Problem statements

There are many problems occurring for not having the appropriate source code review. Four of the major vulnerabilities are- Encryption errors, SQL injection, XSS vulnerabilities, Buffer overflows and Race conditions. The first problem includes weak encryption algorithms, as well as strong encryption algorithms with weak implementation (e.g., insecure key storage). When more data is put into the buffer than it can handle, it causes buffer overflows. Race conditions happen when more than one operation is performed at the same time.

Solutions

For the best output of the source code review, it is built keeping in mind some main goals. They are-

• Improves code quality ⚊ internal code quality and maintainability get better by using this.
• Identifying defects ⚊ improve quality regarding external aspects, especially correctness, but also find performance problems, security vulnerabilities injected malware…
• Learning and Knowledge sharing ⚊ by sharing knowledge about the codebase, solution approaches, expectations regarding quality, etc; both the reviewers and the author get benefited.
• Increase a sense of mutual responsibility ⚊ increase a sense of collective code ownership and solidarity
• Better solutions ⚊ generate ideas for new and better solutions and ideas that transcend the specific code at hand.
• Complying to QA guidelines ⚊ Code reviews are mandatory in some contexts

Benefits

When you start using source code review as a tool, you are going to get the benefits below-

• In this, all the team members act not only as a teacher but also as a learner. All of them share alternative solutions, business rules, design patterns, framework specifics, and good practices among themselves.
• Source code review makes the bug-finding process easier and affordable.
• It is good to double-check the functionality. This tool does this job by checking technical and business specification
• Our experts can detect flaws in the code while seeing the code. Their code review is helpful to find out bugs, security, and performance issues.
• The developers can not assess the readability, understandability, and maintenance of the code. It is the job of the reviewer. He communicates with the developer to simplify and clarify the code further.
• While the code is developed under the influence of a team; not by an individual, the code is supposed to be the best errorfree code. The all-out effort of the team makes the code perfect.