Compose a pipeline
Pick the domains you are responsible for. Every control the graph holds for them is placed into the lifecycle phase where it belongs, with the frameworks it evidences and the attacks it stops.
Domains
- Static Code Analysis20
- Dependency Management24
- Container Security×
- Exposure & Vulnerability Management15
- Endpoint Protection6
- Secrets & Identity Security24
- Build Integrity & Cryptographic Trust19
- CI/CD Pipeline Security10
- Runtime Application Validation25
- Runtime & Kubernetes Protection×
- AI Model & Agent Security16
- Identity & Access Management16
- Cloud Security Posture14
- Package Registry & Provenance Security13
- API Security12
- Detection & Response×
- SBOM & Component Visibility12
- Vendor Governance12
- Infrastructure-as-Code Security11
- Developer Security & Secure Coding10
- Secure Design & Threat Modeling10
- Governance, Risk & Compliance8
- Source Control Security8
- Data Protection2
- Email & Collaboration Security1
Maturity ceiling
Controls carry the maturity level a program needs to run them. Raising the ceiling adds depth and volume; level 3 is a realistic target for most teams.
- GOV Governance and assurance
- The stream that decides what blocks, and proves it blocked.
- SUP Open source and third-party supply
- Everything you did not write, arriving faster than you can review it.
- DEV Design and development
- Where the cost of a fix is lowest and the attention is shortest.
- DEL Build and delivery
- The machine that makes the thing, and the largest single target in the chain.
- VER Testing and validation
- The stream that finds out whether any of the others worked.
- OPS Runtime and platform
- The last place to stop something, and the most expensive.
- OBS Detection and continuous observation
- The only stream whose answer changes while nothing else does.
The figure is how many controls the field places in that cell and the wash behind it is how much of the cell you have decided — 49 targeted, 0 ignored, 284 still open, of 333. A ring means the cell is closed. Your 37 controls account for 49 of those, because a control that belongs at build and again at deploy is two decisions about where it runs rather than one. Ignoring a control counts as decided and leaves the denominator, so coverage measures what you said you would do rather than everything that exists.
The dashed rules are the two boundaries every pipeline has, whatever its platform: intake at build and release at release. Both default open — nothing is refused unless something was configured to refuse it.
The columns are drawn as a row here and as a loop elsewhere, and the same eight phases are the eight color groups a player walks around the DevSecOpoly board, in these same colors. The shape is a convenience. What is real is that each phase is a set of activities, and an activity is only worth doing because it enables a capability.
37 capabilities appear 49 times, because a control can belong at more than one point in the lifecycle. Digest verification, for instance, is enforced at build and checked again at deploy — the same capability doing a different job.
- 01
Plan
2 capabilities
- Security Champions ProgramDR · level 2 · 5 controlsNo product
- Tabletop Exercise ProgramDR · level 3 · 5 controlsNo product
- 02
Code
1 capability
- 03
Build
8 capabilities
- Base Image CVE Remediation AutomationCONTAINER · level 3 · 5 controlsCompare2 scored of 12
- Container Image Vulnerability ScanningCONTAINER · level 2 · counters 1 · 7 controlsList only1 scored of 20
- Container Malware ScanningCONTAINER · level 3 · counters 3 · 2 controlsOne product1 product
- Continuous Image Rebuild & Freshness ManagementCONTAINER · level 4 · 2 controlsCompare2 scored of 6
- Dockerfile & Image Configuration LintingCONTAINER · level 2 · 5 controlsList only4 products
- Image Digest Pinning EnforcementCONTAINER · level 2 · counters 2 · 3 controlsOne product1 product
- Image Layer & Provenance AnalysisCONTAINER · level 3 · 2 controlsList only2 products
- Minimal Hardened Base ImagesCONTAINER · level 3 · counters 3 · 7 controlsCompare2 scored of 14
- 05
Release
3 capabilities
- 06
Deploy
6 capabilities
- Image Digest Pinning EnforcementCONTAINER · level 2 · counters 2 · 3 controlsOne product1 product
- Kubernetes Admission ControlK8S · level 3 · counters 3 · 4 controlsList only6 products
- Kubernetes RBAC & Service Account Least PrivilegeK8S · level 3 · counters 3 · 4 controlsOne product1 product
- Service Mesh mTLS EnforcementK8S · level 4 · 5 controlsList only3 products
- Workload Network Micro-segmentationK8S · level 3 · counters 3 · 5 controlsList only4 products
- Workload Runtime HardeningK8S · level 3 · counters 2 · 5 controlsList only5 products
- 07
Operate
18 capabilities
- Container Image Vulnerability ScanningCONTAINER · level 2 · counters 1 · 7 controlsList only1 scored of 20
- Continuous Image Rebuild & Freshness ManagementCONTAINER · level 4 · 2 controlsCompare2 scored of 6
- Cloud Workload ProtectionK8S · level 3 · counters 3 · 3 controlsList only6 products
- Container Drift PreventionK8S · level 4 · counters 2 · 2 controlsList only6 products
- Kubernetes RBAC & Service Account Least PrivilegeK8S · level 3 · counters 3 · 4 controlsOne product1 product
- Kubernetes Security Posture ManagementK8S · level 3 · counters 2 · 6 controlsList only9 products
- Runtime Application Self-ProtectionK8S · level 4 · counters 2 · 2 controlsList only3 products
- Runtime Threat DetectionK8S · level 3 · counters 5 · 5 controlsList only14 products
- Service Mesh mTLS EnforcementK8S · level 4 · 5 controlsList only3 products
- Virtual PatchingK8S · level 3 · counters 1 · 2 controlsList only4 products
- Web Application FirewallK8S · level 2 · counters 2 · 3 controlsList only5 products
- Workload Network Micro-segmentationK8S · level 3 · counters 3 · 5 controlsList only4 products
- Incident Response Playbook ManagementDR · level 2 · 7 controlsNo product
- Real-time Threat DetectionDR · level 3 · counters 6 · 5 controlsCompare2 scored of 5
- Regulatory Incident & Vulnerability ReportingDR · level 3 · 5 controlsNo product
- Security Log Collection & RetentionDR · level 1 · table stakes · 8 controlsList only6 products
- Supply Chain Incident ResponseDR · level 3 · counters 4 · 6 controlsOne product1 product
- Tabletop Exercise ProgramDR · level 3 · 5 controlsNo product
- 08
Monitor
11 capabilities
- Automated Investigation & ResponseDR · level 4 · counters 2 · 3 controlsCompare2 scored of 4
- Detection Engineering as CodeDR · level 4 · 2 controlsList only5 products
- Engineering Platform Audit Log MonitoringDR · level 3 · counters 5 · 7 controlsList only6 products
- Extended Detection & Response CorrelationDR · level 3 · counters 3 · 2 controlsList only1 scored of 2
- Managed Detection & ResponseDR · level 3 · 3 controlsList only2 products
- Real-time Threat DetectionDR · level 3 · counters 6 · 5 controlsCompare2 scored of 5
- Security Information & Event ManagementDR · level 2 · 5 controlsList only7 products
- Security Orchestration & Automated ResponseDR · level 3 · 3 controlsList only1 scored of 5
- Threat HuntingDR · level 4 · counters 3 · 2 controlsCompare2 scored of 10
- Threat Intelligence IntegrationDR · level 3 · 2 controlsList only2 products
- User & Entity Behavior AnalyticsDR · level 4 · counters 2 · 2 controlsList only3 products
Framework coverage
What this selection alone would let you evidence.
ASVS 5.0
4 of 17
OWASP Application Security Verification Standard (ASVS) 5.0.0
V3 · V12 · V13 · V16
CI/CD Top 10
3 of 10
OWASP Top 10 CI/CD Security Risks
CICD-SEC-10 · CICD-SEC-3 · CICD-SEC-9
S2C2F
1 of 25
OpenSSF Secure Supply Chain Consumption Framework (S2C2F)
INV-2
SSDF 1.1
4 of 42
NIST Secure Software Development Framework 1.1 (SP 800-218)
PW.9.1 · RV.1.1 · PS.3.2 · RV.2.2
Scorecard
1 of 20
OpenSSF Scorecard Checks
Pinned-Dependencies
Coverage by phase
Plan
Not modeledNo attack techniques are modeled against this phase yet. That is a gap in our model, not evidence the phase is safe.
Code
0 countered · 4 open of 4
Build
3 countered · 8 open of 11
Release
1 countered · 3 open of 4
Deploy
1 countered · 0 open of 1
Operate
4 countered · 9 open of 13
Monitor
Not modeledNo attack techniques are modeled against this phase yet. That is a gap in our model, not evidence the phase is safe.
What this selection leaves open
Trusted Supplier Compromise
Open12 real incidentsCommon · Operate
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 5 capabilities that would: Commercial Software Binary Composition Analysis, Continuous Vendor Risk Monitoring, Nth-Party Dependency Mapping, SaaS & CI/CD Integration Governance, and others.
Maintainer Account Takeover
Open10 real incidentsCommon · Release
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 6 capabilities that would: Developer & Maintainer MFA Enforcement, Maintainer & Publisher Risk Analysis, Malicious Package Detection, Minimum Release Age Enforcement, and others.
Stolen Publishing Token
Countered9 real incidentsCommon · Release
Countered by Engineering Platform Audit Log Monitoring.
Artifact Tampering After Build
Open7 real incidentsCommon · Release
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 7 capabilities that would: Artifact Digest Integrity Verification, Artifact Signing, Build Provenance Attestation, Dependency Pinning & Lockfile Integrity Verification, and others.
CI Runner Secret Exfiltration
Open5 real incidentsCommon · Build
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 4 capabilities that would: Build Egress Control & Network Monitoring, Pipeline Permission Minimization, Pipeline Runtime Anomaly Detection, Secrets Detection in CI Logs & Artifacts.
Exploitation of Known Vulnerable Component
Countered5 real incidentsVery Common · Operate
Countered by Container Image Vulnerability Scanning, Minimal Hardened Base Images, Runtime Application Self-Protection, Virtual Patching.
Leaked Secret Abuse
Open5 real incidentsVery Common · Operate
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 5 capabilities that would: Dynamic Short-Lived Credentials, Leaked Credential Validation & Revocation, Secret Push Protection, Secrets Detection in Source Code, and others.
Malicious Install-Time Script
Open5 real incidentsVery Common · Build
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 3 capabilities that would: Install Script & Package Behavior Analysis, Install Script Execution Restriction, Malicious Package Detection.
Abandoned Package or Domain Takeover
Open2 real incidentsCommon · Release
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 2 capabilities that would: Maintainer & Publisher Risk Analysis, Open Source Project Health Scoring.
Adversary-in-the-Middle MFA Phishing
Open2 real incidentsVery Common · Operate
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 3 capabilities that would: Developer & Maintainer MFA Enforcement, Multi-Factor Authentication, Phishing & Business Email Compromise Protection.
Build Cache Poisoning
Open2 real incidentsEmerging · Build
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 2 capabilities that would: Build Cache Poisoning Prevention, Untrusted Workflow Trigger Isolation.
Dependency Confusion
Open2 real incidentsCommon · Build
Nothing in this pipeline counters it. The graph knows 4 capabilities that would: Dependency Confusion Prevention, Dependency Curation & Allowlisting, Namespace & Package Name Reservation, Private Registry Proxy & Curation.
21 further techniques with no documented incidents
Not in this comparison
- Does not apply to this kind of pipeline
- stages A composed pipeline has no authored stages; its capabilities are grouped by lifecycle phase.
- gaps Gap analysis compares a stage's capabilities against the products that stage uses, and only a client pipeline records products in use. A composed pipeline models the design, not an estate.
How this was produced
Every figure above was read from the Gantry knowledge graph, version 7.1.0, and computed when you opened this page — in 301 ms on 2026-10-27. Nothing here is a cached verdict or a dataset assembled for marketing: it is the same model our engagements run on.