By: Seraphina Caldwell

When a widely used enterprise software provider for academic and research institutions disclosed a supply chain security issue in late 2024, the disclosure raised concerns across its client base. The incident affected customer data and created uncertainty about the integrity of software updates. More than a technical event, the situation led to reduced confidence among universities and research centers relying on the platform to manage sensitive records.

The vulnerability stemmed from the update delivery process: self-extracting zip files distributed without cryptographic verification. These files were susceptible to interception and potential modification—posing risks in environments that adhere to standards such as SLSA and NIST 800-218.

With internal and external pressure mounting, the company engaged Scribe Security to review and improve its software supply chain protocols. “The breach led to a full reassessment,” said Rubi Arbel, CEO of Scribe Security. “They aimed to demonstrate—with verifiable methods—that their development process had been secured.”

Enhancing the Delivery Process Through Validation

The initial focus was on updating how software was distributed. Scribe Security introduced its Valint CLI tool to the build environment, which generated signed Software Bills of Materials (SBOMs) during various build stages. This allowed for cryptographic verification of software components.

Private signing keys were stored using Azure Key Vault to restrict access. Updates were then bundled with both application files and signed metadata, enabling recipients to validate authenticity before proceeding with installations.

Customers were also equipped with a verification tool, encouraging a shift from passive acceptance to active validation—particularly valuable for organizations managing regulated data.

Increasing Visibility Across the Supply Chain

In addition to updating delivery methods, the company needed to improve insight into its software composition. Many open-source and transitive dependencies were previously undocumented, which complicated risk assessments.

Scribe automated SBOM generation at key stages of the CI/CD pipeline. This tracking allowed teams to maintain a historical record of dependencies and changes. Results were aggregated into SBOMs and a vulnerability disclosure report (VDR) that could be reviewed by internal teams and external stakeholders.

By incorporating Vulnerability Exploitability Exchange (VEX) advisories, teams could prioritize risks by analyzing whether vulnerabilities were known to be exploitable. “It’s not just about finding issues—it’s about knowing which ones to act on,” said Arbel.

Aligning with SLSA-L2 and Compliance Goals

One of the stated objectives was alignment with SLSA Level 2. This required maintaining records of build processes—including metadata about the environment, user identity, and timestamps—in an accessible, audit-ready format through the Scribe Hub portal.

Customers and auditors could then access this information to verify compliance with industry and federal standards, including Executive Order 14028 and the NIST Secure Software Development Framework.

“SLSA-L2 helped translate abstract security principles into consistent workflows,” said Arbel. “It offered a structured way to demonstrate secure development practices.”

Operational Updates and Initial Outcomes

Within six months of implementing the new systems, the company shared preliminary internal findings. These included improved operational control and a reported decline in certain risk indicators. Automated compliance tracking reportedly reduced manual audit preparation efforts, and conversations with clients began to shift as the company presented verifiable process improvements.

The new workflows also helped integrate development and security teams more effectively. With enforcement steps incorporated into the build process, security was no longer reliant on manual review points.

Takeaways for the Broader Industry

As software supply chain risks continue to draw attention, this case suggests a shift is needed toward greater observability and accountability in development processes. A 2024 Cyber Risk Alliance survey reported that 62% of software vendors lacked full visibility into their software components—an issue the industry is still working to address.

This experience highlights that effective response includes more than immediate fixes. Long-term risk reduction depends on structural adjustments that offer transparency and verifiability.

According to Arbel, the goal was to build an ongoing system. “Security has to be part of the build process—not added later,” he said. “That’s how you establish and maintain trust.”

Published by Joseph T.