United States
- U.S. enterprise clients may ask for evidence of review gates, protected branches, and security-sensitive change handling.
Trust Center
Quality and security gates
Code Review Process
How pull requests, reviewer assignment, protected branches, sensitive-change review, dependency review, AI-generated code review, and emergency changes are handled.
How this page supports country onboarding
Country pages link here for engineering and security reviewers evaluating delivery discipline.
Important note
This page is general onboarding and review information. It is not legal, tax, regulatory, cybersecurity, financial, or compliance advice, and it does not create certification claims or service commitments. Final obligations belong in signed agreements and approved project documents.
Workflow
Review before merge
Code review helps improve quality, maintainability, security, accessibility, and consistency before code reaches production. The exact workflow depends on repository ownership, client policies, delivery model, and risk level.
Sensitive changes
Higher-risk code deserves deeper review
Authentication, authorization, payment, data processing, logging, AI, file upload, infrastructure, secrets, production access, and admin workflow changes may require additional scrutiny beyond ordinary feature review.
AI-assisted code
AI-generated code is not blindly trusted
AI-assisted code should be reviewed, tested, adapted, and rejected where needed. Human accountability remains with the delivery team and project governance process.
Preparation
Buyer checklist
Use pull requests or equivalent review workflow.
Assign reviewers based on risk and domain.
Run automated tests and lint checks where configured.
Review sensitive data handling and logging.
Document emergency changes and follow-up review.
Review materials
Available artifacts
- Pull request checklist
- Security review checklist
- Accessibility review checklist
- Emergency change log
Local overlays
Country-specific notes
United Kingdom
- United Kingdom security review should use the project risk level, data categories, hosting model, access needs, and regulated-industry flags captured in technical discovery.
- Review flags for United Kingdom: Legal review, Privacy review, Security review, UK transfer review when applicable.
- Hosting and access options to discuss: Client-owned UK cloud, UK or EU hosting by agreement, Limited production access model.
European Union / EEA
- European Union / EEA security review should use the project risk level, data categories, hosting model, access needs, and regulated-industry flags captured in technical discovery.
- Review flags for European Union / EEA: GDPR review, SCC review, Security review, AI use-case review when applicable.
- Hosting and access options to discuss: Client-owned EU cloud, EU-only hosting by agreement, Limited production access model.
South Korea
- South Korea security review should use the project risk level, data categories, hosting model, access needs, and regulated-industry flags captured in technical discovery.
- Review flags for South Korea: PIPA review, Cross-border transfer review, Security review, Procurement review, Regulated-industry review when applicable.
- Hosting and access options to discuss: Client-owned South Korea cloud, South Korea region hosting by agreement, Limited production access model, No-production-data-access model.
Canada
- Canada security review should use the project risk level, data categories, hosting model, access needs, and regulated-industry flags captured in technical discovery.
- Review flags for Canada: Privacy review, Security review, Procurement review.
- Hosting and access options to discuss: Client-owned Canadian cloud, Canadian hosting by agreement, Limited production access model.
Australia
- Australia security review should use the project risk level, data categories, hosting model, access needs, and regulated-industry flags captured in technical discovery.
- Review flags for Australia: Privacy review, Security review, Procurement review.
- Hosting and access options to discuss: Client-owned Australian cloud, Australian hosting by agreement, Limited production access model.
Singapore
- Singapore security review should use the project risk level, data categories, hosting model, access needs, and regulated-industry flags captured in technical discovery.
- Review flags for Singapore: Privacy review, Security review, Procurement review.
- Hosting and access options to discuss: Client-owned Singapore cloud, Singapore hosting by agreement, Limited production access model.
United Arab Emirates
- United Arab Emirates security review should use the project risk level, data categories, hosting model, access needs, and regulated-industry flags captured in technical discovery.
- Review flags for United Arab Emirates: Privacy review, Security review, Procurement review, Regulated-industry review when applicable.
- Hosting and access options to discuss: Client-owned UAE cloud, UAE hosting by agreement, Limited production access model.
Next review
Related trust pages
Secure SDLC
How security requirements, secure design, code review, testing, dependency scanning, secret scanning, CI/CD controls, release approval, and monitoring fit into delivery.
OWASP
How OWASP Top 10 awareness, ASVS-inspired verification, input validation, output encoding, authentication, authorization, cryptography, logging, file uploads, SSRF, and API security influence delivery.
Supply Chain
How open-source approval, license review, restricted licenses, dependency inventory, vulnerability scanning, SBOM requests, vendor SDKs, and AI-generated code review are handled.
Connect this review to country onboarding
Use this page with the country onboarding guide so your legal, procurement, security, privacy, finance, and engineering teams have the right review path before contract signature.