Table of Contents
- Who this guide is for
- What you likely care about
- Before you begin
- Step 1: Use Quality metrics to understand risk patterns
- Step 2: Connect risk to delivery behavior
- Step 3: Define security standards you can encode
- Step 4: Use gitStream to enforce low-noise security guardrails
- Recommended operating rhythm
- Recommended next articles
Security & Compliance
This guide is for Security and Compliance leaders who need line-of-sight from security policies to daily engineering behavior. It focuses on using Metrics → Quality , Metrics → Delivery , and gitStre…
Updated
by heather.hazell
- Who this guide is for
- What you likely care about
- Before you begin
- Step 1: Use Quality metrics to understand risk patterns
- Step 2: Connect risk to delivery behavior
- Step 3: Define security standards you can encode
- Step 4: Use gitStream to enforce low-noise security guardrails
- Recommended operating rhythm
- Recommended next articles
This guide is for Security and Compliance leaders who need line-of-sight from security policies to daily engineering behavior. It focuses on using Metrics → Quality, Metrics → Delivery, and gitStream to design low-noise standards that reduce risk without stalling development.
TL;DR – Security & Compliance:
- Use Metrics → Quality and related reliability signals to identify risk patterns.
- Use Metrics → Delivery to understand how PR and deployment behavior influence that risk.
- Use gitStream to encode security standards as low-noise PR policies (review rules, sensitive paths, etc.).
- Partner with DevEx/Platform and SRE to ensure security guardrails support, not block, delivery.
Start here in 15 minutes
- Choose one security-critical area (service, repo, or directory).
- In Metrics → Quality, review the last quarter for that area and note any periods with more issues or incidents.
- Switch to Metrics → Delivery for the same team or service and check:
- Whether those periods lined up with large PRs or rushed reviews.
- Write down one concrete behavior you want to improve (e.g., “no huge PRs in auth,” “extra review on certain paths”).
- If gitStream is enabled, open the gitStream Hub and identify where that behavior could be turned into a simple rule.
- Bring this as a single, focused ask to your DevEx / Platform partner.
Who this guide is for
- Security leads responsible for secure SDLC practices.
- Compliance owners who must show evidence of controls (e.g., for audits).
- Leaders partnering with DevEx, SRE, and QA/Release on standards.
What you likely care about
- Are risky changes being caught early enough in the lifecycle?
- Do high-risk areas (services, repos, directories) get the right level of scrutiny?
- Can you demonstrate that security standards are actually followed, not just written down?
- Can guardrails scale automatically instead of relying on manual review for everything?
Before you begin
- Key repos and teams are connected in LinearB.
- You know which services or directories are security-critical (e.g., auth, payments).
- You have access to Metrics → Delivery and Metrics → Quality for relevant teams.
- gitStream is enabled or can be enabled on critical repos (if your org uses it).
Step 1: Use Quality metrics to understand risk patterns
Goal: See where quality issues cluster so you know where to harden controls.
Where: Metrics → Quality
- Focus on services / teams tied to sensitive data or critical flows.
- Review:
- Signals that show defect or incident patterns over time.
- Changes in quality around release windows or large feature pushes.
- Tag 1–2 services or areas where quality risk looks consistently higher than peers.
Step 2: Connect risk to delivery behavior
Goal: Link security/quality issues to how code is actually shipped.
Where: Metrics → Delivery
- For each high-risk service/area, look at:
- PR size distribution (many big changes vs. smaller, safer ones).
- Review patterns – are PRs getting enough review time?
- Stage-level trends (e.g., frequent rushed reviews before deploy).
- Note patterns like:
- “Large, multi-feature PRs going into auth service with minimal review.”
- “Critical services see more rushed merges near release deadlines.”
Step 3: Define security standards you can encode
Goal: Turn policies into precise, testable rules.
- Pick a short list of behaviors for critical paths, such as:
- Minimum review depth or required reviewers for sensitive directories.
- Stricter limits on PR size in high-risk services.
- Extra checks for PRs touching authentication, authorization, or data-access code.
- Partner with DevEx/SRE to ensure these standards are:
- Clear (easy to understand).
- Low-noise (few false positives).
- Scoped to high-risk areas first.
Step 4: Use gitStream to enforce low-noise security guardrails
Goal: Encode standards as automation instead of tribal knowledge.
Where: gitStream Hub (if enabled)
- Start with a single critical repo or directory.
- Implement rules such as:
- Route PRs touching sensitive directories to specific reviewers.
- Flag PRs that exceed a safe size threshold in those areas.
- Require certain checks (tests, linting, scanning) before merge.
- Roll out gradually and watch Delivery metrics to confirm you’re not creating bottlenecks.
Principle: Favor targeted guardrails in high-risk areas over blanket rules everywhere.
This keeps signal high and pushback low.
Recommended operating rhythm
Monthly
- Review Quality and Delivery patterns for 1–2 critical services.
- Identify one security behavior to improve (e.g., review depth on auth changes).
- Partner with DevEx/SRE to add or adjust a gitStream rule for that behavior.
Quarterly
- Summarize:
- Where security guardrails have been applied.
- Any change in defect/incident patterns for those areas.
- Use this summary as part of audit evidence and roadmap discussions.
Recommended next articles
How did we do?
SRE, Infra, Reliability
Tech Lead & Developer