Translating Compliance Requirements to IaC

Translating Compliance Requirements to IaC

Traditional compliance frameworks were written for physical data centers and manual processes, requiring careful interpretation for cloud-native IaC environments. Network segmentation requirements designed for physical firewalls must translate to cloud security groups and network policies. Access control requirements assuming badge readers and locked doors must map to IAM policies and API authentication. This translation requires deep understanding of both compliance intent and cloud capabilities.

Control mapping creates bridges between compliance language and technical implementation. Each regulatory requirement needs corresponding IaC patterns that satisfy both the letter and spirit of the regulation. For example, PCI-DSS requirement 1.1.1 for firewall configuration standards translates to IaC templates defining security group rules, network ACLs, and WAF configurations.

# PCI-DSS Control Mapping for IaC
compliance_mappings:
  pci_dss_v4:
    - requirement: "1.1.1"
      description: "Formal process for approving firewall rules"
      iac_controls:
        - control_id: "FW-001"
          implementation: "Git PR approval process for security group changes"
          evidence:
            - "Pull request history with approvals"
            - "CODEOWNERS file requiring security team review"
            - "Branch protection rules"
          
        - control_id: "FW-002"  
          implementation: "Automated security group validation"
          evidence:
            - "CI/CD pipeline security scans"
            - "Policy as Code rules"
            - "Deployment gate validations"
            
    - requirement: "2.2.1"
      description: "Implement only one primary function per server"
      iac_controls:
        - control_id: "SERVER-001"
          implementation: "Container/microservice architecture"
          evidence:
            - "Kubernetes deployments with single responsibility"
            - "Container security policies"
            - "Resource isolation configurations"
            
    - requirement: "3.4.1"
      description: "Encrypt transmission of cardholder data"
      iac_controls:
        - control_id: "CRYPTO-001"
          implementation: "TLS enforcement in load balancers"
          terraform_example: |
            resource "aws_lb_listener" "frontend" {
              load_balancer_arn = aws_lb.main.arn
              port              = "443"
              protocol          = "HTTPS"
              ssl_policy        = "ELBSecurityPolicy-TLS-1-2-2017-01"
              certificate_arn   = aws_acm_certificate.cert.arn
              
              default_action {
                type             = "forward"
                target_group_arn = aws_lb_target_group.app.arn
              }
            }
            
        - control_id: "CRYPTO-002"
          implementation: "Encrypted RDS connections"
          terraform_example: |
            resource "aws_db_parameter_group" "secure" {
              family = "mysql8.0"
              
              parameter {
                name  = "require_secure_transport"
                value = "ON"
              }
            }

Documentation requirements in compliance frameworks need special attention in IaC environments. Traditional Word documents and Excel spreadsheets don't match IaC's code-based nature. Modern approaches embed documentation in code through comments, generate documentation from IaC definitions, and maintain living documentation that updates automatically with infrastructure changes.