Secure Coding
Description
Secure coding principles shall be applied to software development.
⚠️ Risk Impact
Insecure coding patterns become production vulnerabilities. SQLi, XSS, SSRF, IDOR — these are decade-old vulnerability classes that still appear in modern production code due to developer-training gaps.
🔍 How EchelonGraph Detects This
EchelonGraph's Tier 1 Cloud Scanner automatically checks for this condition across all connected cloud accounts. Violations are flagged as medium-severity findings with remediation guidance.
🔧 Remediation
Adopt secure coding standard (OWASP ASVS). Train developers. Gate PRs on SAST findings. Conduct security code reviews for high-risk changes. Library deprecation policy.
💀 Real-World Attack Scenario
A junior developer used string-concatenation for a SQL query — classic SQLi vulnerability. SAST flagged it; the alert was dismissed. The vulnerability shipped to production. Bug bounty researcher found it 4 months later; cost: $400K remediation + $1.2M customer-notification + reputation damage.
💰 Cost of Non-Compliance
Application-layer vulns: 26% of 2024 breaches (Verizon DBIR).
📋 Audit Questions
- 1.Secure coding standard adopted?
- 2.Developer training cadence?
- 3.SAST findings gate merges?
- 4.Security code review for high-risk changes?
🎯 MITRE ATT&CK Mapping
⚡ Common Pitfalls
- ⛔SAST in audit mode, alerts ignored
- ⛔Generic security training without language-specific depth
- ⛔Security code review only at design time, not at merge
📈 Business Value
Secure coding catches issues at 100× lower cost than post-deployment.
⏱️ Effort Estimate
Ongoing training + code review
EchelonGraph correlates SAST findings to live deployment state
🔗 Cross-Framework References
Automate ISO 27001 A.8.28 compliance
EchelonGraph continuously monitors this control across all your cloud accounts.
Start Free →