Skip to Content
Last modified by Agnease on 2026/06/08 18:44
From version 1.2
edited by Agnease
on 2026/05/26 07:42
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 3.10
edited by Agnease
on 2026/06/08 18:28
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -xwiki-security-review
1 +What an XWiki Security Review Should Actually Include
Content
... ... @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
32 32   <li><a href="#security-checklist">Security checklist</a></li>
33 33   <li><a href="#review-output">What the review should produce</a></li>
34 34   <li><a href="#when-to-review">When to run a review</a></li>
35 + <li><a href="#security-review-faq">FAQ</a></li>
35 35   </ul>
36 36   </aside>
37 37  
... ... @@ -44,6 +44,11 @@
44 44   </p>
45 45  
46 46   <p>
48 + An XWiki security review is a practical audit of the platform configuration, access model,
49 + authentication setup, installed extensions, custom code, infrastructure and recovery procedures.
50 + </p>
51 +
52 + <p>
47 47   Security risks are often hidden in less visible areas: outdated versions, inherited permissions,
48 48   forgotten administrator accounts, overly powerful rights, old extensions, undocumented scripts,
49 49   weak fallback access or backup assumptions that were never tested.
... ... @@ -51,6 +51,21 @@
51 51  
52 52   <div class="resource-note">
53 53   <p>
60 + <strong>In practice:</strong> an XWiki security review should evaluate the XWiki version,
61 + access rights, authentication setup, installed extensions, custom code, infrastructure,
62 + backups, restore expectations and the operational practices used to maintain the instance.
63 + </p>
64 + </div>
65 +
66 + <p>
67 + An XWiki security review is a structured assessment of the wiki platform, its configuration,
68 + access model, authentication mechanisms, extensions, customizations and operational setup.
69 + The goal is to identify risks, maintenance weaknesses and upgrade blockers before they affect
70 + users or business-critical content.
71 + </p>
72 +
73 + <div class="resource-note">
74 + <p>
54 54   <strong>The main point:</strong> an XWiki security review should not only check whether the application
55 55   is online. It should evaluate the platform, the access model and the operational practices around it.
56 56   </p>
... ... @@ -88,6 +88,11 @@
88 88   A repeatable upgrade process is part of the security posture of a long-running XWiki instance.
89 89   </p>
90 90  
112 + <p>
113 + For more details on upgrade planning, see
114 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.why-upgrade-xwiki')">why regular XWiki upgrades matter</a>.
115 + </p>
116 +
91 91   <h3>2. Access rights and permission model</h3>
92 92   <p>
93 93   XWiki has a powerful access-rights system, but this flexibility needs a clear governance model. A review
... ... @@ -101,6 +101,13 @@
101 101   of small exceptions that nobody reviewed later.
102 102   </p>
103 103  
130 + <p>
131 + For a deeper look at this topic, see
132 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-governance')">why XWiki access rights need a clear governance model</a>.
133 + For a practical starting point, see
134 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-review')">how to start an XWiki access-rights review</a>.
135 + </p>
136 +
104 104   <h3>3. Authentication and identity management</h3>
105 105   <p>
106 106   Authentication should be reviewed beyond the simple question of whether users can log in. LDAP, Active
... ... @@ -125,6 +125,11 @@
125 125   discovered accidentally during an incident or a production upgrade.
126 126   </p>
127 127  
161 + <p>
162 + Customizations should also be reviewed from a maintenance perspective. See
163 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-custom-development')">how to keep XWiki custom development maintainable across upgrades</a>.
164 + </p>
165 +
128 128   <h3>5. Configuration, infrastructure and operations</h3>
129 129   <p>
130 130   The review should also cover the environment around XWiki: HTTPS and reverse proxy configuration, database
... ... @@ -137,8 +137,22 @@
137 137   knows what is included, how long recovery would take or whether the restore process has ever been tested.
138 138   </p>
139 139  
140 - <h2 id="security-checklist">Practical XWiki security review checklist</h2>
178 + <div class="resource-inline-cta">
179 + <p>
180 + <strong>Need a clearer view of your XWiki security posture?</strong>
181 + A structured review can check versions, access rights, authentication,
182 + extensions, custom code, infrastructure, backups and operational practices.
183 + </p>
184 + <a class="btn btn-primary" href="$xwiki.getURL('contact.WebHome')">Request a security review</a>
185 + </div>
141 141  
187 + <h2 id="security-checklist">XWiki security review checklist</h2>
188 +
189 + <p>
190 + A practical XWiki security review should cover both application-level and operational risks.
191 + The following checklist can be used as a starting point when reviewing a production instance.
192 + </p>
193 +
142 142   <ul class="resource-checklist">
143 143   <li>Check the current XWiki version, target version and upgrade path.</li>
144 144   <li>Review installed extensions, outdated components and unsupported customizations.</li>
... ... @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@
155 155   <h2 id="review-output">What the review should produce</h2>
156 156  
157 157   <p>
158 - A useful security review should not only produce a list of problems. It should produce a practical action
210 + A useful security review should not only produce a list of detected problems. It should produce a practical action
159 159   plan. Each finding should explain the risk, the affected area, the recommended action and the priority.
160 160   </p>
161 161  
... ... @@ -165,6 +165,14 @@
165 165   reviewing extensions or preparing the next upgrade.
166 166   </p>
167 167  
220 + <div class="resource-note">
221 + <p>
222 + <strong>A useful review should separate findings by priority:</strong> immediate risks,
223 + planned remediation, maintenance improvements and documentation gaps. This makes the result
224 + easier to act on instead of producing a generic list of observations.
225 + </p>
226 + </div>
227 +
168 168   <p>
169 169   The best outcome is a clearer, safer and more maintainable XWiki instance: one where administrators
170 170   understand the access model, critical features are documented and future upgrades can be planned with
... ... @@ -184,15 +184,89 @@
184 184   permissions, extensions, customizations and recovery procedures were configured years earlier.
185 185   </p>
186 186  
187 - <div class="resource-note">
247 + <div class="resource-note related-resources">
248 + <p><strong>Security review series:</strong></p>
249 + <ul>
250 + <li>
251 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-security-review')">What an XWiki security review should actually include</a>
252 + </li>
253 + <li>
254 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-governance')">Why XWiki access rights need a clear governance model</a>
255 + </li>
256 + <li>
257 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-review')">How to start an XWiki access-rights review</a>
258 + </li>
259 + </ul>
188 188   <p>
189 - Related resources:
190 - <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.why-upgrade-xwiki')">why regular XWiki upgrades matter</a>
191 - and
192 - <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-custom-development')">how to keep XWiki custom development maintainable across upgrades</a>.
261 + Future topics will cover authentication and access control, script and programming rights,
262 + backup validation, extension review and operational practices.
193 193   </p>
194 194   </div>
195 195  
266 + <h2 id="security-review-faq">XWiki security review FAQ</h2>
267 +
268 + <details class="resource-faq-item" open>
269 + <summary>What should an XWiki security review include?</summary>
270 + <p>
271 + An XWiki security review should include the installed XWiki version, upgrade path,
272 + access rights, groups, authentication setup, installed extensions, custom code,
273 + infrastructure, backups, restore expectations and operational procedures.
274 + </p>
275 + </details>
276 +
277 + <details class="resource-faq-item">
278 + <summary>Is an updated XWiki instance automatically secure?</summary>
279 + <p>
280 + No. Updating XWiki is important, but security also depends on permissions,
281 + authentication, extensions, custom code, infrastructure configuration, backups
282 + and how the instance is maintained.
283 + </p>
284 + </details>
285 +
286 + <details class="resource-faq-item">
287 + <summary>Does SSO solve XWiki access control?</summary>
288 + <p>
289 + No. SSO helps authenticate users, but access control still depends on XWiki groups,
290 + inherited permissions, page-level rights and administrative privileges.
291 + </p>
292 + </details>
293 +
294 + <details class="resource-faq-item">
295 + <summary>Why should custom code be reviewed?</summary>
296 + <p>
297 + Custom scripts, templates, macros, UI extensions and Java components can affect
298 + permissions, workflows, rendering, integrations and upgrade behavior. They should
299 + be identified, documented and tested.
300 + </p>
301 + </details>
302 +
303 + <details class="resource-faq-item">
304 + <summary>When should an XWiki security review be done?</summary>
305 + <p>
306 + A review is useful before a major upgrade, after years of organic growth, after
307 + authentication changes, before exposing the wiki more broadly, or when the instance
308 + becomes business-critical.
309 + </p>
310 + </details>
311 +
312 + <div class="resource-note related-resources">
313 + <p><strong>Related resources:</strong></p>
314 + <ul>
315 + <li>
316 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-governance')">Why XWiki access rights need a clear governance model</a>
317 + </li>
318 + <li>
319 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-review')">How to start an XWiki access-rights review</a>
320 + </li>
321 + <li>
322 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.why-upgrade-xwiki')">Why regular XWiki upgrades matter</a>
323 + </li>
324 + <li>
325 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-custom-development')">How to keep XWiki custom development maintainable across upgrades</a>
326 + </li>
327 + </ul>
328 + </div>
329 +
196 196   <div class="resource-cta">
197 197   <h3>Need an XWiki security review?</h3>
198 198   <p>
... ... @@ -209,5 +209,54 @@
209 209   </div>
210 210   </section>
211 211  
346 + <script type="application/ld+json">
347 + {
348 + "@context": "https://schema.org",
349 + "@type": "FAQPage",
350 + "mainEntity": [
351 + {
352 + "@type": "Question",
353 + "name": "What should an XWiki security review include?",
354 + "acceptedAnswer": {
355 + "@type": "Answer",
356 + "text": "An XWiki security review should include the installed XWiki version, upgrade path, access rights, groups, authentication setup, installed extensions, custom code, infrastructure, backups, restore expectations and operational procedures."
357 + }
358 + },
359 + {
360 + "@type": "Question",
361 + "name": "Is an updated XWiki instance automatically secure?",
362 + "acceptedAnswer": {
363 + "@type": "Answer",
364 + "text": "No. Updating XWiki is important, but security also depends on permissions, authentication, extensions, custom code, infrastructure configuration, backups and how the instance is maintained."
365 + }
366 + },
367 + {
368 + "@type": "Question",
369 + "name": "Does SSO solve XWiki access control?",
370 + "acceptedAnswer": {
371 + "@type": "Answer",
372 + "text": "No. SSO helps authenticate users, but access control still depends on XWiki groups, inherited permissions, page-level rights and administrative privileges."
373 + }
374 + },
375 + {
376 + "@type": "Question",
377 + "name": "Why should custom code be reviewed in XWiki?",
378 + "acceptedAnswer": {
379 + "@type": "Answer",
380 + "text": "Custom scripts, templates, macros, UI extensions and Java components can affect permissions, workflows, rendering, integrations and upgrade behavior. They should be identified, documented and tested."
381 + }
382 + },
383 + {
384 + "@type": "Question",
385 + "name": "When should an XWiki security review be done?",
386 + "acceptedAnswer": {
387 + "@type": "Answer",
388 + "text": "A review is useful before a major upgrade, after years of organic growth, after authentication changes, before exposing the wiki more broadly, or when the instance becomes business-critical."
389 + }
390 + }
391 + ]
392 + }
393 + </script>
394 +
212 212  {{/html}}
213 213  {{/velocity}}
xwiki-security-review.png
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.Admin
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1.3 MB
Content
Agnease.Code.SEODetailsClass[0]
metaDescription
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Learn what an XWiki security review should include: version status, access rights, authentication, extensions, custom code, infrastructure, backups and operational practices.
metaTitle
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +What an XWiki Security Review Should Actually Include | Agnease