# Conduct an Internal Security Review

Immanuel Kant, a proponent of critical thinking, famously said, *"Dare to know! Have the courage to use your own understanding."* Much like ideas, code becomes more robust when it is subjected to scrutiny and challenge. The initial group to test new code should be the development team itself.

It is highly advisable to allocate time after coding is completed for a collaborative effort aimed at identifying vulnerabilities and issues. Additionally, ensure that components are reviewed by developers who did not write the original code, as this fresh perspective can uncover hidden flaws and enhance overall code quality.

## Steps for Effective Internal Security Reviews

1. **Schedule Dedicated Review Time**\
   Allocate approximately **one week** to review \~600 lines of smart contract code, especially for unprofessional or less-experienced security reviewers, to ensure thorough analysis. For larger codebases, scale time proportionally (e.g., 2 weeks for 1200 lines).
2. **Assign Diverse Reviewers**\
   Involve developers who didn’t write the code, ideally with familiarity in smart contract security.
3. **Use a Web3-Specific Security Checklist**\
   Adopt a checklist tailored to smart contract vulnerabilities, drawing from authoritative resources like the OWASP Smart Contract Top 10, SWC Registry, and others.
   * **Example Checklist Items**:
     * Are external calls protected against reentrancy?
     * Are access controls enforced for privileged functions?
     * Are arithmetic operations safe from integer overflows/underflows?
   * **Resources**:
     * [OWASP Smart Contract Top 10 (2025)](https://owasp.org/www-project-smart-contract-top-10/)
     * [Smart Contract Weakness Classification (SWC Registry)](https://swcregistry.io/)
     * [Kadenzipfel Smart Contract Vulnerabilities](https://github.com/kadenzipfel/smart-contract-vulnerabilities)
     * [Web3 Security Resources Hub: Vulnerabilities & Attack Vectors](https://github.com/Raiders0786/web3-security-resources)
4. **Leverage Automated Security Tools**\
   Run static and dynamic analysis tools before manual reviews.
   * **Examples**:
     * **Slither** or **Mythril** for static analysis of Solidity contracts.
     * **Echidna** or **Manticore** for fuzzing to test edge cases in smart contracts.
   * **Tip**: Integrate tools into your CI/CD pipeline for automated checks.
5. **Document Findings and Remediation Plans**\
   Log vulnerabilities, their severity (e.g., Critical, High), and fixes in a tracker.
6. **Conduct Follow-Up Reviews**\
   Re-review fixed code to verify remediation, using test cases or automated tools.


---

# Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation

If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter:

```
GET https://docs.optimumsec.xyz/pre-deployment/internal-security-reviews.md?ask=<question>
```

The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.