Back to all available

The Ephemeral DevOps pipeline: building for self-destruction (a ChaosSecOps approach)

computer-education
distributed-and-parallel-computing
security-and-privacy
software-engineering

Abstract

This paper introduces "Ephemeral DevOps," a novel approach to infrastructure and pipeline management based on the principle of planned self-destruction and continuous recreation. By embracing impermanence, this ChaosSecOps-driven methodology forces extreme automation, enhances resilience, proactively mitigates security vulnerabilities, and fosters a culture of continuous improvement. The methodology was evaluated through comprehensive implementation on a highly available, secure e-commerce platform on AWS, demonstrating quantifiable improvements in system reliability and security posture. Key results include elimination of configuration drift through automated Infrastructure as Code (IaC) rebuilding, 40% reduction in deployment time through forced automation practices, successful identification and proactive remediation of security vulnerabilities through regular environment recreation, and enhanced disaster recovery capabilities with complete environment rebuild times under 15 minutes. The approach represents a paradigm shift from traditional long-lived infrastructure to resilience-by-design methodologies, enabling faster deployments, improved security posture, and greater agility in the face of evolving threats. Ephemeral DevOps provides organizations with a systematic framework for building robust, secure, and highly automated systems capable of withstanding the challenges of modern digital landscapes.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].