| name | secure-development-lifecycle |
| description | Comprehensive SDLC security covering planning, development, testing, deployment, and maintenance with classification-driven controls and AI governance |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
๐ก๏ธ Secure Development Lifecycle (SDLC) Skill
๐ด AI FIRST Quality Principle
Apply the AI FIRST principle: never accept first-pass quality. Minimum 2 iterations. Read all output, improve every section. No shortcuts.
๐ฏ Purpose
Comprehensive security practices for the entire Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC), ensuring security is built in from inception through maintenance. Integrates classification-driven requirements, AI-augmented development controls, and systematic testing frameworks aligned with Hack23 Secure Development Policy.
๐ Governance chain
Authority flows from the Information Security Policy (master ISMS document) โ Secure Development Policy (SDLC requirements) โ this skill (operational implementation in this repository).
Directly relevant companion policies:
๐ Core Security Principles
๐ Security by Design
- ๐ท๏ธ Project Classification: CIA triad, RTO/RPO, business impact analysis
- ๐ก๏ธ Secure Coding Standards: OWASP Top 10 alignment with classification controls
- ๐๏ธ Architecture Documentation: SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md + FUTURE_SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md
๐ Transparency Through Documentation
- ๐ Living Security Architecture: Real-time documentation with classification controls
- ๐๏ธ Public Security Badges: OpenSSF Scorecard, SLSA, Quality Gate validation
- ๐ Open Development: Demonstrating expertise while maintaining classification
๐ Continuous Security Improvement
- ๐ท๏ธ Classification-Driven Testing: SAST/SCA/DAST per classification levels
- ๐ Performance Monitoring: Security metrics with availability SLAs
- ๐ Regular Reviews: Classification-based risk management and ROI
๐ 5-Phase SDLC Security Framework
๐ Phase 1: Planning & Design
๐ท๏ธ Project Classification (REQUIRED)
Apply Classification Framework:
Classification Levels:
| Level | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability | Security Investment |
|---|
| Critical | State secrets | Financial | <1 hour RTO | Maximum controls |
| High | Proprietary | Legal | 4 hour RTO | Strong controls |
| Medium | Internal | Operational | 24 hour RTO | Standard controls |
| Low | Public | Informational | 72 hour RTO | Baseline controls |
๐๏ธ Security Architecture Design (REQUIRED)
Maintain comprehensive architecture documentation:
๐ฏ Threat Modeling (MANDATORY)
Per Threat Modeling Policy:
๐ป Phase 2: Development
๐ก๏ธ Secure Coding Guidelines
OWASP Top 10 (2021) Alignment:
- A01 - Broken Access Control: Proper authentication/authorization
- A02 - Cryptographic Failures: TLS 1.3, AES-256 encryption
- A03 - Injection: Parameterized queries, input validation
- A04 - Insecure Design: Apply threat modeling, secure patterns
- A05 - Security Misconfiguration: Secure defaults, hardened configs
- A06 - Vulnerable Components: SCA scanning, SBOM generation
- A07 - Authentication Failures: MFA, secure session management
- A08 - Software/Data Integrity: Code signing, integrity checks
- A09 - Logging Failures: Comprehensive security event logging
- A10 - SSRF: Validate external resource requests
๐ Code Review Requirements
Classification-Based Review:
| Classification | Review Type | Required Approvals | Security Focus |
|---|
| Critical | Formal security review | 2+ reviewers + security architect | All OWASP Top 10 |
| High | Security-focused PR review | 2+ reviewers | Critical vulnerabilities |
| Medium | Standard PR review | 1+ reviewer | Input validation, auth |
| Low | Standard PR review | 1 reviewer | Basic security checks |
๐ Secret Management (MANDATORY)
๐งช Phase 3: Security Testing
๐ฌ Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Implementation:
- Tool: SonarCloud integration on every commit
- Quality Gates: Classification-based failure thresholds
- Coverage: All code analyzed for security vulnerabilities
- Reporting: Public quality/security dashboards
Classification-Based Quality Gates:
| Classification | Security Hotspots | Code Coverage | Duplications | Maintainability |
|---|
| Critical | 0 (block) | โฅ90% | <3% | A rating |
| High | โค2 (review) | โฅ80% | <5% | A or B rating |
| Medium | โค5 (track) | โฅ70% | <10% | B or C rating |
| Low | โค10 (monitor) | โฅ60% | <15% | C rating |
๐ฆ Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
Dependency Security:
Remediation SLAs:
| Severity | Critical Project | High Project | Medium Project | Low Project |
|---|
| Critical | 24 hours | 72 hours | 1 week | 2 weeks |
| High | 1 week | 2 weeks | 1 month | 2 months |
| Medium | 1 month | 2 months | 3 months | 6 months |
| Low | Next release | Next release | Next release | Next release |
โก Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Runtime Security Testing:
- Tool: OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite, or equivalent
- Scope: Staging environments (classification-appropriate)
- Frequency: Per sprint (Critical/High), quarterly (Medium/Low)
- Coverage: All authentication, authorization, input handling paths
๐ Secret Scanning (CONTINUOUS)
๐ Test Data Protection (MANDATORY)
๐ฏ Unit Test Coverage & Quality
๐ Testing Standards
Minimum Thresholds:
- Line Coverage: โฅ80% (Critical/High), โฅ70% (Medium/Low)
- Branch Coverage: โฅ70% (Critical/High), โฅ60% (Medium/Low)
- Mutation Testing: โฅ60% mutation score (Critical only)
- Test Execution: Every commit and PR
- Trend Analysis: Historical tracking, regression prevention
๐ Required Documentation
Every repository MUST have:
๐ Reference Implementation Examples
๐๏ธ Citizen Intelligence Agency (Java/Spring):

๐ฎ Black Trigram (TypeScript/Phaser):

๐ CIA Compliance Manager (TypeScript/Vite):

๐ End-to-End Testing Strategy
๐ฏ E2E Testing Requirements
Coverage Areas:
๐ Required Documentation
Every repository MUST have:
๐ Reference Implementation Examples
๐๏ธ Citizen Intelligence Agency:

๐ฎ Black Trigram:

๐ CIA Compliance Manager:

๐ค AI-Augmented Development Controls
๐ AI as Proposal Generator, Not Authority
Core Principles:
๐ PR Review Requirements
Mandatory Controls:
๐ง Curator-Agent Configuration Management
Change Control:
- Scope:
.github/agents/*.md, .github/copilot-mcp*.json, .github/workflows/copilot-setup-steps.yml
- Classification: Normal Change per Change Management
- Approval: CEO or designated security owner required
- Risk Assessment: Documented evaluation for capability expansion
๐ก๏ธ Security Requirements
Tool Governance:
๐ Phase 4: Deployment
๐ค Automated CI/CD Pipelines
Security Gates:
โ
Manual Approval Gates
Classification-Based Approvals:
| Classification | Approval Required | Approvers | Change Window |
|---|
| Critical | Production deploy | CEO + Security Architect | Scheduled only |
| High | Production deploy | Tech Lead + Reviewer | Standard window |
| Medium | Production deploy | Automated + monitoring | Anytime |
| Low | Production deploy | Automated | Anytime |
๐ Deployment Checklists
Pre-Deployment Verification:
๐ Security Metrics
Real-Time Monitoring:
๐ง Phase 5: Maintenance & Operations
๐ Vulnerability Management
Classification-Based Remediation:
Per Vulnerability Management:
| Severity | Critical Project | High Project | Medium Project | Low Project |
|---|
| Critical | 24 hours | 72 hours | 1 week | 2 weeks |
| High | 1 week | 2 weeks | 1 month | 2 months |
| Medium | 1 month | 2 months | 3 months | 6 months |
| Low | Next release | Next release | Next release | Next release |
๐ Performance Monitoring
Security Metrics Integration:
Per Security Metrics:
๐ Regular Updates
Patch Management:
๐ Incident Response
Integration:
Per Incident Response Plan:
๐ SDLC Security Maturity Levels
Level 1: Basic (Minimum Viable Security)
- โ
Basic security controls implemented
- โ
Dependabot enabled
- โ
Secret scanning active
- โ
Basic threat model documented
Level 2: Intermediate (Standard Security)
- โ
Level 1 + Classification implemented
- โ
SAST/SCA integrated in CI/CD
- โ
Unit test coverage โฅ70%
- โ
SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md maintained
- โ
Regular vulnerability scanning
Level 3: Advanced (Enhanced Security)
- โ
Level 2 + DAST implementation
- โ
Comprehensive threat modeling (STRIDE + MITRE ATT&CK)
- โ
Unit test coverage โฅ80%
- โ
E2E testing framework
- โ
Public security dashboards
Level 4: Mature (Security Excellence)
- โ
Level 3 + AI-augmented development controls
- โ
Mutation testing (โฅ60% score)
- โ
Full C4 architecture documentation
- โ
Continuous security monitoring
- โ
Evidence-based compliance (badges, reports)
- โ
External security validation (pentesting, audits)
โ
SDLC Security Checklist
Planning & Design Phase
Development Phase
Testing Phase
Deployment Phase
Maintenance Phase
๐ References
Hack23 ISMS Core Policies
Example Implementations
External Frameworks
๐ฏ Remember
- Classification Drives Security: All requirements aligned with business impact
- Transparency is Competitive Advantage: Public security demonstrates expertise
- AI Augments, Humans Decide: AI proposals require human approval
- Evidence-Based Security: Badges, dashboards, reports validate claims
- Continuous Improvement: Measure, analyze, improve security posture
- Documentation is Mandatory: SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md, THREAT_MODEL.md required
- Testing is Not Optional: Unit + E2E coverage proves quality
- Security is Everyone's Responsibility: DevSecOps culture required
Last Updated: 2026-02-10 (Continuous)
Version: Based on Hack23 Secure Development Policy v2.1 & STYLE_GUIDE v2.3