DevSecOps Ruined Your Compliance Program. Here’s How to Fix It.
You automated security checks into CI/CD. Great. Now your auditor wants evidence of every scan, every override, and every drift. Your pipeline produces 10,000 artifacts daily. Your ISMS produces spreadsheets. That isn’t sustainable.
You shifted left. You added SAST, DAST, and IaC scanning. Developers fix issues before merge.
Security improved. Compliance collapsed.
The problem nobody warned you about: your CI/CD pipeline now generates thousands of compliance-relevant artifacts every week scan reports, approvals, overrides, and configuration snapshots.
Your ISMS still expects “three screenshots per quarter.” That gap creates audit findings.
The solution is not to stop automating. The solution is to automate evidence collection with the same rigor you automated scanning.
The Great Disconnect: Pipelines vs. Evidence
DevOps sees compliance as a speed bump. Compliance sees DevOps as a black box. Both are right.
DevSecOps isn’t failing compliance is failing to consume what DevSecOps produces.
| What DevOps Produces | What Compliance Needs | The Gap |
|---|---|---|
| 5,000 weekly vulnerability scan findings | Evidence critical issues are remediated within SLA | Noise overwhelms evidence |
| 200 IaC drift detections | Proof production matches approved baselines | History isn’t preserved |
| 50 privilege elevation requests | Audit trail of approvals and business justification | Approvals buried in chat threads |
| 1,200 deployment logs | Evidence of segregation and controlled releases | Logs rotate before audits |
ISO 27017: The Cloud Controls That Live in Your Pipeline
ISO 27017 adds cloud-specific expectations to your ISO baseline. Every one of those controls is enforced or violated inside CI/CD. If controls aren’t enforced in the pipeline, they aren’t enforced at all.
| ISO 27017 Control | What it means | Where it lives in CI/CD |
|---|---|---|
| 8.1.5 | Shared roles & responsibilities | Service accounts, IaC credentials, scoped permissions |
| 8.2.3 | Return/removal of assets | Deprovisioning pipelines, destroy workflows |
| 9.5.1 | Segregation of virtual environments | Namespaces, VPC isolation, policies-as-code |
| 12.6.2 | VM hardening | Golden image build + CIS baseline scanning |
| 13.1.4 | Network policy alignment | Firewall rules-as-code, IaC scanning |
| 13.1.5 | Monitoring cloud activities | Audit log shipping, SIEM integration tests |
| 16.1.5 | Protect virtual environments | WAF rules-as-code, registry scanning, deploy gates |
Integration Pattern #1: VM Hardening as Code → Control 12.6.2 Evidence
You already harden images with golden image pipelines. The gap is not security. The gap is evidence landing in your ISMS automatically.
| Pipeline Stage | Action | Evidence Artifact |
|---|---|---|
| Image Build | Provision VM with CIS baseline | Build log proving hardening rules applied |
| Scan | Validate with baseline scanner | Pass/fail report with timestamp + image ID |
| Promotion | Only passing images promoted | Registry tag indicating “approved” |
| Evidence | Automation captures promotion event | Saved to SharePoint: /Controls/12.6.2/VM_Hardening/ |
Auditor question: “Prove all production VMs are hardened.”
Answer: open one folder. Every scan. Every version. Every timestamp.
Integration Pattern #2: IaC Scanning → Control 13.1.4 Evidence
Your network policy is already code. The fix is preserving scan results and approvals as evidence, automatically, every time.
- Before apply: scan Terraform plan for high-severity misconfigurations.
- If override needed: capture approver + justification in the PR audit trail.
- After apply: save plan JSON + scan report to /Controls/13.1.4/Network_Policies/.
Integration Pattern #3: Container Registry Scanning → Control 16.1.5 Evidence
Registries already scan images. That is malware protection and vulnerability prevention. The missing piece is evidence retention.
- Save scan results (severity, CVEs, fix versions) weekly.
- Capture block events for critical + exploitable CVEs.
- Store exceptions with business justification and approvals.
- Archive to: /Controls/16.1.5/Container_Security/.
Integration Pattern #4: Service Account Access Reviews → Control 8.1.5 Evidence
CI/CD service accounts accumulate permissions quietly. Auditors will ask who reviews them. If your answer is “we think we do,” it becomes a finding.
- Quarterly export: service accounts, roles, and scope (Azure AD / IAM).
- Reviewer attestation: approve or remove permissions with timestamp.
- Remediation link: create tickets automatically for removals.
- Evidence saved: /Controls/8.1.5/Service_Account_Reviews/.
The Compliance Debt of Manual Evidence
If pipeline artifacts disappear, you are building compliance debt. You may be compliant, but you cannot prove it. To auditors, that is the same outcome.
| Artifact | DevOps Lifespan | Audit Lifespan | Debt |
|---|---|---|---|
| IaC scan result | Days (PR merged) | Years (retention policy) | High |
| Container scan | Overwritten by next scan | Years | High |
| Build log | 30 days | Years | High |
| PR approval | Indefinite (git history) | Years | Low |
| Deployment timestamp | Indefinite (tags) | Years | Low |
Want to know where your pipeline is creating audit risk? We’ll map your CI/CD stages to ISO 27017 evidence requirements and show the fastest way to make artifacts land in the right SharePoint control folders automatically.
Why This Works Better With Our ISMS SharePoint Platform
You can build these integrations with generic SharePoint and Power Automate. Most teams won’t, because it competes with product delivery.
Our platform gives you the pre-configured evidence sinks and connector patterns so pipeline evidence lands in the correct control folder automatically.
| ISO 27017 Control | Evidence source | Platform pattern |
|---|---|---|
| 12.6.2 | VM hardening scans | Scan output → Evidence locker (JSON + pass/fail) |
| 13.1.4 | IaC policy scans | Terraform plan + scan → Control folder |
| 16.1.5 | Registry scans | CVE exports + exceptions → Evidence locker |
| 8.1.5 | Service account permissions | Quarterly export + attestation → Evidence folder |
| 8.2.3 | Deprovisioning logs | Destroy workflow output → Evidence locker |
We’ll review your CI/CD environment and your SharePoint evidence setup and show: which ISO 27017 controls you already satisfy, which artifacts you are not preserving, and one integration you can deploy this week to eliminate an evidence gap permanently.
P.S. ISO 27017 expects continuous evidence. Your pipeline already produces it.
The only question is whether it gets preserved automatically before an auditor asks.
The CI/CD to ISO 27017 Evidence Map
- All 7 ISO 27017 cloud controls mapped to CI/CD pipeline stages
- Exact scanner outputs that satisfy each control
- SharePoint evidence folder structure that organizes artifacts
- Retention expectations per artifact type
Stay Connected With Canadian Cyber
Follow us for DevSecOps compliance playbooks, audit-ready evidence automation, and Microsoft-based ISMS best practices:
