Review a guide
These guides were drafted with AI assistance and checked against published sources. They have not yet been reviewed by an independent security specialist. If that is your field, an hour of your attention on one guide would make it better for everyone who reads it.
What we are asking
Pick any guide, or a whole room of the bank, and read it the way you would read a colleague’s draft. For each one:
- Is it correct? Flag anything wrong, overstated or out of date: facts, versions, defaults, named incidents, figures.
- Is the advice safe? Would following the fixes and code samples leave a reader better off, or give false confidence?
- Is the simplification fair? The bank is an analogy and it will not be perfect. Tell us where it teaches something false.
- Is anything important missing? The three signs and three fixes per guide are deliberately short. Say if the wrong three were chosen.
Each guide ends with the sources its facts were checked against, and a link that opens a pre-filled correction on the public issue tracker. That link is the easiest way to send findings, one issue per problem.
What you get
- If you agree, your name, a one-line description of your background and a link of your choosing appear on every guide you reviewed and on the About page, with the date and what you did and did not check.
- Nothing is listed unless you say so. A review you would rather keep private is still used to fix the guide.
- You decide the scope. “I read these three guides for factual accuracy” is a complete and honest review, and that is exactly how it will be described.
What we will not do
- Claim a review that did not happen, or widen the scope you gave us.
- List a reviewer without their agreement.
- Pay for a favourable opinion. Disagreement is the point.
How to start
Open an issue on the public isitsecure repository saying which guides you would like to take, or just start with the correction link on any guide. There are 42 guides in 10 rooms. The full list is here.