing tools, and security information and event management (SIEM) tools. For example, stakeholders can use the vulnerability scanner Nessus to identify vulnerabilities in their IT infrastructure.

Once the analysis is complete, stakeholders can report their findings to the relevant parties, including senior management, IT staff, and other stakeholders. This report should include a detailed description of the risks and vulnerabilities identified, as well as recommendations for addressing them.

Furthermore, consider organizing a debrief session to provide an interactive platform for stakeholders to discuss the results. Encourage open dialogue, allowing participants to share their perspectives, insights, and suggestions in real-time. This collaborative approach not only fosters a deeper understanding of the security architecture review findings but also promotes a sense of collective ownership in addressing identified issues. Additionally, offer targeted resources for further clarification or in-depth exploration, catering to diverse learning preferences within the stakeholder group.

In addition to reporting the findings, stakeholders should also communicate the results of the review to all relevant parties. This may include providing training and education on security best practices, as well as implementing new policies and procedures to address the risks and vulnerabilities identified.

Moreover, establish key performance indicators (KPIs) specifically tailored to gauge the impact of the implemented recommendations over time. Regularly assess these KPIs to quantitatively measure the security enhancements achieved through the architecture review. Foster a culture of continuous learning by organizing knowledge-sharing sessions among team members, encouraging them to discuss real-world experiences and insights gained during the implementation phase. Leverage feedback mechanisms to gather input from end-users and stakeholders, providing a holistic perspective on the actual impact of the security improvements on daily operations.

Finally, stakeholders should monitor the progress of any changes made as a result of the review. This may involve conducting follow-up assessments to ensure that the risks and vulnerabilities identified have been addressed, as well as ongoing monitoring to identify new threats and vulnerabilities.

It is a good idea to keep track of the repeated findings (from step 4) and start developing patterns and anti-patterns to guide the designers so they will follow best practices. Also, this will help them to avoid known bad designs that will get rejected in the review process. (Enablement for shift left)

To ensure that security architecture reviews are effective, stakeholders should also consider engaging with external experts to provide an objective assessment of the security architecture, implementing a continuous monitoring program to identify new risks and vulnerabilities as they emerge, and regularly reviewing and updating the security architecture to ensure that it remains effective in the face of new threats and changing business needs.