differential-review

To perform a security-focused code review on a git diff, you need to analyze authentication, crypto, and external calls within the changes. This approach ties findings to git history and line-level context to generate evidence-based risk reports.

Assessing the blast radius of code changes involves incorporating git history and test-coverage checks into your review. This evaluates the contextual impact of changes across the codebase to identify potential security vulnerabilities.

Generating markdown reports for security vulnerabilities requires a structured workflow that evaluates diffs and incorporates adversarial considerations. This produces comprehensive markdown reports with actionable recommendations based on concrete attack scenarios.

Yes, you can adapt the depth of security analysis for different sized codebases. The review process scales its depth according to whether the codebase is small, medium, or large, ensuring appropriate resource allocation for risk assessment.

Using adversarial analysis when reviewing code diffs helps identify concrete attack scenarios by challenging the security assumptions of the changes. This enforces a structured workflow that produces formal reports with actionable, evidence-based recommendations.

Yes, differential review works without external dependencies. It relies entirely on the provided codebase changes, git history, and internal reasoning to evaluate risks and generate security reports without requiring additional software packages.