The Architecture Review Checklist
Nobody hands you a map when you inherit a codebase. Maybe you're the new CTO and this is your first week. Maybe your company just acquired software built by strangers. Maybe the founders left, and now it's you. The documentation is thin. The git history tells stories you weren't there for. The system runs, mostly, but you don't know why. You definitely don't know where it's going to break. This post gives you questions. Questions that surface problems before those problems surface themselves, usually on a holiday weekend. You'll learn more from the questions you can't answer than the ones you can. Each "I don't know" tells you something. Three areas matter most: security model, operational readiness, and change velocity. Each reveals different risks. Together, they tell you what you've actually inherited. Security Model: Trust Archaeology Security in inherited systems is archaeological. Layers of decisions made by different people, under different threat models, at different stages of the company's life. Your job is to excavate. Where does trust get granted? Can you trace the path from untrusted input to database write? Where exactly does the system decide to trust that input? Most teams can't draw this picture. Authentication happens in one service, authorization checks live somewhere else, input validation scatters across three microservices. That gap between components is where vulnerabilities hide. What's the blast radius? If one component gets compromised, what else falls with it? Look for shared database credentials, service accounts with God-mode access, secrets in environment variables that every service can read. These patterns made sense when the system was three developers and one server. Now they mean a single breach cascades everywhere. The 2013 Target breach started with an HVAC contractor's credentials and ended with 40 million stolen credit cards. Nothing stopped lateral movement once attackers were inside. What happens when auth fails? When the authentication service goes down, do requests fail or pass? Under pressure, many systems fail open: the "temporary bypass" that was never removed, the fallback that skips validation. These exist in almost every inherited codebase. Find them before an attacker does. What security decisions assumed a different world? The single-tenant system that became multi-tenant, the internal tool that became customer-facing. Security flaws can persist through multiple product releases, especially when inherited from dependencies. Ask when the last security review happened. Then ask what changed since. Security gaps don't just threaten data. They threaten the deal, the acquisition premium that evaporates after a breach. Operational Readiness: What Happens When It Breaks The system teaches you how it fails, but only if you're listening. Operational readiness means you can trace from "something's wrong" to "here's the line of code" before your customers start posting about it. What happens when the system breaks at night? If something fails, will the right person wake up with enough context to act? Many inherited systems have alerts that fire into Slack channels nobody watches after dinner. That's wishful thinking dressed as monitoring. Check who's actually on-call, what information they receive, and whether they can do anything useful with it. What failure modes has this system never experienced? If it's never seen a database failover, never handled a dependent service going dark, never weathered real production load, you don't know how it behaves in those scenarios. The absence of incidents might mean the system is resilient, but it might also mean you've been lucky. Which alerts does everyone ignore? Alert fatigue is operational debt with compound interest: every false positive trains your team to dismiss the next notification, until eventually the real incident gets lost in the noise. Ask how many alerts fired last week and how many were actionable. If less than half led to human action, your monitoring is mostly noise. How long does recovery actually take, and have you ever tested it? Most inherited systems have backups that have never been restored, failover procedures that have never been executed, and runbooks written by people who left years ago. Your documented recovery time means nothing until you've run through it under pressure. GitLab learned this the hard way in 2017 when they discovered during an incident that their backups weren't working. For context: DORA research shows that elite-performing teams restore service in under an hour. Low performers take between a week and a month. Who actually knows how this works? If the answer is one person, you have a single point of failure. Researchers call this the "bus factor," the number of people who could leave before a project stalls. A study at JetBrains found that files abandoned by their original developers tend to stay abandoned, becoming permanent blind spots in the codebase. If the answer is "the team that left," you're operating on muscle memory that's already fading. Change Velocity: The Fear Tax Developers who are scared to touch code batch changes into risky big releases. Fixes get deferred because they might break something else. Technical debt accumulates because nobody wants to venture into the dangerous parts. Survey research across the software industry found that teams waste 23% of their development time dealing with technical debt. Deadline pressure is the most common cause. Fear is a legitimate architectural metric. Where do developers refuse to go? Every inherited system has these zones: the billing code nobody fully understands, the integration with that legacy system held together by careful attention and prayer. These become permanent blind spots and permanent sources of risk. What's the worst that happens from a typo? Can one wrong character bring down production? A healthy architecture survives small mistakes, while a fragile one demands perfection at all times. Do your tests actually catch bugs? A green test suite that misses regressions creates false confidence. Teams deploy because the tests passed, when the tests weren't checking what mattered. Look at the last few bugs that reached production. Should the tests have caught them? How long until a new engineer can ship? This measures friction. If it takes months to understand the system well enough to contribute safely, change will always be slow. The codebase is effectively defended against its own team. Etsy has new engineers deploy on day one. Can you undo a bad deploy in minutes? Willingness to ship correlates directly with ability to recover, and if rollback is scary, slow, or uncertain, every change feels permanent. Teams stop taking reasonable risks and the system calcifies. What to Do With These Answers Start with the questions you couldn't answer. Those are your blind spots, and blind spots don't stay hidden forever. For the answers that worried you, write them down now. Next week the urgency will fade, you'll rationalize, and the system will keep running while you tell yourself it's probably fine. Capture the concern while you still feel it. Document the surprises for your team. If the mental model doesn't match reality, someone else will hit the same confusion, probably during an incident at the worst possible time. These questions won't give you a complete picture. Nothing will. But they'll tell you where the gaps are, and that's where to start.Lumia Labs partners with organizations navigating exactly this situation: inherited systems and pressure to move forward. If you want a second set of eyes on what you've inherited, let's talk.
