🛡️ Secure Development Policy Skill
🎯 Purpose Statement
Apply Hack23 AB's Secure Development Policy to demonstrate how security-by-design creates competitive advantages through systematic DevSecOps implementation.
Reference: Hack23 Secure Development Policy
This skill provides comprehensive guidance for implementing all phases of the secure development lifecycle with clear, actionable requirements following STYLE_GUIDE.md icon standards.
🔄 Secure Development Lifecycle (SDLC) - All Phases
📋 Phase 1: Planning & Design
Clear Requirements:
- ✅ Complete project classification per Classification Framework
- ✅ Document CIA triad levels (Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability)
- ✅ Define RTO/RPO aligned with business impact
- ✅ Create SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md with Mermaid C4 diagrams
- ✅ Perform STRIDE threat modeling documented in THREAT_MODEL.md
- ✅ Complete risk assessment integrated with Risk Register
- ✅ Calculate security investment ROI based on classification
Deliverables Checklist:
- README.md includes "Project Classification" section
- SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md created with current state
- FUTURE_SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md created with roadmap
- THREAT_MODEL.md includes STRIDE analysis
- Risk assessment documented and registered
- Cost-benefit analysis approved by CEO
💻 Phase 2: Development
Clear Requirements:
- ✅ Follow OWASP Top 10 secure coding standards
- ✅ Implement language-specific security best practices
- ✅ Require security-focused code review for all changes
- ✅ Apply data classification to all code assets
- ✅ Use GitHub secrets, never hardcode credentials
- ✅ Implement secret rotation procedures
- ✅ Use parameterized queries (no SQL injection)
- ✅ Validate and sanitize all inputs
- ✅ Encode outputs appropriately for context
- ✅ Implement proper error handling (no information disclosure)
Code Review Security Checklist:
- No hardcoded secrets or credentials
- Input validation on all external data
- Output encoding prevents XSS
- Parameterized queries prevent injection
- Authentication/authorization properly implemented
- Error messages don't leak sensitive info
- Logging captures security events
- Dependencies are approved and scanned
- Code follows least privilege principle
- Sensitive data encrypted at rest and in transit
🧪 Phase 3: Security Testing
Clear Requirements:
🔬 SAST (Static Application Security Testing)
- ✅ SonarCloud integration on every commit
- ✅ Quality gate must pass (no Critical/High vulnerabilities)
- ✅ Security hotspots reviewed and resolved
- ✅ Code coverage ≥80% lines, ≥70% branches
📦 SCA (Software Composition Analysis)
- ✅ Automated dependency scanning (Dependabot/Renovate)
- ✅ SBOM generation (CycloneDX or SPDX format)
- ✅ License compliance via FOSSA scanning
- ✅ Vulnerability remediation per classification SLAs:
- Critical: 24 hours - High: 7 days - Medium: 30 days - Low: 90 days
⚡ DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing)
- ✅ OWASP ZAP scanning in staging environment
- ✅ API security testing (authentication, authorization, input validation)
- ✅ Annual penetration testing for High/Critical projects
🔍 Secret Scanning
- ✅ GitHub secret scanning enabled
- ✅ Pre-commit hooks prevent secret commits
- ✅ Immediate rotation for any exposed secrets
🔒 Test Data Protection
- ✅ NEVER use production data in test environments
- ✅ Anonymize/pseudonymize/mask all test data
- ✅ Securely delete test data after use
- ✅ Restrict test environment access (least privilege)
🚀 Phase 4: Deployment
Clear Requirements:
- ✅ Automated CI/CD with security gates
- ✅ All GitHub Actions pinned to SHA commits
- ✅ Harden-runner enabled with egress auditing
- ✅ Least privilege permissions in workflows
- ✅ Manual approval required for production
- ✅ Deployment checklist completed
- ✅ Security metrics and monitoring configured
- ✅ Rollback plan documented and tested
GitHub Actions Security Pattern:
permissions:
contents: read # Least privilege default
jobs:
deploy:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: step-security/harden-runner@<SHA>
with:
egress-policy: audit
- uses: actions/checkout@<SHA>
# Pin ALL actions to SHA, not tags🔧 Phase 5: Maintenance & Operations
Clear Requirements:
- ✅ Active vulnerability management per Vulnerability Management
- ✅ Security metrics tracked per Security Metrics
- ✅ Regular dependency updates (automated via Dependabot)
- ✅ Security patches applied per classification SLAs
- ✅ Incident response integration per Incident Response Plan
- ✅ Annual security review and threat model update
- ✅ Quarterly dependency and license audits
- ✅ Continuous monitoring and alerting
Monitoring Requirements:
- Security event logging enabled
- SIEM integration configured
- Vulnerability alerts routed to security team
- Performance metrics track security impact
- Compliance dashboards updated real-time
🤖 AI-Augmented Development Controls
Clear Requirements for ALL AI-assisted development:
🔐 AI as Proposal Generator Only
- ✅ All AI outputs require human review and approval
- ✅ AI cannot bypass CI/CD, security gates, or approvals
- ✅ Human developer retains accountability for all changes
- ✅ AI cannot weaken security controls
- ✅ AI cannot autonomously deploy to production
📋 Mandatory PR Review Process
- ✅ All AI-assisted code goes through standard PR workflow
- ✅ PR description documents AI assistance used
- ✅ Security gates enforced (no exceptions for AI)
- ✅ Human reviewer verifies security controls intact
- ✅ Testing requirements unchanged (80%+ coverage)
🔧 Curator-Agent Governance
- ✅ Changes to
.github/agents/*.mdrequire CEO approval - ✅ Changes to
.github/copilot-mcp*.jsonrequire CEO approval - ✅ Changes to
.github/workflows/copilot-setup-steps.ymlrequire CEO approval - ✅ Treat as Normal Changes per Change Management
- ✅ Document risk assessment for capability expansion
- ✅ All new integrations require security review
🛡️ Security & Audit Requirements
- ✅ Agents operate with least-privilege tool access
- ✅ MCP configurations under change control
- ✅ All agent activities logged and auditable
- ✅ Capability expansion requires security review
- ✅ Quarterly agent ecosystem security audit
🎯 Unit Test Coverage Requirements
Clear Requirements:
- ✅ Minimum 80% line coverage
- ✅ Minimum 70% branch coverage
- ✅ Tests run on every commit and PR
- ✅ UnitTestPlan.md documented in repository
- ✅ Public coverage reports via badges
- ✅ Historical coverage tracking (no regression)
- ✅ Coverage reports published to public URL
Reference Implementations:
- 🏛️ CIA: Unit Tests • Coverage • Plan
- 🎮 Black Trigram: Tests • Coverage • Plan
- 📊 CIA Compliance Manager: Tests • Coverage • Plan
🌐 End-to-End Testing Requirements
Clear Requirements:
- ✅ All critical user journeys covered
- ✅ E2ETestPlan.md documented in repository
- ✅ Public Mochawesome/Cypress reports
- ✅ Cross-browser testing (Chrome, Firefox, Safari)
- ✅ Performance assertions within tests
- ✅ Authentication/authorization flows tested
- ✅ Error handling and edge cases covered
Reference Implementations:
🕷️ Threat Modeling Requirements
Clear Requirements per Threat Modeling Policy:
📋 Required Documentation
- ✅ THREAT_MODEL.md in repository root
- ✅ STRIDE framework application (all 6 categories)
- ✅ MITRE ATT&CK technique mapping
- ✅ Attack tree analysis with probability/impact
- ✅ Threat agent classification (external/internal/supply chain)
- ✅ Quantitative risk assessment with business impact
- ✅ Security control mapping with effectiveness validation
🔄 Maintenance Requirements
- ✅ Threat model created during design phase
- ✅ Updated for all architectural changes
- ✅ Annual comprehensive review
- ✅ Quarterly update cycle
- ✅ Incident-driven updates after security events
Reference Implementations:
- 🏛️ CIA: Threat Model • STRIDE • Attack Trees
- 🎮 Black Trigram: Threat Model • Gaming Security
- 📊 CIA Compliance Manager: Threat Model • Risk Assessment
🎖️ Public Evidence Requirements
Clear Requirements per STYLE_GUIDE.md:
Required Badges in README.md
- ✅ OpenSSF Scorecard (target: ≥7.0)
- ✅ CII Best Practices (minimum: Passing)
- ✅ SLSA Level 3 attestation
- ✅ SonarCloud Quality Gate (must be "Passed")
- ✅ Code Coverage badge (≥80%)
- ✅ License badge (OSI-approved)
- ✅ Threat Model link badge
Example Badge Configuration:
[](https://scorecard.dev/viewer/?uri=github.com/ORG/REPO)
[](https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/projects/ID)
[](https://sonarcloud.io/summary/new_code?id=ORG_REPO)
[](https://sonarcloud.io/summary/new_code?id=ORG_REPO)
[](https://github.com/ORG/REPO/blob/main/THREAT_MODEL.md)📋 Master Verification Checklist
Use this comprehensive checklist before ANY deployment:
Phase 1: Planning & Design ✅
- Project classification complete (CIA + RTO/RPO + Business Impact)
- SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md created with C4 diagrams
- FUTURE_SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md created with roadmap
- THREAT_MODEL.md includes STRIDE + MITRE ATT&CK
- Attack trees documented with probability/impact
- Risk assessment registered
- Cost-benefit analysis approved
Phase 2: Development ✅
- OWASP Top 10 mitigations implemented
- Language-specific security standards followed
- Code review completed with security focus
- Asset classification applied
- No hardcoded secrets (verified with secret scanning)
- Input validation implemented
- Output encoding implemented
- Error handling doesn't leak sensitive info
- Logging captures security events
Phase 3: Testing ✅
- SAST passed (SonarCloud quality gate green)
- SCA clean (all vulnerabilities remediated per SLA)
- DAST completed (OWASP ZAP scan clean)
- Secret scanning clean
- Test data properly anonymized
- Unit test coverage ≥80% lines, ≥70% branches
- E2E tests cover all critical paths
- UnitTestPlan.md documented
- E2ETestPlan.md documented
Phase 4: Deployment ✅
- CI/CD security gates passed
- All GitHub Actions pinned to SHA
- Harden-runner enabled
- Least privilege permissions
- Manual approval obtained for production
- Deployment checklist complete
- Security metrics configured
- Rollback plan tested
Phase 5: Operations ✅
- Vulnerability management active
- Security metrics monitored
- Dependency updates automated
- Incident response integrated
- Annual review scheduled
- Quarterly audits scheduled
AI Controls ✅
- Human review for all AI outputs
- No autonomous deployments
- PR documentation complete
- Agent permissions least-privilege
- MCP config under change control
- Audit trail enabled
Documentation ✅
- SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md
- FUTURE_SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md
- THREAT_MODEL.md
- SECURITY.md (vulnerability disclosure)
- WORKFLOWS.md (CI/CD documentation)
- UnitTestPlan.md
- E2ETestPlan.md
- CRA-ASSESSMENT.md (if applicable)
- README includes classification section
- All required badges displayed
Public Evidence ✅
- OpenSSF Scorecard ≥7.0
- CII Best Practices (Passing+)
- SLSA Level 3 attestation
- Quality Gate passed
- Coverage ≥80%
- License compliance (FOSSA clean)
📚 Authoritative References
- Primary Policy: Secure Development Policy
- Related Policies:
- Threat Modeling - Vulnerability Management - Classification Framework - Change Management - Incident Response Plan - Security Metrics
- Standards: STYLE_GUIDE.md
💡 Key Takeaways
- 🛡️ Security by Design: Build security in from the start, not bolt on later
- 🌟 Transparency: Public evidence through badges and documentation
- 🏷️ Classification-Driven: All decisions aligned with project classification
- 🔄 Continuous Improvement: Regular reviews, updates, and learning from incidents
- 🤖 Human Accountability: AI assists, humans decide and approve
- 📊 Evidence-Based: Every security claim backed by public, verifiable proof
- ✅ Comprehensive Coverage: ALL 5 SDLC phases with clear, actionable requirements