Describe your secure software development lifecycle stage by stage: planning, coding, review, build, release and response to vulnerabilities. For each stage name one control and one artifact a buyer could inspect. Keep it to one page, and match it to what your teams actually do.
Use the framework buyers already know
NIST's Secure Software Development Framework, SP 800-218, is a core set of high-level secure development practices that can be added to any lifecycle. CISA's attestation form is based on it. You do not need to claim formal alignment, but organising your answer in the same order makes review quicker for buyers who use it.
Stage by stage
| Stage | Control to describe | Artifact to offer |
|---|---|---|
| Plan | Security requirements and threat modelling for significant changes | Template or example, redacted |
| Code | Secrets handling, approved languages, linting | Contributing guide |
| Review | Mandatory peer review before merge, protected branches | Branch rule settings |
| Test | Static analysis, dependency scanning, dynamic testing | CI pipeline summary |
| Build | Isolated, reproducible builds, restricted pipeline access | Pipeline description |
| Release | Signed artifacts, change records, rollback plan | Release checklist |
| Respond | Intake for vulnerability reports, tracking, notification | Disclosure policy |
Write it as plain prose
A numbered list in the questionnaire box is fine, but sentences read better in the PDF a buyer forwards to their reviewer. Example for the review stage: "All production changes require approval from at least one engineer who did not write the change, enforced by branch protection. Administrators are subject to the same rule." Only write that if the setting is true. Admin bypass is a common gap; see branch protection: admins bypass by default.
Be honest about maturity
If threat modelling happens only for large features, say that. If dynamic testing runs quarterly rather than per release, say that. Buyers regularly ask for a sample, and a mismatch between the description and the sample ends the conversation.
Keep a single source
Store the approved description in your answer library with an owner and review date so every response is identical. See questionnaire answer library: owners and review dates.
Try it yourself
Click through it at your own pace, or open it full screen.
Look at how a pull request is checked before merge. That is the review and test stage in action.
Quick check
Do we need a formal SDLC document?
A short written description that matches practice is enough for most buyers. A long document nobody follows is worse.
Should the answer name specific tools?
Name categories. Tool names change and add little unless the buyer asks.
Safeguard provides policies, gates and guardrails for pull requests and compliance evidence automation, with a free scan at gold.safeguard.sh/scan.
Sources
Last reviewed: 19 October 2026.
