Back when I started developing code, and that was a fairly long time ago, the vast majority of developers I interacted with had taken that job because they were excited to be working with technology, and enjoyed instructing and controlling computers to an extent that was perhaps verging on the creepy.
Much of what I read about application security strongly reflects this even today, where developers are exhorted to remember that security is an aspect of the overall quality of your work as a developer.
This is great â€“ for those developers who care about the quality of their work. The artisans, if you like.
For every artisan I meet when talking to developers, thereâ€™s about another two or three who are more like labourers.
They turn up on time, they do their daily grind, and they leave on time. Even if the time expected / demanded of them is longer than the usual eight hours a day.
By itself, this isnâ€™t a bad thing. When you need another pair of â€śOKâ€ť and â€śCancelâ€ť buttons, you want someone to hammer them out, not hand-craft them in bronze. When you need an API to a back-end database, you want it thin and functional, not baroque and beautiful.
Itâ€™s important to note that these guys mostly do what they are told. They are clever, and can be told to do complex things, but they are not single-mindedly interested in the software they are building, except in as much as you will reward them for delivering it.
If these developers will build only the software theyâ€™re told to build, what are you telling them to build?
At any stage, are you actively telling your developers that they have to adhere to security policies, or that they have to build in any kind of â€śsecurity best practiceâ€ť, or even to â€śthink like an attackerâ€ť (much as I hate that phrase) â€“ Iâ€™d rather you tell them to â€śthink about all the ways every part of your code can fail, and work to prevent themâ€ť [â€śthink like a defenderâ€ť]?
Some of your developers will interject their own ideas of quality.
– But –
Most of your developers will only do as they have been instructed, and as their examples tell them.
The first thing to note is that you wonâ€™t reach these developers just with optional training, and you might not even reach them just with mandatory training. They will turn up to mandatory training, because it is required of them, and they may turn up to optional training because they get a dayâ€™s pay for it. But all the appeals to them to take on board the information youâ€™re giving them will fall upon deaf ears, if they return to their desks and donâ€™t get follow-up from their managers.
When your AppSec program makes training happen, your developersâ€™ managers must make it clear to their developers that they are expected to take part, they are expected to learn something, and they are expected to come back and start using and demonstrating what they have learned.
Curiously enough, thatâ€™s also helpful for the artisans.
Second, donâ€™t despair about these developers. They are useful and necessary, and as with all binary distinctions, the lines are not black and white, they are a spectrum of colours. There are developers at all stages between the â€śI turn up at 10, I work until 6 (as far as you know), and I do exactly what Iâ€™m toldâ€ť end and the â€śI love this software as if it were my own child, and I want to mould it into a perfect shining paragon of perfectionâ€ť end.
Donâ€™t despair, but be realistic about who you have hired, and who you will hire as a result of your interview techniques.
Third, if you want more artisans and fewer labourers, the only way to do that is to change your hiring and promotion techniques.
Screen for quality-biased developers during the interview process. Ask them â€śwhatâ€™s wrong with the codeâ€ť, and reward them for saying â€śitâ€™s not very easy to understand, the comments are awful, it uses too many complex constructs for the job itâ€™s doing, etcâ€ť.
Reward quality where you find it. â€śWe had feedback from one of the other developers on the team that you spent longer on this project than expected, but produced code that works flawlessly and is easy to maintain â€“ you exceed expectations.â€ť
Labourers as opposed to artisans have no internal â€śquality itchâ€ť to scratch, which means quality bars must be externally imposed, measured, and enforced.
What are you doing to reward developers for securing their development?