The problem with compliance automation
Every major compliance automation effort follows the same pattern: pick a benchmark, pick an OS, write a full set of tasks scoped to that intersection. The result is a discrete artifact —RHEL9-CIS, RHEL8-STIG — maintained independently.
For two frameworks across three RHEL versions, that is six full codebases. Each cell is an independently maintained artifact that shares 70-85% of its logic with its neighbors.
The consequences are predictable:
- Drift. A bug fixed in one artifact is rarely ported to all others. The same logical control behaves differently depending on which artifact was applied.
- Delayed coverage. When a new OS ships, every artifact must be rebuilt from scratch. Coverage arrives months later, even though 90% of the controls are mechanically identical.
- False complexity. Teams perceive compliance automation as inherently expensive because every new OS or framework requires a full implementation effort.