We clarify a common misconception: moving systems to the cloud does not hand off all protection to a provider. The environment spans people, processes, policies, and technology. That means both the provider and the organization share key duties.
Our view frames this as the shared responsibility model: providers secure hardware, compute, storage, networking, and the base service. We must protect identities, configurations, applications, encryption, network traffic, and data integrity to prevent breaches and costly compliance gaps.
Gartner predicts most incidents will stem from customer-side misconfiguration. That makes disciplined governance and clear policies essential. We guide businesses to operationalize controls that match risk, meet U.S. regulations, and reduce reputational and financial harm.
Key Takeaways
- Protection is a joint effort between provider and customer under the shared responsibility model.
- Providers secure infrastructure; organizations secure identities, apps, and data.
- Misconfigurations and weak identity controls drive most breaches.
- Policies, monitoring, and encryption are baseline controls we must own.
- Strong governance aligns controls with compliance and business risk.
Who is responsible for cloud security? The short answer
The clearest short answer: protection in the cloud is a shared effort between provider and customer.
Providers secure facilities, hardware, and the underlying service stack. We must secure operating systems, applications, identities, configurations, and data.
Assuming the vendor handles everything creates risk. Gaps in access control and data handling are frequent attack vectors. Continuous verification beats one-time checks.
- Providers: physical and virtual infrastructure, patching, and baseline resilience.
- Customers: identity, encryption, configuration rigor, and monitoring over time.
- Policies and automated guardrails let teams move fast while reducing mistakes.
Documented roles and clear owners speed remediation and lower incident costs. Align controls to risk, enforce standards, and verify data flows as environments change.
| Layer | Provider duties | Customer duties |
|---|---|---|
| IaaS | Physical hosts, hypervisor, network fabric | OS hardening, patching, identities, data protection |
| PaaS | Runtimes, managed services, platform patches | Application code, access policies, configuration and data governance |
| SaaS | Full stack, service availability, underlying infrastructure | User accounts, data classification, integration controls |
Understanding the shared responsibility model in cloud computing
A clear line between provider duties and tenant duties reduces ambiguity and speeds response.
Security of the cloud refers to the provider’s domain: physical sites, hardware, networking, and the virtualization layer that enables platform services. These are the foundational controls vendors maintain so systems remain resilient.
Security in the cloud is our domain: configuring access, protecting data, hardening guest systems, and continuous monitoring of the environment. We must treat defaults as starting points, not final settings, and enforce encryption and logging explicitly.
People, process, policy, and technology across the ecosystem
- Assign ownership. Give explicit owners for identity lifecycle, key rotation, and image hardening.
- Embed guardrails. Put policy checks into CI/CD so misconfigurations never reach production.
- Keep an inventory. Track services, data stores, and who manages them to reduce blind spots.
- Review access. Remove stale accounts and apply least privilege to limit data exposure.
| Scope | Typical provider duties | Typical customer duties |
|---|---|---|
| Foundational | Physical facilities, host hardware, hypervisor | Inventory, configuration baselines, patching of guest systems |
| Platform services | Managed runtimes, service availability, platform patches | Application code, access policies, data classification |
| Operational controls | Underlying network resilience and isolation | Logging, monitoring, and incident response playbooks |
We use the shared responsibility model as a practical tool. It aligns platform, security, engineering, and compliance around clear tasks so the organization can manage risk consistently.
How responsibilities shift across IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS
Responsibilities shift as teams move from raw hosts to managed platforms and fully hosted apps. The shared responsibility model helps us map tasks so no control falls through the cracks.
IaaS: customer controls OS, identities, data, and configurations
At the infrastructure level, the provider runs the physical hosts and virtualization. We own the guest OS, patching, application hardening, and identity policies.
Practical actions: apply CIS hardening to EC2 instances, restrict SSH, enforce IAM roles, and monitor storage access.
PaaS: provider manages runtimes; customers secure apps, access, and data
PaaS shifts runtimes and libraries to the vendor, reducing host work. We still secure application code, secrets, and configuration drift.
For managed databases like RDS, the provider handles OS and patches. We manage schema grants, encryption, and backups.
SaaS: provider secures the full stack; customers govern identities and data use
With SaaS, the vendor operates the platform and app. Our focus remains on identity governance, role-based access, data residency, and integration controls.
Practical examples and patterns
- Amazon S3: block public access, enable default encryption, and apply bucket policies.
- Serverless (Fargate/Functions): provider abstracts servers; we restrict function roles and control network egress.
- Mixing levels: map controls per service to avoid gaps when teams use IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS together.
| Level | Provider duties | Customer duties |
|---|---|---|
| IaaS | Physical hosts, hypervisor, network fabric | OS hardening, patching, IAM, application configs |
| PaaS | Runtimes, managed services, platform patches | App security, secrets handling, data governance |
| SaaS | Full stack, availability, underlying infrastructure | Identity governance, data use policies, integrations |
Across every level, network segmentation and least-privilege access reduce lateral movement. We treat the shared responsibility model as a living document and map controls to each service and environment.
Cloud provider perspectives: AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud
Major cloud providers offer distinct defaults that shape how teams implement controls and manage risk.
AWS: Well-Architected guidance and “of” vs. “in” the cloud
AWS separates security of the cloud (infrastructure, hardware, networking) from security in the cloud (OS patches, IAM, apps, data).
The AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar provides concrete checks and patterns we can adopt to align controls with services and compliance needs.
Microsoft Azure: IaaS/PaaS/SaaS boundaries and security pillar
Microsoft Azure mirrors this split and codifies boundaries across IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS.
Azure Advisor and the platform’s security pillar give prescriptive guidance to reduce drift and enforce policies during deployment.
Google Cloud: From shared responsibility to shared fate defaults
Google Cloud adds a “shared fate” posture, biasing secure defaults to lower misconfiguration risk while maintaining the shared responsibility model.
Navigating multi-cloud: Different defaults, same obligations
Multi-cloud increases complexity because services and terminology differ. Datadog finds nearly half of organizations still run unmanaged users with long-lived credentials — an avoidable IAM exposure.
Our recommendation: map a common control baseline to each provider, use native advisor tools, and validate settings as code so environments stay auditable and consistent.
Today’s biggest cloud security risks businesses must manage
Many breaches begin with simple missteps: an over-permissive role, a public endpoint, or an unrotated key. These errors scale quickly as teams deploy more services and data flows across environments.
Misconfigurations and identity access management gaps
Misconfigurations and weak identity controls remain top drivers of incidents. Permissive roles, stale credentials, and unmanaged keys let attackers move from one resource to another.
Increased attack surface and lack of visibility
Public endpoints, exposed ports, and shadow resources expand the attack surface. Without an accurate inventory, blind spots persist and threat detection lags.
Ever-changing workloads, CI/CD velocity, and ephemeral assets
Containers, functions, and rapid CI/CD pushes can outpace controls. If pipelines lack policy-as-code, insecure settings reach production at scale.
Compliance at scale: continuous checks and real-time alerts
Meeting compliance needs requires continuous validation and alerts tied to remediation. Real-time workflows keep mean time to detect and respond within acceptable risk thresholds.
- Common threats: account takeover, malware, zero-day exploits, insider abuse, denial of service, amplified data breaches.
- Actions we recommend: map assets, enforce least privilege, validate network rules, and automate posture checks across platforms and providers.
Best practices to uphold your side of the responsibility model
Adopting consistent guardrails turns rapid delivery into reliable protection. We prioritize controls that stop small mistakes from becoming incidents while keeping teams productive.
Our approach centers on Zero Trust, granular identity, continuous posture checks, and DevSecOps integration.
- Zero Trust: enforce least-privilege access, micro-segmentation, and continuous verification to limit blast radius.
- IAM hygiene: manage identities by group/role, enforce strong keys and session timeouts, and run regular access reviews.
- CSPM and drift prevention: codify standards, detect misconfigurations, and auto-remediate across accounts and regions.
- Protect apps and APIs: place next-gen WAF close to services to adapt rules and block malicious traffic.
- Data protection: encrypt in transit and at rest, secure key management, and monitor storage for open buckets and orphaned resources.
- Threat detection: combine threat intelligence with AI-driven anomaly detection and automated remediation to reduce response time.
- DevSecOps guardrails: embed policy-as-code, IaC scanning, and paved roads so unsafe changes are blocked before production.
Measure continuously with dashboards that track posture, compliance, and remediation SLAs. We align platform and infrastructure teams on shared playbooks to restore secure states quickly.
Partnering with cloud providers without abdicating responsibility
Formal SLAs and mapped roles turn a vendor relationship into a predictable control framework. We negotiate explicit terms that cover control ownership, logging retention, incident timelines, and escalation paths so that assumptions never replace agreement.
Define shared SLAs, controls, and escalation with providers
We embed security expectations into contracts and operational SLAs. That includes who owns logs, who retains audit trails, and how quickly each team must respond to an event.
We require visibility guarantees (audit logs, config history) and joint testing cadences to validate failover, resilience, and control effectiveness.
Map responsibilities by service and environment for your organization
We map duties across dev, staging, and production so every application and platform has an owner for identity, encryption, backups, and monitoring.
| Environment | Identity / Encryption | Logging / Monitoring |
|---|---|---|
| Dev | Team owns keys | Central tool verifies |
| Staging | Platform + team share | Provider feeds, we verify |
| Prod | Organization retains control | Retention and audits enforced |
- Integrate provider tools (AWS Trusted Advisor, Azure Advisor, Active Assist) into continuous assurance while keeping independent verification.
- Document change approval, rollback, and emergency access so management and operations coexist with rapid recovery.
- Routinely reassess the shared responsibility model to prevent drift and maintain compliance readiness.
Conclusion
Operational rigor—mapped owners, tests, and automation—turns guidance into measurable resilience.
In cloud computing, outcomes hinge on how well we run our side of the shared responsibility model. We must steward data, tighten identity controls, and keep configurations accurate to reduce risk to the business.
Providers and cloud providers offer tools and best practices, but operational excellence across people, process, and technology remains the key differentiator.
Standardize secure patterns, monitor infrastructure and applications continuously, and automate guardrails. Invest in posture, detection, and response to raise resilience and meet compliance without slowing innovation.
Clear responsibilities foster collaboration and faster response when incidents occur. Partner with us to build governance and automation that protect systems at scale.
FAQ
Who holds responsibility for cloud security?
Responsibility splits between the service provider and the customer under a shared responsibility model. Providers secure the underlying infrastructure (data centers, physical hosts, and foundational services). Customers secure their applications, identities, access controls, data, and configurations running on the provider’s platform.
Who holds responsibility for cloud security? The short answer
Providers manage infrastructure and platform hardening; customers manage data protection, identity access management (IAM), application security, and configuration hygiene. The exact split depends on the service model (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS).
What is the difference between security of the cloud and security in the cloud?
“Security of the cloud” refers to the controls the provider implements to protect physical hardware, networking, and foundational services. “Security in the cloud” covers customer tasks: securing VMs, containers, apps, data, and user access. Both are required for a secure environment.
How do people, processes, policies, and technology factor across the ecosystem?
A mature security posture combines trained teams, documented policies, secure processes, and technical controls (IAM, encryption, monitoring). Providers supply platform tools; organizations must integrate them into governance, incident response, and compliance programs.
How do responsibilities shift across IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS?
With IaaS you control the OS, middleware, apps, data, and identity. In PaaS the provider manages runtimes and some platform services while you secure apps, data, and access. With SaaS the vendor secures most of the stack, but you retain responsibility for data governance, user accounts, and how the service is configured.
What does the customer control in IaaS?
In IaaS customers manage operating systems, patching, installed software, identity and access, data encryption, network security groups, and workload configuration. Misconfigurations at this layer are a leading source of breaches.
What does the provider manage in PaaS and what must customers still secure?
Providers manage runtimes, middleware, and underlying platform availability in PaaS. Customers must secure applications, credentials, API access, data storage settings, and enforce least-privilege IAM.
In SaaS offerings, what remains the customer’s responsibility?
Customers must govern accounts and permissions, control data lifecycle and sharing, configure security features, and ensure compliance. They also monitor user behavior and integrate the SaaS logs into wider security monitoring.
Can you give practical examples with services like EC2, RDS, S3, and serverless?
EC2 (IaaS): you manage OS and app hardening. RDS (managed DB): provider handles backups and patching, you manage schema and access. S3 (object storage): provider ensures durability; you set bucket policies, encryption, and public access. Serverless: the provider runs the runtime; you secure code, function permissions, and event sources.
How do AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud explain shared responsibility?
AWS emphasizes “security of” vs. “security in” the cloud via Well-Architected guidance. Microsoft highlights IaaS/PaaS/SaaS boundaries and a security pillar in its architecture frameworks. Google Cloud frames this as shared responsibility moving toward shared fate defaults, encouraging cooperative controls and visibility.
How should organizations navigate multi-cloud differences?
Map responsibilities per provider and service, normalize IAM and logging, and adopt centralized policy-as-code and CSPM (Cloud Security Posture Management). Different defaults exist, but obligations like identity hygiene and data protection remain consistent.
What are today’s biggest risks businesses must manage?
Top risks include misconfigurations, weak IAM, expanded attack surfaces, poor visibility across hybrid and multi-cloud environments, fast-changing ephemeral workloads (CI/CD pipelines), and maintaining compliance at scale.
How do misconfigurations and IAM gaps create exposure?
Publicly exposed storage, overly permissive roles, and default credentials enable lateral movement and data exfiltration. Strong IAM policies, role separation, and continuous posture checks reduce these risks.
What best practices help organizations uphold their side of the model?
Adopt Zero Trust principles (least privilege, continuous verification), enforce granular IAM, use CSPM to detect drift, deploy WAFs and API protection, encrypt data at rest and in transit, and integrate threat intelligence with auto-remediation.
How do DevSecOps and policy-as-code support security?
Embed security into CI/CD pipelines with IaC scanning, automated policy enforcement, and “paved road” configurations that reduce risky variance. This prevents misconfigurations before deployment and speeds secure delivery.
How should organizations partner with cloud providers without abdicating responsibility?
Define shared SLAs, document control ownership, and set escalation paths. Regularly map responsibilities by service and environment, validate controls with audits, and require provider transparency on incidents and compliance.
How do we map responsibilities by service and environment for our organization?
Create a responsibility matrix that lists services (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS), assigns ownership for identity, data, network, and logging, and ties each item to policy, monitoring, and remediation playbooks. Update the matrix when adopting new services or architectures.
