Skip to content
THE REVIEW LENS

Inspect the control.
Trace its dependencies.

We follow call graphs and data flow across handlers, service layers and framework code to examine how security controls protect sensitive operations.

Code review map linking application interfaces, data handling, authority and state checks, and sensitive operations.
Review focus: reachability, control placement and framework behavior.
STACKS

Java / Kotlin   ·   .NET / C#   ·   JavaScript / TypeScript   ·   Python   ·   Go   ·   PHP

Languages, frameworks and review depth confirmed during scoping.

01 / REVIEW COVERAGEOPEN AN AREA ↓

Where we spend
reviewer time.

Identity & authorizationToken validation · privilege checks · account recovery

Review server-side permission enforcement, authentication state and recovery flows. Check that object ownership and role restrictions survive alternate entry points.

INSPECTMiddleware orderingToken verificationPermission helpers
Business logic & concurrencyWorkflow transitions · replay · transaction integrity

Examine state transitions, idempotency and transaction boundaries. Look for approval bypasses, repeated operations and race conditions around security-sensitive decisions.

INSPECTState machinesAtomic updatesCheck/use timing
Untrusted data & dangerous operationsInjection · deserialization · file and network access

Trace external values through parsing and transformation into queries, command execution, templates and outbound requests. Assess whether protections match the final execution context.

INSPECTQuery constructionPath handlingSerialization APIs
Cryptography & sensitive dataKey use · credential handling · data exposure

Inspect use of cryptographic libraries, randomness and key lifecycle controls. Review secret handling, sensitive logging and data exposure through errors or responses.

INSPECTCrypto wrappersSecret referencesLogs & exceptions
Dependencies & configurationPackage exposure · security defaults · integration code

Review relevant manifests, dependency findings and security configuration. Assess affected functionality and deployment assumptions to distinguish component alerts from application risk.

INSPECTLockfilesFramework settingsIntegration wrappers

SCOPE THE DEPTH

Match the review
to the change.

Application baseline

Map the agreed codebase and prioritize its security-critical modules.

Critical component

Go deeper into an authentication service, parser or sensitive business workflow.

Release diff

Review changed code and the surrounding controls it can affect.

Effort depends on architecture, complexity and access—not source-line count alone.

02 / HOW THE REVIEW WORKS

Two analysis paths.
One validated assessment.

Automated findings and manual observations feed a shared investigation. Reviewers establish the conditions under which an issue can affect the application.

Agreed source revision feeds parallel automated analysis and manual inspection; both converge on reachability and impact validation, findings and revision-based retesting.

Access & revision

Agree repositories, commit references, exclusions and a secure source-access method under the engagement NDA.

Validation conditions

Use focused tests or runtime reproduction where feasible. Clearly identify conclusions limited to static evidence.

Coverage statement

Record reviewed modules, analysis methods, unavailable components and limitations.

03 / ENGINEERING HANDOFF

Make the finding
locatable.
Make the fix
reviewable.

Give developers the context to correct the root cause and test adjacent paths.

FINDING CONTENTREVIEW → REMEDIATE
Location
Repository, revision, file and affected function or line range.
Technical evidence
Relevant code path, trigger conditions and validation notes.
Risk assessment
Reachability, privileges required and security impact.
Remediation
Code-level guidance, safer implementation patterns and regression checks.
Verification
Retest result tied to the supplied fix revision and agreed scope.

A clear basis for review.

Applicable ASVS requirements and versions are agreed in scope. Code review supports SSDF code-analysis practices; it does not establish full framework conformity.

START WITH THE CODEBASE

What are you shipping next?

Share the stack, repository scope and release context. We'll define the review depth.

Plan your code review