🗺️ DevSecOps Playbook Domains, Priority, Difficulty, and Adoption Roadmap

Intro: The public DevSecOps Playbook by 6mile is useful not because it introduces brand-new tools, but because it turns DevSecOps into an ordered backlog. It groups work into five lifecycle domains, assigns priority and difficulty, and maps those tasks to wider frameworks such as MVSP, ASVS, DSOMM, SSDF, CIS, and ISO.

What this page includes

the parts of the 6mile playbook that are most useful to import into this KB;

how to use priority and difficulty without turning them into cargo-cult scoring;

a practical 30 / 60 / 90+ day adoption roadmap;

a direct map from the playbook domains into the existing KB sections.

Why this playbook is worth borrowing from

The strongest idea in the 6mile playbook is simple:

security work is grouped into five domains across the software lifecycle;
the playbook contains 60 tasks across those domains;
each task is tagged with priority and difficulty;
many tasks are mapped to larger frameworks so teams can translate practical work into assurance language.

That makes the document useful as an operating model, not just a reading list.

The five domains

Playbook domain	What it is trying to control	Best matching KB areas
Development Environment	what happens on the developer workstation before code reaches central systems	Application Security, Learning Paths and Labs, Developer Workstation Hardening
Source Code Management	repository identity, review, ownership, and repo-level defaults	CI/CD and Software Supply Chain Security, Repository Secret Scanning
Continuous Improvement and Automation	pipelines, test environments, secret handling, centralized scanners, DAST, transient build security	Security Quality Gates and Release Blocking, Runner Isolation and Trust Boundaries
Deployment	runtime transport security, logging, WAF/CDN posture, emergency deployment path, security contact channels	Frontend and Browser Security, Detection and Response, Infrastructure and Cloud Security
Organizational Techniques	pentesting cadence, threat modeling, SIEM adoption, attack-surface discovery, vulnerability disclosure	Threat Modeling, Governance, Detection and Response

Priority and difficulty are for planning, not for dogma

The playbook uses Priority to express implementation order and Difficulty to express the expected effort.

That is valuable, but only if you interpret it correctly:

Priority means “implement sooner,” not “the only thing that matters”

A priority-1 control is usually one of these:

it removes a class of frequent mistakes;
it creates a strong control surface with low friction;
it enables several later controls.

Examples from the playbook that fit this pattern:

version control and centralized SCM;
MFA for repository access;
local and centralized secrets detection;
centralized SCA;
security contact files such as SECURITY.md and security.txt;
centralized logging;
attack-surface discovery.

Difficulty means “cost to implement well,” not “never do it”

Many medium or difficult items become reasonable once you already have:

versioned CI/CD definitions;
protected environments;
central identity and secrets handling;
reusable platform patterns.

Threat modeling, DAST, alternative deployment paths, data separation, and transient runner hardening often look hard before the platform work exists and much easier after it does.

A practical rollout model

30-day baseline

Focus on controls that reduce obvious developer and repository mistakes.

Recommended imports from the playbook:

secure code training and short developer enablement loops;
.gitignore hygiene and source-code versioning;
IDE plugins plus local SCA / SAST / secret scanning;
centralized SCM with user roles and MFA;
required pull requests and peer review;
CODEOWNERS and SECURITY.md;
a working CI/CD pipeline with a secure credential store;
centralized SCA and secret detection in CI;
valid TLS, HTTPS redirect, HSTS where applicable;
centralized application logging;
published vulnerability reporting path.

60-day scale-up

Once the basics exist, expand into reusable release controls.

Recommended imports:

application baseline “recipe” for new services;
org-level default repo files via .github or equivalent shared templates;
environment separation for dev / staging / prod;
centralized static analysis with triage policy;
release gates tied to protected environments;
security.txt at the application edge;
WAF or edge protection where the app profile justifies it;
attack-surface automation and recurring inventory review.

90-day and maturity track

This is where the harder but higher-value work becomes tractable.

Recommended imports:

anonymized data strategy for non-production environments;
CI/CD administration and control-boundary review;
DAST in the right lane for the right apps;
transient compute freshness and runner hardening;
tested emergency deployment path;
collaborative threat modeling process;
SIEM correlation across application, cloud, and platform logs;
bug bounty or structured external researcher intake where justified.