← Back to all briefings
Developer 5 min read Published Updated Credibility 90/100

Security Engineering Briefing — NIST Releases SSDF 1.1

NIST’s February 2022 SSDF 1.1 update tightened federal expectations for secure development, compelling organisations to adjust operational controls, governance, and supplier management.

Zeph Tech Research Lead

Research lead, Zeph Tech

Timeline plotting source publication cadence sized by credibility.
2 publication timestamps supporting this briefing. Source data (JSON)

Executive briefing: On 4 February 2022, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) released Version 1.1 of the Secure Software Development Framework (SSDF), Special Publication 800-218. The update consolidates lessons from high-profile supply chain compromises and Executive Order 14028, providing prescriptive practices for software producers serving federal agencies and critical infrastructure. Organisations must recalibrate secure development programmes, governance structures, and supplier management to align with SSDF 1.1, anticipating federal procurement clauses that require attestations of compliance.

Key updates in SSDF 1.1

Version 1.1 refines SSDF practices across four groups—Prepare the Organization (PO), Protect the Software (PS), Produce Well-Secured Software (PW), and Respond to Vulnerabilities (RV). Notable updates include:

  • Expanded guidance on threat modeling, secure architecture patterns, and mapping to emerging frameworks like the Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA).
  • New emphasis on verifying provenance of third-party components, requiring suppliers to document source repositories, build environments, and integrity controls.
  • Integration of logging, monitoring, and response requirements aligned with OMB Memorandum M-22-18 and federal logging maturity.
  • Clarifications on documenting secure development policies and providing artifacts to customers as part of contract due diligence.

SSDF 1.1 also includes mappings to existing standards (e.g., ISO/IEC 27034, BSIMM, SAFECode) and highlights automation opportunities to reduce manual control burdens.

Operational priorities

Software engineering, security, and product teams should focus on:

  • Policy alignment. Update secure development lifecycle (SDLC) policies to reflect SSDF 1.1 terminology and practices. Ensure policies cover code review, dependency management, build integrity, and vulnerability disclosure.
  • Process integration. Embed SSDF tasks into DevSecOps pipelines, including automated static and dynamic analysis, dependency scanning, secret detection, and infrastructure-as-code validation.
  • Provenance tracking. Capture metadata for source code commits, build environments, and dependencies. Use tools like Sigstore, in-toto, or build attestations to prove artifact integrity.
  • Vulnerability response. Enhance incident response playbooks to include root cause analysis, customer communication, and integration with coordinated disclosure programmes.

Operational teams should maintain traceability between SSDF practices and backlog items, ensuring accountability for remediation work.

Governance and oversight

Boards and executive committees must oversee SSDF adoption:

  • Program ownership. Appoint a secure development programme manager with authority across engineering, security, and quality assurance. Establish steering committees that review metrics, risk exceptions, and investment needs.
  • Risk management. Integrate SSDF controls into enterprise risk frameworks, capturing software supply chain risk as a distinct category. Align with NIST Cybersecurity Framework and ensure findings flow into enterprise risk registers.
  • Assurance. Plan internal audits and third-party assessments of SSDF adherence, documenting evidence for federal procurements. Leverage SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001, or FedRAMP assessments to demonstrate control effectiveness.
  • Policy governance. Ensure board or senior leadership approval of updated secure development policies, with minutes reflecting discussions on risk tolerance and resource allocation.

Governance bodies should review major software releases, focusing on security debt, vulnerability backlog, and dependency risk trends.

Sourcing and supplier management

SSDF 1.1 influences procurement strategies for both software buyers and suppliers:

  • Contract clauses. Update master service agreements and statements of work to require SSDF-aligned practices, SBOM delivery, vulnerability remediation timelines, and disclosure obligations.
  • Vendor due diligence. Incorporate SSDF questionnaires into supplier risk assessments, requesting evidence of secure build pipelines, code review processes, and incident response capabilities.
  • Open-source governance. Evaluate open-source components using risk scoring models (e.g., OpenSSF Scorecards) and require maintainers to adopt secure release processes where feasible.
  • Managed services. For outsourced development or DevSecOps platforms, ensure providers support artifact signing, access controls, and security telemetry required by SSDF.

Supplier scorecards should track compliance commitments, audit results, and remediation progress.

Technology enablement

Modern tooling is essential to operationalise SSDF 1.1:

  • Pipeline security. Implement policy-as-code solutions enforcing branch protections, reviewer requirements, and security gates. Integrate secrets management, container scanning, and SBOM generation into CI/CD workflows.
  • Telemetry. Collect build logs, deployment metadata, and runtime security events in centralized platforms to support forensic investigations and attestations.
  • Automation. Use automated policy engines to block releases that lack required attestations or fail security checks. Provide developers with self-service dashboards showing compliance status.

Technology roadmaps should include investments in developer experience, enabling secure coding while maintaining delivery velocity.

Training and culture

SSDF adoption depends on workforce readiness:

  • Deliver role-based training for developers, testers, product managers, and release engineers covering SSDF practices, threat modeling, and secure coding standards.
  • Establish security champion networks within engineering teams to promote best practices and mentor peers.
  • Incentivise secure coding through performance objectives, recognition programmes, and incident postmortems that highlight learning opportunities.

Communication plans should explain how SSDF alignment supports customer trust, regulatory compliance, and competitive differentiation.

Metrics and reporting

Track SSDF implementation with metrics such as:

  • Percentage of repositories with automated security testing coverage.
  • Time to remediate critical vulnerabilities discovered in pre-production or production environments.
  • Number of releases accompanied by signed attestations and SBOMs.
  • Dependency risk scores and the percentage of third-party components meeting policy thresholds.
  • Completion rates for secure development training.

Provide dashboards to executive leadership and customers, demonstrating continuous improvement and accountability.

Regulatory and customer alignment

Federal agencies—including the Department of Homeland Security and the General Services Administration—are expected to incorporate SSDF requirements into software acquisition. Suppliers should prepare to sign attestations as required by OMB M-22-18 and the forthcoming Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rulemaking on secure software. Commercial customers increasingly reference SSDF in security questionnaires, especially in critical infrastructure sectors. Aligning SSDF practices with frameworks such as CSA STAR, HITRUST, or PCI Secure Software Lifecycle (Secure SLC) can streamline responses.

Forward look

NIST will continue refining SSDF to address evolving threats such as AI-assisted code generation, infrastructure-as-code vulnerabilities, and hardware-software co-design risks. Organisations should monitor OpenSSF guidance, CISA Secure by Design advisories, and international regulations (e.g., EU Cyber Resilience Act) that may reference SSDF principles. Maintaining agile governance, automated controls, and collaborative vendor ecosystems ensures resilience as software supply chain expectations tighten.

Key resources

Zeph Tech helps product and security teams operationalise SSDF 1.1 with secure pipeline automation, supplier governance, and executive reporting.

Timeline plotting source publication cadence sized by credibility.
2 publication timestamps supporting this briefing. Source data (JSON)
Horizontal bar chart of credibility scores per cited source.
Credibility scores for every source cited in this briefing. Source data (JSON)

Related briefings

Curated signals from the same pillar or overlapping topics.

Continue in the Developer pillar

Return to the hub for curated research and deep-dive guides.

Visit pillar hub

Latest guides

  • NIST SSDF
  • Secure software development
  • Supply chain security
  • SBOM
Back to curated briefings