Projects/OWASP Secure Coding Practices - Quick Reference Guide/Releases/SCP v1.1/Assessment

Click here to return to project's main page

Release Review of the OWASP Secure Coding Practices - Quick Reference Guide - SCP v1.1 Release

Project Leader for this Release

Keith Turpin's Pre-Assessment Check-list:

Project Leader review

(This FORM is EDITED via a template)

Alpha level

1. Is this release associated with a project containing at least the Project Wiki Page Minimum Content information? answer 1

2. Is your document licensed under a free and open license? (see Project Licensing section of the Guidelines for OWASP Projects) Please point out the link(s). answer 2

3. Is the document available as a PDF (Portable Document Format) and an editable (.Doc) format on the project site? Please point out the link(s). answer 3

4. Are all articles that constitute the project release properly tagged within project category and available from main project Wiki page? Please point out the link(s). answer 4

5. Is there a roadmap for this project release which will take it from Alpha to Stable release? Please point out the link(s). answer 5

Beta Level

6. Are the Alpha pre-assessment items complete? answer 6

7. Are all document contents (articles) present and listed on the OWASP project wiki page? Please point out the link(s). answer 7

8. Is there user documentation on the OWASP project wiki page? Please point out the link(s). answer 8

9. Is there an “About This Document” section in the document listing: (Please point out the link(s). Document (Project Release) Name Author(s) Contributor(s) Contact email address Current version and/or release date Project's web page address answer 9

10. Is there documentation on how to build the tool from source including obtaining the source from the code repository? Please point out the link(s). answer 10

Stable Level

11. Are the Alpha and Beta pre-assessment items complete? answer 11

12. Have any limitations been documented? Please point out the link(s). answer 12

13. Does the document consider OWASP Writing Style and OWASP Template for Docs? Please point out the link(s) answer 13

14. Is there a one sheet overview document about the project release? Please point out the link(s). answer 14

15. Is the document in a format which can be converted to an OWASP book? (books are currently via Lulu.com) Please point out the link(s). answer 15

First Reviewer

Ludovic Petit's Review:

First Reviewer

Ideally, reviewers should be an existing OWASP project leader or chapter leader.

(This FORM is EDITED via a template)

Beta level

1. Does the document consider the OWASP Writing Style? answer 1

2. Do contents from wiki articles match download-able documents? (PDF and .doc versions) answer 2

3. Does the document have an “About This Document” section which allows the end user to get an overview of the state of the document? answer 3

4. How completely does the release address the goal of the project? Is the overall document complete in structure and organization? Are any missing or incomplete sections critical enough to keep the document at an Alpha quality level? answer 4

Stable Level

5. Have all the Beta Reviewer Action Items been completed? These will need to be completed if they have not already occurred during a previous assessment. answer 5

6. Have any limitations been documented? Please point out the link(s). answer 6

7. Does the document substantially address the application security issues it was created to solve? answer 7

8. Does the document respect OWASP Writing Style and OWASP Template for Docs? answer 8

9. Have you noted any limitations of the document that are not already documented by the project release lead? answer 9

10. Would you consider using this document in your day to day work assuming your professional work includes a reason to use this document? Would you recommend this document to others in the profession? Why or why not? answer 10

11. What, if anything, is missing which would make this a more useful document? Is what is missing critical enough to keep the release at a beta quality? answer 11

Second Reviewer

Brad Causey's Review:

Second Reviewer

It is recommended that an OWASP board member or Global Projects Committee member be the second reviewer on Quality releases. The board has the initial option to review the project, followed by the Global Projects Committee.

(This FORM is EDITED via a template)

Beta level

1. Does the document consider the OWASP Writing Style? answer 1

2. Do contents from wiki articles match download-able documents? (PDF and .doc versions) answer 2

3. Does the document have an “About This Document” section which allows the end user to get an overview of the state of the document? answer 3

4. How completely does the release address the goal of the project? Is the overall document complete in structure and organization? Are any missing or incomplete sections critical enough to keep the document at an Alpha quality level? answer 4

Stable Level

5. Have all the Beta Reviewer Action Items been completed? These will need to be completed if they have not already occurred during a previous assessment. answer 5

6. Have any limitations been documented? Please point out the link(s). answer 6

7. Does the document substantially address the application security issues it was created to solve? answer 7

8. Does the document respect OWASP Writing Style and OWASP Template for Docs? answer 8

9. Have you noted any limitations of the document that are not already documented by the project release lead? answer 9

10. Would you consider using this document in your day to day work assuming your professional work includes a reason to use this document? Would you recommend this document to others in the profession? Why or why not? answer 10

11. What, if anything, is missing which would make this a more useful document? Is what is missing critical enough to keep the release at a beta quality? answer 11