In today’s rapidly evolving software development landscape, there is a growing divide between traditional security approaches and the needs of modern DevSecOps. Many platforms are still stuck on outdated notions like “shift left” and runtime protection, which offer reactive security measures but fail to address the root causes of vulnerabilities. To truly embed security in modern development workflows, organizations must focus on proactive, start left methodologies that integrate security early in the CI/CD pipeline and eliminate inefficiencies like alert fatigue and unnecessary tool churn.

Why Runtime Protection and “Shift Left” Miss the Mark

Runtime protection, can be likened to RASP (Runtime Application Self-Protection) or WAF (Web Application Firewall) solutions, is often pitched as a last line of defense against vulnerabilities during runtime. However, this approach doesn’t align with the proactive start left methodology and often creates more problems than it solves. Here’s why:

1. Runtime Container Security: Overhead Without the Benefit

• Runtime security solutions monitor and normalize log patterns of a given container, but they typically don’t block malicious activity in real time. Instead, they generate alerts based on anomalous behavior.
• These alerts quickly overwhelm security teams, leading to alert fatigue. If blocking is an option, it introduces a high level of risk due to the dynamic nature of containers. New patterns can emerge regularly as containers are refreshed, causing legitimate activity to be flagged and blocked. This leads to unnecessary overhead in triaging and clearing alerts, and ultimately, security teams may ignore these alerts altogether.

2.  The High Risk of Blocking in Runtime

•  If a runtime solution does attempt to block malicious activity, it runs the risk of blocking legitimate traffic or operations, especially as container patterns evolve during redeployment. The ever-refreshing nature of containers means that what might be considered anomalous at one point could simply be part of a legitimate new pattern introduced during a refresh.
• Blocking features in this context can result in severe disruptions to operations, forcing teams to turn off or ignore security controls in order to maintain uptime.

3. Alert Fatigue: The Cost of Reactive Security

• Relying on runtime security means that security teams spend their time reviewing and clearing a flood of alerts. Over time, this leads to alert fatigue, where important issues are missed, and security tools are either neglected or disabled.

“Shift left” security—moving security earlier in the software development lifecycle—while an improvement over traditional runtime protection, still fails to address the root problem: building secure software from the first line of code. The "shift left" mentality still treats security as a separate step that happens after the software is developed, rather than embedding it as part of the development process itself.

A More Efficient Solution: Embedding Security Early with Start Left Methodologies

Rather than depending on reactive runtime security or flawed "shift left" models, organizations need to adopt an approach that builds security into the development pipeline from the outset. Here’s what that looks like:

1. Proactive Container Security: Automating the Right Controls

• In a highly efficient CI/CD pipeline, containers should be continuously redeployed with up-to-date baseline images, even in the absence of code changes. This is akin to giving containers a TTL (Time to Live)—once their TTL expires, they’re cycled out and replaced with fresh instances, making it more difficult for any unauthorized access or vulnerabilities to persist.
• This process can be automated, making it far more effective than runtime monitoring or reactive security. By continuously cycling out containers, you eliminate potential vulnerabilities or compromised production environments without relying on runtime logs or alerts. This approach also dramatically reduces alert fatigue and the manual overhead associated with clearing alerts.

2. CD Approach to Eliminate Vulnerabilities

• A continuous deployment (CD) approach focuses on eliminating vulnerabilities and compromised containers as part of the regular development and redeployment cycle, rather than waiting for a runtime security solution to catch them after they’re live.
• This approach, aligned with start left practices, integrates security directly into the CI/CD pipeline—proactively catching vulnerabilities during the creation of containers, rather than reacting to them after deployment.

3. A Holistic DevOps Culture

• Beyond just tooling, the start left approach encourages a cultural shift toward DevOps practices that prioritize building high-quality, secure products from the ground up. Security isn’t something tacked on or monitored after the fact—it’s a core part of how the product is built, deployed, and maintained.
• A complementary DDoS/WAF service can be employed to mitigate external threats like DDoS attacks without relying on bloated runtime tools that don’t address the underlying security concerns. This combination ensures that the environment is secure from external scans while internal security is managed through best practices built into the development pipeline.

Stop Enabling Bad Practices: Consolidate and Focus

The current focus on “shift left” and runtime protection isn’t just ineffective—it’s enabling bad practices. The industry continues to promote a patchwork of tools, creating unnecessary complexity and leading to alert fatigue. Many organizations find themselves relying on a patchwork of tools to cover the gaps left by reactive security measures, leading to higher costs, tool churn, and a fragmented security approach.

Instead of adding more tools and complexity, organizations need to consolidate and focus on tools that are built for modern software development and aligned with start left principles.

These platforms should:

• Embed security directly into the CI/CD pipeline, ensuring vulnerabilities are caught and mitigated before they reach production.
• Leverage open-source and modern third-party tools that are flexible, scalable, and designed for proactive security rather than reactive fixes.
• Automate container security by regularly redeploying updated containers and cycling out older ones, minimizing the risk of unauthorized access and alert fatigue.

The Future of Security is Proactive, Not Reactive

If your current security model is relying on shift left or runtime protection, it’s time to rethink your approach. The future of security lies in proactive measures, where security is built into the development process and automated throughout the CI/CD pipeline. 

By embracing start left methodologies, organizations can stop reacting to security issues after they’ve already become problems and start building security into their software from day one. This reduces costs, eliminates inefficiencies, and empowers teams to deliver secure, resilient software faster and with greater confidence.

Conclusion: Don’t Enable Old Ways—Adopt Start Left for True DevSecOps

Traditional security platforms that enable tool chaos, runtime protection, and shift left practices are holding organizations back. To move forward, companies need to adopt solutions that prioritize integrity, scalability, and proactive security. The future of security lies in start left, where teams build security into the fabric of their workflows and eliminate vulnerabilities before they ever reach production.

By consolidating tools, focusing on modern methodologies, and automating critical security controls, you can finally move away from inefficient, reactive practices and create a secure foundation that supports innovation and speed.