By submitting this form, you agree to our 

For years, the bottleneck in software was “how fast can we write code?” Today, Generative AI shifts that bottleneck to 

For years, the bottleneck in software was “how fast can we write code?” Today, Generative AI shifts that bottleneck to “how fast can we secure it?”

As organizations move from experimentation to production-grade AI, they are discovering that traditional DevOps tooling wasn’t built for a non-deterministic world. For example, static software composition analysis (SCA) scanners that assume deterministic dependency graphs or CI policy gates that validate known build artifacts. When a model generates code rather than a human, the software supply chain changes overnight.

Securing non-deterministic systems: A practical guide for AI artifacts and LLMOps

, explores three emerging security frontiers that every organization adopting AI must address:

1. AI-generated code introduces supply-chain hallucinations

LLMs generate dependencies probabilistically, not deterministically. This creates the emerging 

 attack vector, where attackers register hallucinated package names suggested by AI tools and weaponize them with malicious payloads.Without validation and artifact governance, a single copied command can silently compromise an enterprise environment.

2. AI models behave like executable software, not passive data

Modern model formats can execute arbitrary code during deserialization, most notably through Python pickle-based loading.This 

 means downloading an unverified model from public registries such as Hugging Face or Ollama can result in full system compromise.Secure AI development requires scanning, signing, and favoring restricted formats like 

, alongside enforcing trusted provenance for every model artifact.

3. AI productivity and orchestration layers expand the attack surface

Frameworks that connect models to enterprise data and automate workflows introduce a new class of high-impact vulnerabilities.Recent RCE exploits in orchestration tools demonstrate that 

LLMOps infrastructure itself is now part of the software supply chain

, and must be sandboxed, authenticated, and governed like any production system.

Our full guide provides a strategic roadmap for navigating the shift from DevOps to LLMOps, deconstructing threats in frameworks like Langflow, and building a “sandbox-by-default” development lifecycle.

Parul Jhawar

Marketing

AI Artifacts: The new software supply chain blind spot

The Hybrid Repository Structure: Balancing Control and Flexibility

And now, let’s dive into part three: How 

 keep your multi-format repositories secure, consistent, and developer-friendly.

In the first two blogs of this series, we explored why repository structure matters and how Cloudsmith’s Hybrid Repository Structure balances control with flexibility. While we touched on policies and permissions, we didn’t dive into the 

 mechanics of how access control ensures artifact security, traceability, and consistency, especially in 

, where different packages, languages, and tooling coexist in a single place.

While multi-format repositories allow for more flexibility in how your repositories are set up, they can introduce a new way of thinking about how and when different artifacts can be accessed and by whom. This blog breaks down how Cloudsmith provides fine-grained, flexible, and secure controls for teams of any size.

Cloudsmith provides the following user roles:

These roles help limit access based on organizational need and provide the foundation for more granular permissions.

You can explore the full breakdown of Cloudsmith roles, permissions, and privileges in our documentation.

You can read more about user roles, permissions, and privileges in Cloudsmith 

Every Cloudsmith customer is given the opportunity to set default global privileges. These global default privileges are set for the “Member” user role in Cloudsmith, which is often suited best for individual developers. Within a customer’s global workspace privileges, organizations can choose to grant members the ability to create new teams, invite new users, and even create new repositories. Organization owners can also grant “blanket” repository privileges to all users within Cloudsmith. 

While we offer the flexibility for organizations to shift responsibility and access to the developer, we often see our enterprise customers lean away from blanket permissions and access toward more fine-grained permissions. As an example, we have a semiconductor manufacturing customer that has disabled default workspace global privileges so that only Organisation owners are the only users who can invite new users, create new teams, invite 3rd-party collaborators, and create new repositories. 

In addition, this customer has access control, and privileges are scoped down to specific teams. Default global repository privileges are disabled so that they can choose exactly which team(s) should have access to repository(s). Even Cloudsmith service accounts are grouped together within a team for ease of tracking permissions and access when it comes to build and deployment times. 

If we zoom in once and look at the repository level in Cloudsmith, we can assign a default privilege for organization members for accessing packages within the repository, and we can assign specific privileges for specific teams, users, or service accounts.

This is the stage where you’ll have to consider what packages the repository is storing and if you want developers and service accounts to have default admin, read, or write permissions to the repository. Continuing to use my customer example, they have chosen to set default read permissions for all repositories; however, specific service accounts have write and 

 to different repositories. You may be okay with your developers downloading artifacts to their local machine for testing or even service accounts requesting stored artifacts tied to staging and production environments.

On the other hand, there are customers that may not want their developers having the ability to write to every repository and would most likely want specific service accounts tied to their CI/CD pipelines to only have write permissions. While this is generally best practice, there are certainly exceptions to this rule, as we also have platform teams that choose to grant specific developer teams write access to specific artifact repositories.

On top of the permission and access control settings we’ve discussed, Cloudsmith goes even further to ensure that, through various additional settings, platform teams can decide exactly what their developers need and don’t need to be reconfigured within a repository.

Platform teams are able to grant or deny developer permissions, such as:

Copying Packages From One Repository to Another

Moving Packages From One Repository to Another

Managing, Using, Or Viewing Entitlement Tokens

If you thought that wasn’t enough, Cloudsmith takes it a step further by scoping down permissions to the individual developer’s generated packages. So while platform teams can restrict tampering of artifacts generated by other developers or systems, they can also decide if they would like to allow developers the ability to scan, move, copy, delete, or resync their own packages.

Most of the enterprise customers I work with allow developers to do as they please with their own packages to avoid a developer mutiny! In either case, these user actions are catalogued in our 

 for enhanced observability across your Cloudsmith environment.

For instances where our customers want to be very particular about what, how, and when users can access specific packages, Cloudsmith offers 

. These scoped tokens are read-access only, so there is never a risk of a user performing a write action against the repository they have limited access to.

Customers are able to restrict access by creating a precise search query to narrow down specific packages within a repository, should they choose not to provide visibility into all the packages within the repository. On top of visibility restrictions, customers can also add token usage restrictions to avoid prolonged access and usage of the token. Parameters include:

Typically, we see our customers use entitlements for 3rd party software distribution or even for systems that don’t require logins to Cloudsmith.

For our security-conscious customers, Cloudsmith also offers the ability to configure 

 based on country, with an easy-to-use preconfigured list of countries to choose from. Choose to deny or allow access from specific countries. Although keep in mind that theoretically, no unauthenticated user should have access to your Cloudsmith workspace in general. This restriction applies more towards open-source repositories that you may be hosting in Cloudsmith, but it’s always a good idea to practice defence-in-depth!

If geo-based restrictions are too broad, you can scope down to IP-based restrictions to either allow or deny client access based on IP address. This added protection ensures that requests coming from clients with an unapproved IP address do not have access to your repositories. 

With all of these configuration options, it can be tricky to decide how you want to best enable your developers while balancing security and flexibility. Not to worry—the Cloudsmith Customer Success team is here to help you in your decisions throughout the onboarding process. We’ve walked through these decisions with many customers and have outlined decision impacts for you so you’re not left wondering “what if”. Learn more about Cloudsmith 

 to get started with us. See you on the other side! 

1. What is access control in a multi-format repository?

Access control defines who can read, write, or administer artifacts across different package formats stored in the same repository. It ensures secure, consistent governance across diverse tooling.

2. How do permissions work in Cloudsmith for multi-format repositories?

Cloudsmith supports global, repository-level, team-based, and user-specific permissions, allowing organizations to tailor access to packages, teams, service accounts, and even individual artifact actions.

3. Why is fine-grained access control important in software supply chain security?

Fine-grained controls reduce the blast radius of errors, prevent unauthorized writes, and help organizations enforce policies required by modern software supply chain frameworks like SLSA and SSDF.

4. What are entitlement tokens used for in Cloudsmith?

Entitlement tokens provide scoped, read-only access to specific artifacts without requiring user accounts, making them ideal for external distribution, automation, or least-privilege workflows.

5. Can developers manage their own packages in Cloudsmith?

Yes. Cloudsmith allows permissions that let developers manage only the packages they personally created—without putting others’ artifacts at risk.

6. How does Cloudsmith support secure CI/CD pipeline access?

Service accounts can be granted precisely the permissions needed for pipeline operations (like write or admin) while keeping developers and collaborators restricted to read-only or scoped access.

7. What’s the difference between global and repository-level privileges?

Global privileges affect the entire workspace, while repository-level privileges enable granular control over specific teams, users, or service accounts interacting with a particular repository.

Cristian Garcia

Senior Customer Success Manager

Access Control & Permissions for Multi-Format Repositories

In a world where software ships in seconds, teams are still chained to legacy systems built for a different era. What once passed as “good enough” for storing and distributing builds has become a drain on productivity - adding risk, slowing delivery, and quietly inflating costs year after year.

In this post, we’ll break down the hidden cost of legacy artifact repositories, discuss the importance of modernizing through cloud-native artifact management, and demonstrate how you can leave the old infrastructure that has been slowing your software supply chain.

Legacy artifact management involves older on-premise artifact repositories or in-house custom systems. These tools were designed in another era, when teams used monolithic applications and updates were done once a year or even less.

The modern reality is very different. Cloud-native development, continuous CI/CD pipelines, and distributed engineering teams need a modern artifact management approach that delivers scalability, uptime, and built-in security.

This is where legacy artifact repositories fall behind. Many teams assume that on-prem systems are “more secure” because they’re isolated, but isolation no longer protects against today’s threats. Most attacks now originate upstream, through open-source dependencies that already contain vulnerabilities, malicious code injections, or compromised packages. 

With the volume and speed of issues emerging in the open-source ecosystem, an isolated, self-hosted repository cannot keep pace without continuous scanning, real-time visibility, and automated updates. Without these protections, legacy artifact management becomes a blind spot in the software supply chain - quietly storing and distributing unverified or unsafe artifacts.

The hidden costs of legacy or on-premise artifact repositories

Legacy systems can feel safer to stick with - they’re already in place and “working.” But maintaining the status quo often hides bigger costs: outdated infrastructure, ongoing maintenance, and mounting security risks from unpatched or unsupported components.

Legacy repositories need to be manually patched, updated, backed up, and scaled. Teams spend valuable engineering time on server management instead of innovation. Each new project or environment increases the complexity of configuration and slows down the development.

Hosting artifact repositories either in on-prem or in self-managed cloud VMs requires continued expenditure on storage, bandwidth, and compute. The costs increase unintentionally as the size and volume of artifacts grows (especially large Docker images or build artifacts). Beyond infrastructure, many older systems also require costly vendor support contracts for upgrades, patches, and troubleshooting. These fees often increase over time and are non-negotiable.

Legacy systems often lack built-in scanning, access control, or software bill of materials (SBOM) capabilities. Lacking transparency in dependencies leaves teams exposed to vulnerabilities and unmet compliance requirements - something that enterprises will not be able to afford in 2025 and beyond's regulatory environment.

As repositories grow, performance bottlenecks emerge - developers face slower downloads, failed builds, and pipeline downtime, all of which directly slow release velocity and drain productivity.

Why cloud-native artifact management is a change worth making

Legacy tools may have provided the groundwork for early DevOps, but they cannot keep up with the current software landscape. Modern organizations need next-generation artifact management - cloud-native solutions designed for speed, security, scalability, and seamless integration with cloud-native CI/CD pipelines.

 platform is more than just a storage location for packages - it’s a critical pillar of your software supply chain security. It guarantees that every artifact, from source to deployment, is verified, traceable, and instantly accessible, regardless of where your teams are working.

These capabilities are exactly why more organizations are moving to modern, cloud-native platforms that combine speed, security, and scalability to support today’s software delivery demands - reasons we explore in detail below.

With legacy artifact repositories, engineering teams spend hours managing servers, applying patches, and juggling storage. A truly 

cloud-native artifact management platform

 is different from simply hosting a repository in the cloud—it’s built to auto-scale, self-update, and deliver continuous security without manual intervention. There’s no server downtime, no upgrade windows to schedule, and no need to plan for storage expansion - everything is handled seamlessly in the background.

Self-hosted systems cannot keep pace with the growth in artifact volume size. A cloud-native artifact management platform dynamically boosts its capacity to manage millions of artifacts across multiple teams, regions, and projects, 

Using elastic storage and edge caching CDNs, developers are always guaranteed a 

3. Built-in security and compliance from the ground up

In today’s world, threats move faster than ever. With malicious packages and supply chain attacks on the rise, cloud-native artifact repositories integrate vulnerability scanning, access controls, and SBOMs (Software Bill of Materials) directly into your pipelines.

This ensures that all artifacts maintained and shared are validated, trackable, and consistent with the industry regulations such as SOC 2, ISO 27001, and FedRAMP.

No extra patching or standalone security tools - modern artifact management 

 into every phase of your software supply chain.

4. Performance and speed that empower developers

A truly cloud-native artifact repository ensures artifacts are forwarded to the closest edge location, which significantly decreases both the time spent building and deploying, which has a direct impact on increasing developer productivity and CI/CD throughput.

Engineers can focus on building features rather than waiting on downloads or troubleshooting failed builds, making software delivery faster, more reliable, and predictable.

5. Seamless integration with the modern DevOps toolchain

Legacy repositories often require plugins or manual scripting to integrate with CI/CD tools. Cloud-native artifact management platforms offer native integrations with 

This ensures that artifacts flow seamlessly through your CI/CD pipelines, maintaining consistency, traceability, and reliability from development all the way to production.

6. Single visibility and governance between teams

In large organizations, artifacts are often scattered across multiple repositories and sometimes duplicated, making governance and visibility a constant challenge. A cloud-native artifact management system provides a centralized, single platform for managing visibility, audit, and access.

Administrators can also manage published, promoted, or consumed artifacts - to ensure compliance and reduce the risk of unauthorized access or obsolete dependencies.

In contrast to self-managed solutions that have unpredictable infrastructure charges, cloud-native artifact management follows a usage-based pricing scheme, which is predictable.

You pay for what you use. You do not expect to incur costs for hardware, maintenance, or downtime. This will ultimately lead to a reduced total cost of ownership (TCO) and a better understanding of the ROI of engineering time.

Moving legacy artifact management to a new, modern, cloud-native repository is not just a technical choice but a strategic one that enhances both the security, performance, and user experience of developing a product or service, as well as reduces costs in the long run.

Migrating from legacy artifact management to a modern, cloud-native repository improves security, performance, and the overall developer experience while helping reduce long-term operational costs. By centralizing control, simplifying scalability, and strengthening the software supply chain, teams can focus on building software more efficiently and securely.

How to upgrade from escape legacy artifact management (step-by-step)

The idea of moving away from on-premise or legacy artifact systems to a modern, cloud-native solution can be overwhelming, but with the correct plan, it is achievable.

Review what you store (packages, containers, Helm charts, etc.) and where.

Analyze utilization and access patterns -

 Learn which teams, pipelines, and tools rely on which repositories.

Select a modern artifact management platform – 

Seek capabilities such as universal format support, security scanning, policy management, global availability, and automation through integrations.

Migrate critical projects first, automate uploads, and validate integrations.

Once migration and validation are complete, phase out outdated systems to eliminate ongoing maintenance, reduce operational overhead, and free up resources for modern, cloud-native artifact management.

 Toolkit, combined with expert support, makes the transition seamless - preserving your history and metadata while enabling improved security and scalable infrastructure.

The real ROI of leaving legacy, on-premise artifact management behind

Teams that modernize and migrate to cloud-native artifact management see measurable returns:

Reduce infrastructure expenses by up to 60%.

Faster build and deployment times across CI/CD pipelines.

Improved developer satisfaction through simplified workflows.

Better compliance posture with automated vulnerability management.

Time spent maintaining a legacy repository directly impacts productivity and costs. Migrating to a modern, cloud-native artifact repository preserves operational efficiency and supports long-term software delivery improvements.

How Cloudsmith makes modern artifact management effortless

All of these challenges, including scalability, security, automation, and visibility, can be solved with a truly cloud-native approach to artifact management. And if you are planning a migration to the cloud, it is worth doing it right rather than sticking with your existing provider simply because it feels easier. A migration is already a major change, and it is the perfect opportunity to elevate your entire artifact management program. 

Cloudsmith was built from the ground up as a fully cloud-native platform that helps teams break free from the limits of traditional repositories, delivering seamless automation, built-in security, and scalable reliability in a single unified system.

Here’s how Cloudsmith enables that transition seamlessly:

 Cloudsmith is truly cloud-native which means hosting, scaling, and security are built in. Teams can focus on development without worrying about infrastructure maintenance and downtime.

 Whether you manage containers, packages, Helm charts, or custom binaries - with multi-format repositories, Cloudsmith provides one centralized platform for all your artifacts.

 Each artifact is scanned, signed, and tracked. Cloudsmith also has vulnerability scanning, dependency metadata, and SBOM generation built-in to ensure end-to-end security for your software supply chain.

 Artifacts are served over Cloudsmith’s global edge network and minimizing latency and providing fast and reliable builds across the globe.

 Cloudsmith integrates seamlessly with the latest DevOps platforms: GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, and Jenkins - enabling teams to automate artifact workflows, reduce manual errors, and accelerate software delivery.

A modern, cloud-native artifact repository like Cloudsmith simplifies operations, strengthens security, and accelerates software delivery - without the hidden costs or complexity of legacy systems.

Summary: don’t let legacy on-premise artifact management hold you back

Legacy artifact management is not only dated - it’s also costly, risky, and non-sustainable. The emerging generation of cloud-native artifact management platforms, such as Cloudsmith, transcends complexity with confidence, enabling teams to achieve the visibility and velocity required to build securely at scale.

The faster you retire legacy systems, the sooner your organization can build securely, on a truly modern, cloud-native platform.

1. What is legacy artifact management, and why is it a problem?

The management of legacy artifacts encompasses older systems (typically 

) used to store and distribute software packages. Such systems do not offer the automation, scalability, and integrated security that are needed in modern DevOps, resulting in inefficiencies and increased operational costs.

2. What are the unknown expenses of legacy artifact repositories?

Beyond licensing, teams also bear the costs of infrastructure maintenance, downtime, manual updates, and security risks. These hidden expenses can quickly add up, often exceeding the investment required for a modern, cloud-native alternative.

3. How do I migrate to a modern artifact repository?

Begin by auditing your existing repositories, determining dependencies, and automating the migration with the help of migration tools (such as Cloudsmith’s Migration Tool). The advantage is to retain the integrity of artifacts with the purpose of avoiding manual management.

4. Why choose a cloud-native artifact repository over self-hosted options?

Uptime, scaling, and security are automatically managed on cloud-native platforms. They are CI/CD integrated, can distribute faster worldwide, and can eliminate maintenance overhead, allowing your developers to focus on their core tasks

5. How does modern artifact management improve security and compliance?

Modern artifact systems integrate vulnerability scanning, SBOMs generation, and access control. This will ensure artifacts are secure, traceable, and compliant – which is essential to securing your software supply chain.

The true cost of legacy artifact management

We often advise our customers to consider a “Hybrid” repository structure, which incorporates both the development environment (dev, staging, prod) and the specific team/application/service for artifact repositories in Cloudsmith. This is essentially just adding another layer to the team/application/service specific repository structure that provides better visibility and traceability of different environments. 

It might help to visualize the hybrid approach (we’ll discuss what we mean by “automated promotion” below).

Why Choose a Hybrid Repository Structure?

You might consider a hybrid repository structure if you find that a purely environment-based or purely team-based model leaves gaps in your workflow. For example, if your artifact repositories are currently team-based (set up solely by teams/services/applications), it can be difficult to put the right artifact promotion workflows in place without leveraging very strict artifact tagging practices. It also makes it harder to view artifacts across your various development stages. On the other hand, if you use an environment-based model group by development environment) without clear distinctions between teams/services/applications, you might run into visibility and traceability issues across artifacts.

We often see Cloudsmith customers that have outgrown single-model repository setups and are beginning to feel growing pains. As your organization grows, so does the demand for more efficient software development practices. The “simpler” repository model runs the risk of ultimately creating confusion, duplication, and lack of accountability. The hybrid approach contains that complexity in a clear and concise way that aligns with your development environments and organizational structure.

When To Choose a Hybrid Repository Structure?

Different compliance requirements across applications and environments is often a trigger for moving to a hybrid repository structure. For example, if your production environment for your government-facing application needs stricter security controls than your development environment for an internal application, a hybrid approach lets you apply different vulnerability policies to each.

Another reason to choose a hybrid structure is when you start getting into different product lines, diverse tech stacks, or growing sets of microservices. If you need to ensure that each product or service can move through specific stages of development independently, the hybrid approach makes that possible without sacrificing consistency.

It also rewards organizations that value observability. For instance, there may be times where you may need to investigate rogue image downloads from specific client requests within your staging environment that are causing a spike in package delivery demand. Or consider what happens when a pipeline has ingested a malicious package and you need to trace back to the originating repository. If the hybrid approach is adopted correctly, both of these situations can be addressed a lot more easily and quickly by security and observability teams.

At Cloudsmith, we partner closely with SRE’s and infosec teams early in the onboarding process to ensure our customers are well equipped to handle these situations.

One of the more popular topics we discuss during customer onboardings is the practice of artifact promotion across repositories. Package promotion workflows can be the place where artifact management breaks down in less structured setups.
In the hybrid model, environment based repositories act as quality gates that artifacts must pass through before reaching production. This ensures that only vetted, tested, and approved artifacts move forward, reducing the risk of instability, untested code, or vulnerable code being deployed into customer-facing applications. Development teams can still own and manage their artifacts independently, while the environment boundaries guarantee a consistent, auditable path throughout the artifact lifecycle.

The other significant benefits of the hybrid approach are visibility and governance. With a purely environment-based structure, it can be difficult to quickly identify who “owns” a package or service, while a purely service-based approach risks muddying the waters when promoting artifacts across environments.
The hybrid approach solves this tension but allows teams to retain clear ownership of their artifacts, while environment-based repositories enforce quality “gates” as well as access controls as packages move from development to staging, to production.

A hybrid repository structure strikes the balance between order and flexibility. By combining environment-based repositories (development, staging, and production) with service, application, or team-specific segmentation, organizations gain more control over how software flows through their pipelines without losing sight of ownership or accountability.
This approach creates clear boundaries between environments while still aligning repositories with the way development teams actually build and ship software.

How to Implement the Ideal Hybrid Repository Structure?

There isn’t a “one-size-fits-all” approach to implement a hybrid repository structure, but there are a few patterns that work especially well depending on how your organization is structured. One common approach is to segment by team and environment. For example, you might have repositories like frontend-dev, frontend-staging, and frontend-prod, alongside backend-dev, backend-staging, and backend-prod. This approach works well when you have dedicated frontend and backend teams who need clear ownership of their artifacts, while environment-based repositories provide the quality gates required to promote code safely through your organization’s environments.

Another variation is to organize by product/service and environment, such as payments-dev, payments-staging, and payments-prod for services. This model is particularly effective for organizations running microservices or multiple customer-facing products. Each service has a self-contained promotion pipeline making it easier to test, release and troubleshoot independently without impacting other teams. Larger organizations sometimes prefer a department or function-based hybrid model, where repositories are grouped for example by mobile-dev, mobile-staging, mobile-prod for a mobile app focused engineering team, while a data focused team might have their own set of similar repositories. Again, this keeps things scalable and avoids proliferation of repositories, while still ensuring environment-based control.

Finally, a useful approach includes a shared dependency repository alongside service and environment repositories. For example, you might have a shared-libs repository where internal SDKs, libraries, and external dependencies might live to be used across multiple services or applications. The Cloudsmith customer success team often recommends enterprise customers adopt this approach for both deduplication of dependencies as well as ensuring there is a dedicated “ingress” repository that acts as a security gate for proxied dependencies. This avoids having multiple “development” repositories having multiple upstream configurations and helps greatly with auditability.

Companies with just a few major products often do best with a product + environment structure, while those running many microservices benefit from a service + environment structure. Smaller, more agile teams might lean towards a team + environment approach to meet their specific needs. In most enterprise environments, it’s actually common to mix multiple hybrid patterns within a single artifact registry. Your teams might use all 3 of the above approaches depending on specific workflow requirements. We call this “multi-pattern hybrid repository structure”.

For each of the above hybrid structures, our customers have the ability to automate the creation of these repositories on behalf of their development teams using our REST API and Terraform provider, with some customers even creating golden paths or secure self-service workflows to enable development speed and freedom. Overall, the key to getting the hybrid approach just right for your organization is to align your repositories with how your development teams are organized as well as how your CI/CD pipelines actually operate.

Cloudsmith’s Support for Hybrid Repository Structures

Cloudsmith is the modern way to store and distribute your software at scale, securely. With Cloudsmith’s multi-format support and build-in scale, we are able to meet the needs of the largest enterprises building and distributing software today. Gone are the days of language formats bound to repositories and limits on how many repositories you can create.

With Cloudsmith, your developers are able to spin up new globally distributed repositories with just a few clicks or commands to meet their needs. All of this comes out of the box with Cloudsmith. The Cloudsmith Customer Success team is here to help you navigate repository configurations, especially the hybrid approach given the amount of customers we have benefitting from this approach.

If you haven’t already, check out our previous post, 

, where we break down the foundational principles behind effective repository organization and how the right structure can shape your software delivery success.

Speed, reliability, and security are now essential in modern software delivery. With organizations increasing the speed of their engineering processes, software artifacts, including Docker images and npm packages, have grown to be the foundation of the development lifecycle. It is crucial to manage these artifacts effectively in order to enable teams to deliver to users faster and with greater confidence.

Historically, artifact management, like many parts of the CI/CD pipeline, was managed in-house, with organizations setting up their own artifact repository and infrastructure. Although such a strategy was viable at smaller scales, it frequently resulted in issues, particularly the lack of storage capacity, bottlenecks in performance within a region, and a high maintenance overhead.

In recent years, organizations have been shifting 

 towards the cloud. This move to cloud-native infrastructure removes the physical limits of on-prem systems and allows teams to scale across the world, reduce latency, and sustain high performance on each stage of the CI/CD pipeline.

This blog will discuss seven aspects of how a 

 system can enhance your software delivery processes by scaling and enhancing their performance, enabling teams to deliver software more quickly, dependably, and globally.

1. Elastic scaling of storage and distribution

Conventional artifact repositories often run into difficulties when engineering teams scale their usage. As developers begin generating hundreds of thousands of versions of Docker images, packages, or libraries, traditional on-premise systems require manual maintenance. This often involves increasing on-premise systems, more hardware, manual configuration, and frequent maintenance.

In contrast, cloud-native artifact management leverages elastic scaling to automatically expand storage as demand grows. This guarantees that as engineers produce more artifacts; performance will remain constant. With physical infrastructure deletion, scalability with artifacts is easily accomplished without capacity bottlenecks, and doing incremental upgrading is costly.

 performance does not only hinge on the storage of artifacts, it also depends on how quickly they can be accessed in different regions of the world to support globally distributed teams. The problem of latency is a significant problem in globally spread enterprises when teams are compelled to draw artifacts in one, centralized on-premise repository, which is often very distant from where builds are occurring. It may cause slow builds, delays in deployments, and exasperated developers.

Cloud-native artifact management systems address this issue through replication and caching. Replication is the process of storing copies of the artifacts in more than one location, in places near the teams that require them. Caching goes a step further: When an artifact is initially requested, it is momentarily stored, or rather cached, in edge servers at key points around the world. The next time a team in that region orders the same artifact, it can be delivered directly out of the cache, and they do not have to take a long, latency-intensive journey back to a central repository.

Systems and developers can retrieve the closest copy of an artifact, which can significantly reduce their retrieval time. This type of cloud-native scaling makes global distribution a strength and not a weakness, meaning that the performance of artifacts will not be weakened when teams are operating in North America, Europe, or Asia.

3. Seamless integration with CI/CD pipelines

Automation is the core of the new-generation software delivery, and artifacts are the key to any build, test, and release. Using cloud-native artifact management, repositories have been built into CI/CD pipelines, and artifacts have been made a first-class citizen in the delivery process.

New builds are automatically checked, analyzed and subsequently validated. Integration with other tools (i.e., Jenkins, GitHub Actions, and GitLab CI) through webhooks and APIs allows pipelines to continue running seamlessly. Such integration enhances the DevOps artifact management that helps in delivering much faster with a lesser amount of manual work and risk.

 repositories are often offline due to maintenance, upgrades, or other unexpected loss of online accessibility, thereby making development difficult. Cloud-native systems provide reliability by design, with redundancy and auto-healing load balancing being part of the infrastructure. This guarantees the presence of artifacts even when the demand is high.

For engineering teams, that means repeatability, uninterrupted workflows, and confidence that outages won’t disrupt delivery. By removing the fear of downtime, organizations can stay on schedule and ensure developers always have the artifacts they need.

Scaling artifacts with traditional infrastructure is typically expensive in terms of procurement costs, such as servers, storage, and licenses. Cloud-native models typically remove this limitation by allowing users to paying-as-you-go, aligning cost directly with their use.

Enhanced capabilities, such as deduplication, avoiding storage redundancy, and tiered storage, aim to keep commonly used artifacts from high-performance systems and archive older versions in lower-cost ones. This is an efficient way to enable scale as well as prevent overspending because of team growth. When artifact scalability and economic efficiency combine, so do performance and cost in cloud-native platforms.

The larger your store of digital artifacts becomes, the more critical it is to ensure their integrity and compliance. Cloud-native repositories often have built-in security controls, as they help to keep them trustworthy and auditable. Immutability characteristics disallow alterations from being made to published artifacts, and access restrictions stop undesired users from publishing or retrieving artifacts. 

Artifacts are encrypted both at rest and in transit and are integrated with SBOM reporting to achieve regulatory (SOX, HIPAA, GDPR) compliance. This is a security-first approach that guarantees both speed and trust to enterprises, as artifact performance is coupled with integrity and compliance.

7. Future-proof scalability for innovation

Technology does not stand still, and neither should your artifact management strategy. Cloud-native systems are futuristic and therefore can be scaled as organizations start adopting new architectures like microservices, edge computing and AI-driven development.

Getting Started with RPM packages and Cloudsmith

More articles

AI Artifacts: The new software supply chain blind spot

Access Control & Permissions for Multi-Format Repositories

The true cost of legacy artifact management

The Hybrid Repository Structure: Balancing Control and Flexibility

7 Ways Cloud-Native Improves Artifact Management Scalability and Performance

The platform of choice for AI companies