As I have been watching the Rugged DevOps discussions unfold over the last few months (and contributed my own small part), it has been interesting to see the different directions the discussion takes.
The need to consider security architecture and design in the agile release process is becoming clearer to the community. There is clearly a ways to go, however, and the discussion and evangelism should continue.
So, I find myself a bit confused with the "White Rabbit's" objections to the term "Rugged DevOps". The Rabbit, and others of like mind, object to the term "Rugged" or "Sec" (as in DevOpsSec) based on the belief that the phrase implies that security needs to be called out separately and even treated separately.
In the Rabbit's own words - "It perpetuates the notion that security principles are something that is apart from the development and deployment cycles and that security is something that is an add-on".
In short, I think the Rabbit is missing the point. I'll use an analogy to make my point - driving in your car. Your chance to die in a car crash is 1 in 88, so I'd say, car safety is a problem.
So, when I talked to my relatives about the craziness on I-95 over the Memorial Day weekend, the term "safe driving" immediately focused our minds on one particular part of the driving experience. Conversely, I might have used the terms like "reckless driving" or "driving in traffic" to focus on another part of the driving experience. Clearly my relatives recognized these terms as my attempt to focus the discussion on one aspect of driving, not the implication that "safety" is not intrinsic to driving overall.
So, back to the Rabbit. "Rugged DevOps" is a literary device that allows the community to focus some discussions around the importance (or lack thereof) of security in DevOps. If the majority of developers were developing with security in mind, the topic would be moot. That is clearly not the case. Also, the term obviously does not minimize the larger DevOps term. In reality, it elevates DevOps. If the concept of Rugged becomes an "assumption" within DevOps, then DevOps is better for the side-discussion.
So, my advice to the Rabbit. Don't worry about it :). DevOps still stands as the larger discussion, and "Rugged DevOps" only serves to strengthen DevOps, not weaken it.