saic

SAIC Software Engineer Case Interview: Secure Mission Data Ingestion & Analytics System (Defense/IC)

Overview This SAIC case simulates a real mission environment where engineers integrate secure, compliant software across DoD/IC programs. The focus is on pragmatic systems design, implementation trade‑offs under constraints (classification, disconnected ops, COTS/GOTS integration), DevSecOps, and mission impact. The interview emphasizes SAIC’s culture: customer mission first, security/compliance by design, iterative delivery, and clear, collaborative communication with multidisciplinary stakeholders. Scenario Brief (given to candidate at start) A program office needs a minimally viable, secure data ingestion and analytics capability for fielded sensors (unreliable links, intermittent connectivity). The system must: (1) ingest JSON telemetry from edge devices; (2) validate and de‑duplicate records; (3) persist to a secure store; (4) publish events to an analytics pipeline; (5) expose a read API for authorized consumers; (6) operate in IL5 today, with a path to IL6; (7) support disconnected/edge use with eventual sync; (8) align with RMF/NIST 800‑53 controls and DoD STIG guidance. Non‑functional Constraints - Throughput: 500 msgs/sec sustained, burst 2,000; p95 ingest latency ≤ 150 ms in garrison; tolerate higher at edge. - Security: FIPS‑validated crypto; mTLS for service‑to‑service, CAC/OIDC/SAML for user auth; least privilege, encrypted data at rest/in transit; auditable logging to a central SIEM; SBOM generation. - Platforms: Kubernetes/OpenShift (preferred), AWS GovCloud or Azure Government; IaC via Terraform + Ansible. - Tooling expectations: GitLab/Jenkins CI/CD, SAST/DAST, IaC scanning, container hardening, OpenTelemetry for traces/metrics/logs. What the Candidate Must Do (within session) 1) Clarify Requirements (5–10 min): Elicit assumptions, edge cases, and mission priorities; identify COTS/GOTS integration points and data classification handling (e.g., cross‑domain, separate enclaves). 2) High‑Level Architecture (15–20 min): Whiteboard a secure ingest pipeline: API gateway → validation service → durable queue (e.g., Kafka/RabbitMQ) → processing/ETL → storage (e.g., PostgreSQL with RLS + TDE, or object store + catalog) → analytics consumers. Address: idempotency, schema evolution, back‑pressure, disconnected edge sync, key management (KMS/HSM), secrets, tenancy, and ATO path. 3) API/Data Contract (5–10 min): Define a minimal POST /telemetry endpoint with versioned schema, validation errors, retries, dedupe key design, pagination for reads, and classification markings in metadata. 4) DevSecOps Plan (5–10 min): Propose CI/CD stages (build → test → scan → sign → deploy), image signing (Sigstore/Cosign), environment promotion, feature flags, blue/green or canary, SBOM and vulnerability handling, logging/monitoring SLOs, runbooks. 5) Targeted Implementation (10–15 min): Write a small, idiomatic service stub (Java/Spring Boot or Python/FastAPI) that: validates incoming JSON against a schema, enforces idempotency (e.g., Redis/Postgres key), and emits to a queue. Include 1–2 unit tests. 6) Risk/Compliance Readout (5–10 min): Call out top risks (supply chain, data spillage, key rotation, capacity/bandwidth), proposed mitigations, RMF artifacts (SSP, POA&M), and steps toward ATO. Materials Provided - One‑page redacted sensor payload spec with sample JSON. - Minimal STIG/RMF checklist excerpt to anchor compliance discussion. - Skeleton repo or starter snippet for chosen language. Evaluation Criteria (weights reflect SAIC standards) - Architecture & Trade‑offs (25%): Clear, modular design; handles throughput, resilience, idempotency, edge sync; realistic COTS/GOTS integration. - Security & Compliance (20%): Concrete alignment to RMF/NIST 800‑53, STIG considerations, encryption, secrets, authN/Z, auditability; practical ATO awareness. - Implementation Quality (20%): Correctness, tests, readability, error handling, performance awareness, idiomatic code. - DevSecOps & Operability (10%): CI/CD, scanning, SBOM, observability, deployment strategy, rollback. - Communication & Collaboration (10%): Requirement clarification, stakeholder translation (mission ↔ engineering), concise rationale. - Mission/Constraints Fit (10%): Addresses disconnected ops, classification boundaries, cost/schedule realism, incremental deliverability. - Risk Management (5%): Identifies top risks and credible mitigations. Rubric Signals - Strong: Proposes secure, event‑driven design with schema versioning, dedupe keys, back‑pressure; covers mTLS + CAC/OIDC, KMS‑managed keys, centralized SIEM, IaC with policy as code; produces small but correct service + tests; articulates ATO path and phased delivery. - Mixed: Reasonable CRUD/API but weak on idempotency, edge realities, or compliance specifics; limited testability/observability. - Weak: Focus on algorithm trivia; ignores security/compliance and operational constraints; cannot justify trade‑offs. Timing Template (75 minutes total) - 0–10: Brief + requirement clarification - 10–30: Architecture & API/data contract - 30–45: DevSecOps plan + risks/compliance - 45–60: Targeted coding task - 60–75: Readout, Q&A, follow‑ups Panel Composition (typical at SAIC) - Hiring manager or tech lead (owns flow and mission context) - Senior software engineer (deep dive on design/implementation) - Cyber/security engineer (RMF/STIG/compliance) - Product/mission representative (requirements and delivery realism) Follow‑Up Probes (used if time allows) - How would you support cross‑domain transfer or multi‑enclave deployments? - Strategy for schema evolution and backward compatibility at the edge. - Cost/performance trade‑offs between managed services (GovCloud) vs self‑hosted. - Handling PII and data minimization; redaction at ingest. - Path to multi‑region DR and continuity of operations. What This Case Specifically Tests at SAIC - Ability to integrate secure, compliant software that advances the customer mission under real constraints. - Balance of pragmatic delivery with documentation/readiness for accreditation. - Collaboration with security, platform, and mission stakeholders common in SAIC programs.

engineering

8 minutes

Practice with our AI-powered interview system to improve your skills.

About This Interview

Interview Type

PRODUCT SENSE

Difficulty Level

4/5

Interview Tips

• Research the company thoroughly

• Practice common questions

• Prepare your STAR method responses

• Dress appropriately for the role