Changes for page What an XWiki Security Review Should Actually Include
Last modified by Agnease on 2026/06/08 18:44
Summary
-
Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)
-
Attachments (0 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
-
Objects (0 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Page properties
-
- 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 ... ... @@ -51,6 +51,21 @@ 51 51 52 52 <div class="resource-note"> 53 53 <p> 55 + <strong>In practice:</strong> an XWiki security review should evaluate the XWiki version, 56 + access rights, authentication setup, installed extensions, custom code, infrastructure, 57 + backups, restore expectations and the operational practices used to maintain the instance. 58 + </p> 59 + </div> 60 + 61 + <p> 62 + An XWiki security review is a structured assessment of the wiki platform, its configuration, 63 + access model, authentication mechanisms, extensions, customizations and operational setup. 64 + The goal is to identify risks, maintenance weaknesses and upgrade blockers before they affect 65 + users or business-critical content. 66 + </p> 67 + 68 + <div class="resource-note"> 69 + <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 90 107 + <p> 108 + For more details on upgrade planning, see 109 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.why-upgrade-xwiki')">why regular XWiki upgrades matter</a>. 110 + </p> 111 + 91 91 <h3>2. Access rights and permission model</h3> 92 92 <p> 93 93 XWiki has a powerful access-rights system, but this flexibility needs a clear governance model. A review ... ... @@ -101,6 +101,13 @@ 101 101 of small exceptions that nobody reviewed later. 102 102 </p> 103 103 125 + <p> 126 + For a deeper look at this topic, see 127 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-governance')">why XWiki access rights need a clear governance model</a>. 128 + For a practical starting point, see 129 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-review')">how to start an XWiki access-rights review</a>. 130 + </p> 131 + 104 104 <h3>3. Authentication and identity management</h3> 105 105 <p> 106 106 Authentication should be reviewed beyond the simple question of whether users can log in. LDAP, Active ... ... @@ -125,6 +125,11 @@ 125 125 discovered accidentally during an incident or a production upgrade. 126 126 </p> 127 127 156 + <p> 157 + Customizations should also be reviewed from a maintenance perspective. See 158 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-custom-development')">how to keep XWiki custom development maintainable across upgrades</a>. 159 + </p> 160 + 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> 173 + <div class="resource-inline-cta"> 174 + <p> 175 + <strong>Need a clearer view of your XWiki security posture?</strong> 176 + A structured review can check versions, access rights, authentication, 177 + extensions, custom code, infrastructure, backups and operational practices. 178 + </p> 179 + <a class="btn btn-secondary" href="$xwiki.getURL('contact.WebHome')">Request a security review</a> 180 + </div> 141 141 182 + <h2 id="security-checklist">XWiki security review checklist</h2> 183 + 184 + <p> 185 + A practical XWiki security review should cover both application-level and operational risks. 186 + The following checklist can be used as a starting point when reviewing a production instance. 187 + </p> 188 + 142 142 <ul class="resource-checklist"> 143 143 <li>Check the current XWiki version, target version and upgrade path.</li> 144 144 <li>Review installed extensions, outdated components and unsupported customizations.</li> ... ... @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ 155 155 <h2 id="review-output">What the review should produce</h2> 156 156 157 157 <p> 158 - A useful security review should not only produce a list of problems. It should produce a practical action 205 + A useful security review should not only produce a list of detected problems. It should produce a practical action 159 159 plan. Each finding should explain the risk, the affected area, the recommended action and the priority. 160 160 </p> 161 161 ... ... @@ -165,6 +165,14 @@ 165 165 reviewing extensions or preparing the next upgrade. 166 166 </p> 167 167 215 + <div class="resource-note"> 216 + <p> 217 + <strong>A useful review should separate findings by priority:</strong> immediate risks, 218 + planned remediation, maintenance improvements and documentation gaps. This makes the result 219 + easier to act on instead of producing a generic list of observations. 220 + </p> 221 + </div> 222 + 168 168 <p> 169 169 The best outcome is a clearer, safer and more maintainable XWiki instance: one where administrators 170 170 understand the access model, critical features are documented and future upgrades can be planned with ... ... @@ -186,13 +186,70 @@ 186 186 187 187 <div class="resource-note"> 188 188 <p> 189 - Related resources: 190 - <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.why-upgrade-xwiki')">why regular XWiki upgrades matter</a> 244 + <strong>Security review series:</strong> 245 + this article is the main overview. You can also read 246 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-governance')">why XWiki access rights need a clear governance model</a> 191 191 and 192 - <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-custom-development')">how to keep XWiki custom development maintainable across upgrades</a>. 248 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-review')">how to start an XWiki access-rights review</a>. 249 + Future topics will cover authentication and access control, script and programming rights, backup validation, 250 + extension review and operational practices. 193 193 </p> 194 194 </div> 195 195 254 + <h2 id="security-review-faq">XWiki security review FAQ</h2> 255 + 256 + <h3>What should an XWiki security review include?</h3> 257 + <p> 258 + An XWiki security review should include the installed XWiki version, upgrade path, 259 + access rights, groups, authentication setup, installed extensions, custom code, 260 + infrastructure, backups, restore expectations and operational procedures. 261 + </p> 262 + 263 + <h3>Is an updated XWiki instance automatically secure?</h3> 264 + <p> 265 + No. Updating XWiki is important, but security also depends on permissions, 266 + authentication, extensions, custom code, infrastructure configuration, backups 267 + and how the instance is maintained. 268 + </p> 269 + 270 + <h3>Does SSO solve XWiki access control?</h3> 271 + <p> 272 + No. SSO helps authenticate users, but access control still depends on XWiki groups, 273 + inherited permissions, page-level rights and administrative privileges. 274 + </p> 275 + 276 + <h3>Why should custom code be reviewed?</h3> 277 + <p> 278 + Custom scripts, templates, macros, UI extensions and Java components can affect 279 + permissions, workflows, rendering, integrations and upgrade behavior. They should 280 + be identified, documented and tested. 281 + </p> 282 + 283 + <h3>When should an XWiki security review be done?</h3> 284 + <p> 285 + A review is useful before a major upgrade, after years of organic growth, after 286 + authentication changes, before exposing the wiki more broadly, or when the instance 287 + becomes business-critical. 288 + </p> 289 + 290 + <div class="resource-note related-resources"> 291 + <p><strong>Related resources:</strong></p> 292 + <ul> 293 + <li> 294 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-governance')">Why XWiki access rights need a clear governance model</a> 295 + </li> 296 + <li> 297 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-access-rights-review')">How to start an XWiki access-rights review</a> 298 + </li> 299 + <li> 300 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.why-upgrade-xwiki')">Why regular XWiki upgrades matter</a> 301 + </li> 302 + <li> 303 + <a href="$xwiki.getURL('resources.xwiki-custom-development')">How to keep XWiki custom development maintainable across upgrades</a> 304 + </li> 305 + </ul> 306 + </div> 307 + 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> 211 211 324 + <script type="application/ld+json"> 325 + { 326 + "@context": "https://schema.org", 327 + "@type": "FAQPage", 328 + "mainEntity": [ 329 + { 330 + "@type": "Question", 331 + "name": "What should an XWiki security review include?", 332 + "acceptedAnswer": { 333 + "@type": "Answer", 334 + "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." 335 + } 336 + }, 337 + { 338 + "@type": "Question", 339 + "name": "Is an updated XWiki instance automatically secure?", 340 + "acceptedAnswer": { 341 + "@type": "Answer", 342 + "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." 343 + } 344 + }, 345 + { 346 + "@type": "Question", 347 + "name": "Does SSO solve XWiki access control?", 348 + "acceptedAnswer": { 349 + "@type": "Answer", 350 + "text": "No. SSO helps authenticate users, but access control still depends on XWiki groups, inherited permissions, page-level rights and administrative privileges." 351 + } 352 + }, 353 + { 354 + "@type": "Question", 355 + "name": "Why should custom code be reviewed in XWiki?", 356 + "acceptedAnswer": { 357 + "@type": "Answer", 358 + "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." 359 + } 360 + }, 361 + { 362 + "@type": "Question", 363 + "name": "When should an XWiki security review be done?", 364 + "acceptedAnswer": { 365 + "@type": "Answer", 366 + "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." 367 + } 368 + } 369 + ] 370 + } 371 + </script> 372 + 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