Sadly having been in such an environment, I can confirm that indemnity insurance exists for such situations. What happens is the underwriter to reduce risk mand

Sadly having been in such an environment, I can confirm that indemnity insurance exists for such situations. What happens is the underwriter to reduce risk mandates a very rigid process. In one case, I saw a "private cloud" provider underwrite their client's system by owning the "software-development-release-cycle". They were mandating quarterly releases and three-month manual testing and regression periods. They put themselves in a situation whereby they could charge the client for the tin, administering the process, the time and materials for the deployment and testing and the indemnity premium. They reduce their risk/exposure because of infrequent releases and such long regression cycles meant assurance levels were rarely met within the dedicated window. There was a very long tail of unreleased features. In summary, they mitigated any risk by chocking the product, reducing the number of releases and the size of them to deliver a fraction of the value available. We learned to work around by taking advantage of feature switching, but quarterly releases are a death knell for a product.