Guidance for turning source-code security review into useful public research while keeping proprietary lines, paths, and secrets out of view.
Safe technical detail
The brief can explain source, transform, sink, and missing control at a pattern level. Exact repository paths, line numbers, commits, private package names, and proof payloads remain private.
Move validation and authorization checks to the trust boundary, use framework-native safe APIs, and add regression tests for the reachable path.
Pentoma Code combines static path evidence with reviewer validation so public material can explain the weakness class without quoting customer source.
Source review research is strongest when it teaches a pattern rather than exposing code.
AI-assisted reasoning is not the final authority. A reviewer must confirm reachability, impact, and remediation quality before any public writeup is approved.
Publication timeline
Public research should show enough process to be credible without exposing raw scan output, prompt traces, proprietary code, or private customer context.
Reviewer notes are reduced to the weakness class, reachable path shape, and safe remediation theme.
Private files, exact line ranges, commits, dependency inventory, and secrets are excluded.
The approved record explains the lesson without publishing proprietary source context.
References
Links here point only to resources that are safe to share publicly.