Best Practices for Secure Code Review
-
As part of the “Best Practices” series by Uplatz
Welcome to a development-focused edition of the Uplatz Best Practices series — where we shift security left and build safer code from day one.
Today’s focus: Secure Code Review — identifying vulnerabilities and flaws before they reach production.
🧱 What is Secure Code Review?
Secure Code Review is the process of manually and/or automatically analyzing source code to uncover security issues like:
- Injection flaws
- Insecure authentication
- Inadequate input validation
- Hardcoded secrets
- Broken access controls
It’s a core part of DevSecOps and helps organizations catch issues early, cheaply, and thoroughly.
✅ Best Practices for Secure Code Review
Code review isn’t just for quality — it’s a frontline security defense. Here’s how to do it effectively and consistently:
1. Establish a Code Review Checklist
📋 Include Security-Specific Items Alongside Functional Checks
✅ Align With OWASP Top 10 and Secure Coding Guidelines
📘 Tailor Checklists by Language, Framework, and App Type
2. Use Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Tools
🛠 Integrate Tools Like SonarQube, Fortify, Checkmarx, Semgrep
🔁 Run Scans Automatically During Pull Requests
📊 Track and Triage Findings in Issue Trackers
3. Avoid Hardcoded Credentials
🔐 Detect Secrets in Code (Use Git Hooks, TruffleHog, GitLeaks)
🧰 Leverage Secrets Managers (e.g., Vault, AWS Secrets Manager)
🧼 Scrub Commits With Sensitive Data
4. Validate All Inputs
🧪 Look for Missing or Weak Input Validation
🧹 Check for Unescaped Outputs in Templates and APIs
🛡 Guard Against XSS, SQLi, Path Traversal, and Injection Attacks
5. Review Authentication and Authorization Logic
🔑 Enforce Server-Side Auth — Never Trust the Client
📛 Watch for Role Bypass, IDOR, and Token Misuse
🔁 Validate Session Expiry, Refresh Token Handling, and MFA
6. Use Secure Defaults and Patterns
🧱 Default to Deny — Least Privilege Everywhere
🔁 Reuse Hardened Libraries or Frameworks for Encryption, JWT, OAuth
🧩 Avoid Writing Custom Crypto or Auth Logic
7. Review Error and Logging Handling
🚫 Avoid Logging Sensitive Data (PII, passwords, tokens)
🧾 Ensure Stack Traces and Debug Info Aren’t Exposed
📜 Use Structured Logging for Better Forensics
8. Include Multiple Reviewers and Diverse Perspectives
👥 Use 2+ Reviewers for High-Risk Changes
🧠 Involve Security Champions From Each Dev Squad
🎯 Mix Manual and Tool-Based Reviews for Full Coverage
9. Create a Security Culture in Peer Reviews
📣 Encourage Devs to Call Out Security Risks Without Blame
🧑🏫 Hold Review Retros and Share Common Anti-Patterns
🏁 Gamify Secure Review Contributions in Your Team
10. Automate What You Can — But Don’t Eliminate Human Insight
🤖 Use Tools for Repeatable, Pattern-Based Checks
🧠 Manually Review Business Logic, Auth Flows, and Edge Cases
🔁 Refine Rules and Checklists as Threats Evolve
💡 Bonus Tip by Uplatz
A great code review isn’t about nitpicks — it’s about reducing risk.
Combine automated detection with human context for true security at the source.
🔁 Follow Uplatz to get more best practices in upcoming posts:
- Secure DevOps Workflows
- SAST vs DAST vs IAST Explained
- Building Security Champions in Dev Teams
- Threat Modeling at Code Review Time
- AI-Driven Code Review Tools
…and 15+ more on secure SDLC, cloud-native development, and engineering excellence.