Security Architecture Review Template
Use this template when conducting security architecture reviews for new features, major changes, or system components.
Review Information
Component/Feature: [Name of component or feature]
Reviewer: [Name]
Date: [Date]
Review Type: [Initial / Follow-up / Final]
Affected Security Controls: [List control IDs, e.g., A-001, B-002]
Executive Summary
Brief Description: [One-paragraph summary of the component/feature and its security implications]
Security Risk Level:
- Low
- Medium
- High
- Critical
Recommendation:
- Approve
- Approve with conditions
- Request changes
- Reject
Architecture Overview
Component Description
[Detailed description of the component, its purpose, and how it fits into the system]
Data Flow
[Describe how data flows through the component, including inputs, outputs, and transformations]
Threat Model
[Identify potential threats, attackers, and attack vectors]
Security Analysis
Authentication & Authorization
Current Implementation: [Describe how authentication and authorization are handled]
Security Assessment:
- Authentication is properly implemented
- Authorization checks are present at all boundaries
- Principle of least privilege is followed
- No privilege escalation vulnerabilities
- Session management is secure (if applicable)
Issues Found: [List any authentication/authorization issues]
Recommendations: [List recommendations for improvement]
Cryptographic Operations
Current Implementation: [Describe cryptographic operations used]
Security Assessment:
- Cryptographic primitives are appropriate and well-tested
- Key management follows best practices
- No hardcoded keys or secrets
- Random number generation is secure
- Signature verification is complete
- Constant-time operations used where needed
Issues Found: [List any cryptographic issues]
Recommendations: [List recommendations for improvement]
Input Validation & Sanitization
Current Implementation: [Describe input validation approach]
Security Assessment:
- All inputs are validated at boundaries
- Input sanitization is appropriate
- No injection vulnerabilities (SQL, command, etc.)
- Path traversal is prevented
- Buffer overflows are prevented
- Integer overflow/underflow is handled
Issues Found: [List any input validation issues]
Recommendations: [List recommendations for improvement]
Data Protection
Current Implementation: [Describe how sensitive data is protected]
Security Assessment:
- Sensitive data is encrypted at rest (if applicable)
- Sensitive data is encrypted in transit
- No sensitive data in logs
- No sensitive data in error messages
- Proper data retention and deletion
Issues Found: [List any data protection issues]
Recommendations: [List recommendations for improvement]
Error Handling
Current Implementation: [Describe error handling approach]
Security Assessment:
- Errors don't leak sensitive information
- Error handling is comprehensive
- Fail-secure defaults are used
- No information disclosure through errors
Issues Found: [List any error handling issues]
Recommendations: [List recommendations for improvement]
Network Security
Current Implementation: [Describe network security measures]
Security Assessment:
- Network communication is encrypted (TLS)
- DoS protection is implemented
- Rate limiting is appropriate
- Network message validation is complete
- Protocol security is maintained
Issues Found: [List any network security issues]
Recommendations: [List recommendations for improvement]
Consensus & Protocol Compliance
Current Implementation: [Describe consensus/protocol implementation]
Security Assessment:
- Consensus rules are correctly implemented
- No consensus bypass vulnerabilities
- Protocol compliance is maintained
- Network compatibility is preserved
Issues Found: [List any consensus/protocol issues]
Recommendations: [List recommendations for improvement]
Security Controls Mapping
Affected Controls: [List all security controls affected by this component]
| Control ID | Control Name | Priority | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A-001 | Genesis Block | P0 | ✅ Complete | - |
| B-002 | Emergency Signatures | P0 | ⚠️ Partial | Needs review |
Required Actions:
- Security audit required (P0 controls)
- Formal verification required (consensus-critical)
- Cryptography expert review required
Testing & Validation
Current Testing: [Describe existing tests]
Security Testing Assessment:
- Security tests are included
- Edge cases are tested
- Fuzzing is appropriate (if applicable)
- Integration tests cover security scenarios
- Test coverage is adequate
Recommendations: [List testing recommendations]
Dependencies
Dependencies: [List security-sensitive dependencies]
Security Assessment:
- Dependencies are up-to-date
- No known vulnerabilities
- Consensus-critical dependencies are pinned
- Licenses are compatible
Issues Found: [List dependency issues]
Compliance & Governance
Governance Tier: [Identify required governance tier]
Compliance:
- Appropriate governance tier is selected
- Required signatures are identified
- Review period is appropriate
Risk Assessment
Identified Risks
| Risk | Severity | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Example risk | High | Medium | Critical | Mitigation strategy |
Risk Summary
[Overall risk assessment and summary]
Recommendations
Critical (Must Fix)
[List critical issues that must be fixed before approval]
High Priority
[List high-priority recommendations]
Medium Priority
[List medium-priority recommendations]
Low Priority
[List low-priority recommendations]
Approval
Reviewer Signature: [Name]
Date: [Date]
Status: [Approved / Conditionally Approved / Rejected]
Conditions (if applicable): [List any conditions for approval]
Follow-up
Required Actions: [List actions required before final approval]
Follow-up Review Date: [Date for follow-up review, if needed]
References
- Security Controls System
- Threat Models
- Developer Security Checklist
- Security Testing Template
- blvm-node SECURITY.md (reference node security practices)