Secure SDLC Planning
For engineers and leads designing or refreshing a secure development process — grounded in the ASVS verification standard and existing repository/CI/CD guidance rather than a generic checklist.
- Audience
- Engineering leads and AppSec practitioners designing or revising a secure software development lifecycle.
- Level
- Advanced
- Depth
- Short to moderate — six steps.
Prerequisites
- Repository and CI/CD Security covers useful supporting context, though it isn't required first.
Learning Objectives
- Understand what the ASVS verification standard actually requires at a chapter level.
- Ground a secure-SDLC plan in existing pipeline and repository controls rather than starting from a blank page.
- Leave with a plan sized to a specific team's size, cadence, and platform.
0 of 6 complete (0%)
Progress is saved only in this browser.
Steps
1. Secure SDLC
OpenCategory
Frames secure development as a design constraint from the start, not a review gate at the end.
2. CI/CD Security Controls Every Engineering Team Should Have
OpenArticle
The pipeline controls a secure SDLC plan needs to assume are either already in place or explicitly scheduled.
3. Repository Security Assessment Checklist
OpenArticle
The repository-level controls a secure SDLC plan builds on top of.
4. OWASP ASVS Controls
OpenReference Collection
The verification standard a mature secure SDLC is ultimately trying to satisfy, chapter by chapter.
5. Secure SDLC Planner
OpenDecision Center
Produce a plan sized to your specific team, release cadence, and platform rather than a generic template.
6. Repository Security Review
OpenDecision Center
Verify the repository-level controls the plan assumes are actually in place.
Related Learning Paths
Repository and CI/CD Security
A sequence covering both a repository's own security posture and the pipeline that builds and deploys from it — two categories that are usually reviewed together because a pipeline typically holds more privilege than what it deploys.
Engineering Manager AppSec
For managers, directors, and CTOs who need to report on application security risk and prioritize a backlog without necessarily writing the fixes themselves.