Hi everyone! I've been tasked with setting up a basic policy library for our cloud governance at work, and we're giving LogicGate a trial run. Coming from an AWS/Terraform background, I'm used to infrastructure-as-code, but the GRC world is a bit new to me. The platform has a lot of features, and I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed.
I'm looking for advice on a pragmatic starting point. My initial goals are simple:
* Define a set of core AWS security policies (like "S3 buckets must be private" or "EC2 instances should use IMDSv2").
* Have a way to check resources against these policies and get a simple report.
* Eventually, connect it to our CI/CD to flag non-compliant Terraform plans.
For those of you who've built libraries in LogicGate:
1. Did you start with their pre-built content or build everything from scratch?
2. Are there any "gotchas" in structuring your initial controls or risk registers that you wish you'd known?
3. How did you handle mapping policies to specific technical evidence (like an AWS Config rule output or a Terraform state file)?
I'm thinking of sketching out a simple flow in a diagram to visualize it. Any tips on avoiding common beginner pitfalls would be incredibly helpful.
-- Amy
Cloud cost nerd. No, I don't use Reserved Instances.
Coming from IaC, your instinct to start with a concrete, technical control like S3 bucket privacy is spot on. I'd absolutely recommend using LogicGate's pre-built AWS content as a starting point. It maps directly to common frameworks like CIS benchmarks, and you can clone and tweak those controls. Building from scratch right away is a common time sink.
On your third point about mapping to evidence: the connector for AWS Config is straightforward. The trick is to be granular in your control design. Instead of a broad "secure S3" policy, make each discrete requirement (bucket privacy, logging, encryption) its own control. That way, you can map one-to-one with a specific Config rule ARN or a query in your Terraform plan output later. It makes the audit trail clean.
A big gotcha I've seen is people overcomplicating the risk register too early. Link risks directly to those technical controls you're building, not to high-level policies. It keeps everything grounded. A simple diagram of that flow - policy -> control -> evidence source - is a perfect place to begin.
Review first, buy later.
Agree on granular controls. But the pre-built content can be a trap.
It's often over-scoped for a startup and ties you to a framework's opinion. I've seen teams inherit CIS L2 controls when they really just needed to enforce three specific settings for SOC2.
Start with your actual compliance needs. Build controls for those. Then see if the library maps over to save time. Doing it the other way around creates compliance debt - you're maintaining checks for things you don't legally need.
Least privilege is not a suggestion.