Direct answer
A Secure SDLC review is an independent assessment of how security is built into your software development lifecycle. It examines design reviews, coding standards, CI/CD security gates, dependency and secrets handling, and release approvals — then produces a prioritised roadmap aligned to frameworks such as OWASP SAMM and ASVS.
How is a Secure SDLC review different from a pen test?
A penetration test finds vulnerabilities in a finished (or near-finished) system. A Secure SDLC review improves the process that keeps producing those vulnerabilities. Many organisations need both: pen tests for assurance evidence, SDLC reviews for lasting maturity.
What areas are typically assessed?
Governance and ownership, threat-informed requirements, design review practices, secure coding guidance, pull-request and code-review gates, SAST/SCA/DAST usage, secrets management, infrastructure-as-code checks, release RACI, and how incidents feed back into engineering standards.
Assessors distinguish missing controls from misconfigured tooling and from process drift — where policy exists on paper but not in day-to-day delivery.
Which frameworks are used?
Common references include OWASP SAMM, OWASP ASVS, and NIST SSDF (SP 800-218). Where you pursue ISO 27001 or SOC 2, findings can be mapped to secure-development control themes so audit conversations start from evidence.
What does a useful roadmap look like?
A useful roadmap is 30/60/90-day sequenced actions with owners and acceptance criteria — for example, “critical SAST findings block merge unless waived with recorded rationale and expiry.” Vague advice to “shift left” without gates is not enough.
Related service
If you need this work delivered, see Secure SDLC Review or start a conversation.