SPIKE: Multi-Cloud CSPM - Architecture and Best Practices review w Cloud Security/Checkpoint

**Describe the Issue**
CSPM in the near future will be installed in multiple BC Gov Clouds, and planning for best practices around this and any options we have for this will be discussed. Establishing a centralized, Multi-Cloud CSPM architecture will be key to proper Cloud Governance, reporting and security/privacy, and be a centerpiece within a Multi-Cloud operations strategy

**Additional Context**
Additionally, how to centralize the use of a Multi-Cloud CSPM using AD credentials and PIM, should be a key topic to review, even in the case of our current AWS implementation and its use right now of KeyCloak. Using AWS AD Sync should be tested either as part of this process or in parrallel at some point.

**Acceptance Criteria**
- Investigate latest best practice architecture options for a CSPM in this context
- Discuss various facets of Multi-Cloud w CSPM/monitoring
- Review architecture best practices/options with CloudGuard
- Review/Discuss with Checkpoint

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

**Extra Template Info**

***Definition of Ready***
These set of conditions will need to be met in order to bring a ticket into the sprint and start work. Protects the team from unclear requirements.
Issues (Task/Story/Spike) aligned to an EPIC and linked appropriately.
Assigned to the appropriate CPF MEMBER (and is not left blank in ZenHub) at the start of sprint (1st day of the sprint)
Acceptance has been defined for the issue and has been reviewed with CPF team and approved by the necessary approver.
Has been sized and estimated by the delivery team.
Detailed breakdown of the steps required to complete the story in the additional context
Any additional specifications have been documented, reviewed with CPF and approved by the necessary approver.

***Acceptance Criteria***
A set of pre-defined requirement that need to be met in order to mark the user story as “done”.
It should be testable with no room for interpretation
It should be either “pass” or “fail”
It should be clear enough for business stake holders to understand
As part of the user story, it should be written from the user perspective
A well written acceptance criteria is great for
- managing expectations
- defining scope
- reducing ambiguity
- establishing testing criteria for QA
Given (Pre-condition)
When (Action)
Then (Outcome)

***Definition of Done***
These set of conditions are met for work to be considered as complete on an issue.
All acceptance criteria(s) have been validated.
All the necessary documentation for the issue has been uploaded to Teams.
Functionality has been tested when applicable.
Functionality has been demonstrated to the relevant stakeholders (where applicable).
Story has been scheduled for a Sprint Demo/community update and impacted teams invited to the Demo.
Stories accepted by PO and documented for potential sharing with impacted users.
- Documented = Captured in Community Update (CU) deck
- Release notes = aspirational goal of providing a bulleted list of features and changes that our users can touch. Was going to store them in our Cloud Pathfinder repo. Can also display to users in the CU