## Problem GitLab's security scanner configuration process doesn't offer a consistent experience across the various scan types. This reality makes it difficult for users to leverage their experience configuring one scanner to help them when configuring another. Additionally, the current UI has some usability issues (such as context switching) that can hinder or derail a user's workflow. ## Questions to answer 1. What's working about our current configuration process? What isn't? 2. Are there any opportunities to make the configuration process for GitLab's security scanners more consistent? 3. How can we promote learnability throughout the configuration process? 1. Does the configuration of one scanner make the adoption and config process more successful for others? 4. How do users with little to no security experience feel about the process of finding and configuring a security scanner? (related, but not directly part of this study) ## Hypothesis We believe that by streamlining workflows and improving the consistency and learnability of the security scanner configuration process for users who are responsible for managing CI/CD and on-demand scanners will result in increased adoption of GitLab's security features and potentially garner more upgrades to Ultimate. ## Goal Evaluate the configuration UI and workflows for all scanners (CI and on-demand) and create actionable recommendations focused on improving consistency and learnability ## Objectives 1. Identify opportunities to improve learnability/usability of the scanner configuration process 2. When portions of the configuration experience differ between scanners, we want to understand why they differ and which experience is favorable (when applicable). 3. Understand the workflows and needs for CI/CD scanning and on-demand scanning. How do they relate? Does the relationship differ between scan types? 4. Understand how competing products approach the scan configuration process ## Proposal 1. Conduct [UX Scorecard](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/ux/ux-scorecards/) evaluations to identify and score the usability of the current scanner configuration experiences 1. [UX Scorecard: Source code analysis configuration](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-design/-/issues/1682) 1. [UX Scorecard: Dynamic analysis configuration](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-design/-/issues/1702) _(WIP)_ 1. Audit the current configuration UI for all scanners 1. [Audit of scanner configuration UI](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/340334) 1. Create [journey maps](https://www.nngroup.com/articles/journey-mapping-101/) for key JTBD or user stories related to scan configuration (CI/CD vs On-demand) 1. Conduct 1-3 [competitive analyses](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/competitor-evaluations) to identify workflows, best practices, potential features, etc ### Related issues: - https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/growth/ui-ux/-/issues/105 - https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/ux-research/-/issues/1618