<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Secure Sdlc on James Jardine</title><link>https://jamesgaryjardine.com/tags/secure-sdlc/</link><description>Recent content in Secure Sdlc on James Jardine</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2015 20:09:58 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://jamesgaryjardine.com/tags/secure-sdlc/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Versioning the SDLC to Indicate Security Level</title><link>https://jamesgaryjardine.com/versioning-the-sdlc-to-indicate-security-level/</link><pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2015 20:09:58 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://jamesgaryjardine.com/versioning-the-sdlc-to-indicate-security-level/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;I recently saw a tweet that mentioned how trending SecDevOps is becoming. For those that don’t know, that is the “secure” devops, or shall I say devops with security injected. It really got me thinking about not only devops, but also the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). We keep saying security can’t be bolted on and that it needs to be built in, yet we keep bolting it on.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>