The Two Types of CISOs: Infrastructure Operators vs. Software Factory Defenders

For years, the CISO role was mostly defined around infrastructure: endpoints, servers, networks, firewalls, identity, cloud posture, SaaS access, compliance, and vendor risk.

That world still exists. In many companies, it is still the main security reality.

But in software-driven companies, the CISO now has a very different problem. They are not only protecting infrastructure. They are protecting a software factory.

And those two CISOs need very different runtime security strategies.

Type 1: The Infrastructure-First CISO

The first type of CISO runs a company where most of the business software is bought, not built.

The company relies heavily on third-party platforms: SAP, Salesforce, Workday, Microsoft 365, ServiceNow, Oracle, and other enterprise systems. The internal environment is mostly IT, infrastructure, identity, endpoints, cloud accounts, and vendor-managed applications.

This CISO may still have developers somewhere in the organization, but software creation is not the core operating model. The company is not shipping code every day. It is not constantly rebuilding applications. It is not running hundreds of internal microservices owned by dozens of engineering teams.

For this CISO, the security model is mostly about controlling and monitoring infrastructure.

• Protect the endpoints.
• Secure the servers.
• Monitor cloud workloads.
• Detect suspicious processes.
• Control identity and access.
• Manage vendors and SaaS risk.
• Respond to incidents across infrastructure.

In this world, traditional runtime security tools can be good enough. Products from endpoint, cloud, and workload security vendors - including Symantec, SentinelOne, Wiz, CrowdStrike, Microsoft, and similar platforms - are built very well for infrastructure-centric security.

They see processes. They see network activity. They see cloud misconfigurations. They see containers, hosts, users, files, and infrastructure behavior.

For an infrastructure-first organization, that level of visibility often matches the main risk model.

Type 2: The Software Factory CISO

The second type of CISO lives in a completely different reality.

This CISO protects a company that builds software as a core part of the business. The company has many developers, frequent releases, CI/CD pipelines, internal services, cloud-native applications, APIs, open-source dependencies, and constant product change.

This is not just an IT environment. It is a production software factory.

And the attack surface changes every day.

• Developers are constantly pushing code.
• AI coding tools are accelerating software creation.
• Applications change faster than security teams can manually review.
• Open-source libraries make up a large portion of the application.
• New dependencies are added all the time.
• Transitive dependencies create hidden risk.
• Supply-chain attacks increasingly target the software itself.
• Attackers can study the same open-source code that defenders use.

For this CISO, the hardest question is no longer only: “Is my server compromised?”

The harder question is: “Which part of my application is being misused, exploited, or behaving differently at runtime?”

The Runtime Gap

Traditional runtime security sees the outside of the application. It sees the process, the container, the host, the network connection, the file activity, or the child process.

That matters. But for a software factory, it is not enough.

Imagine a Python process spawning a child process. A traditional runtime tool may detect that Python created a child process. That is useful, but it is also incomplete.

The real question is deeper:

• Which library triggered it?
• Was it part of expected application behavior?
• Was it caused by user-controlled input?
• Was it a vulnerable open-source package?
• Was it a transitive dependency?
• Was this library ever supposed to do this?
• Which developer team owns the application path?
• What should be fixed or blocked?

Without application and library-level context, the SOC gets an alert. But the investigation still begins almost from zero.

For the infrastructure-first CISO, that may be acceptable. For the software factory CISO, it creates noise, delay, and uncertainty.

Why Open Source Changes Everything

Modern applications are mostly assembled, not written from scratch. Open-source libraries are deeply embedded in the application stack. They handle parsing, serialization, authentication, logging, networking, compression, templates, AI models, file formats, and more.

That means the application is not one thing. It is a living chain of first-party code, direct dependencies, and transitive dependencies.

Attackers know this. They do not need to break the whole server. They can exploit one library, one unsafe function, one parser, one deserialization path, one package install flow, or one dependency that nobody in the organization even remembers adding.

This is why software-factory CISOs need runtime security that understands code behavior, not just infrastructure behavior.

The AI Acceleration Problem

AI makes this gap worse.

Developers are using AI to write code faster. Attackers are using AI to analyze open-source code faster, generate exploit variants faster, and test payloads faster.

The result is a speed mismatch. Applications change faster. Dependencies change faster. Exploits are created faster. But traditional security workflows still depend heavily on known CVEs, signatures, rules, and manual investigation.

The software factory CISO needs a runtime layer that can answer what is actually happening inside the application when the code runs.

Two CISOs, Two Runtime Needs

This is the core difference.

The first CISO can often succeed with runtime tools that understand infrastructure.

The second CISO needs runtime tools that understand applications.

Where Raven Fits

Raven is built for the second world: the software factory.

Raven is not just looking at the process from the outside. It is designed to understand what happens inside the running application - which libraries are active, which functions execute, how library call chains behave, and when a library is being misused or exploited.

That matters because the software factory CISO does not only need to know that “Python spawned a process” or “Java made a network connection.” They need to know which library caused it, whether that behavior is expected, whether it maps to a vulnerable or risky path, and what should be blocked or fixed.

This is the difference between runtime monitoring and code-aware runtime security.

The Bottom Line

Not every CISO has the same problem.

If your company mainly operates infrastructure and consumes third-party business software, traditional runtime security may be enough.

But if your company is a software factory - with developers constantly changing applications, AI-generated code entering the pipeline, open-source dependencies everywhere, and supply-chain risk embedded inside the application - then infrastructure-level runtime visibility is not enough.

You need runtime security that understands the application from the inside.

Because in the software factory, the attack does not always start at the server.

It often starts inside the code.

‍