My Stack, My Rules: Always Question the Results of an Initial Search

When investigating a security vulnerability or refactoring a legacy architecture, a risky assumption an engineer can make is that a simple text search tells the whole story.

For Nathan Klim, Technical Architect at NextGen, the foundation of his personal stack isn’t a software tool, it’s a disciplined mental filter: Never unquestioningly accept the results of an initial search.

1. Look Beyond the Obvious Query

Whether an investigation involves specific file names, configuration codes or system attributes, basic search queries only surface direct matches. Real-world codebases are rarely that straightforward.

“You should always ask: ‘Are there ways to access this file/code/attribute that wouldn’t get picked up by my search?'” Nathan explains.

• “A file, for example, might be called explicitly by name, making it easy to catch (an explicit call). : Or, it might be constructed dynamically by gluing string fragments together at runtime (dynamic assembly). If you only search for the literal file name, you miss the hidden dependencies entirely.”

2. Balance Cost vs. Benefit

Digging deeper doesn’t mean falling into an endless rabbit hole. For Nathan, the key to applying this rule effectively is knowing where to draw the line so thoroughness doesn’t slow down progress unnecessarily.

It comes down to balancing the cost and benefit of investigation: at a minimum, actively consider those alternate access methods, even if you decide a full deep-dive search isn’t warranted.

3. Healthy Skepticism Over Cynicism

Applying this extra layer of scrutiny fundamentally changes the quality of an architect’s output, even if the process itself remains unseen by the rest of the team.

• Uncovering true scope: It exposes the full extent of security-related fixes required before a vulnerability hits production.
• Bulletproof architecture: It ensures proposed structural changes account for every hidden edge case across the codebase.
• Tempered realism: It cultivates a healthy, pragmatic skepticism, checking the blind spots while keeping business momentum moving forward.

“This rule is completely invisible to everyone else, they don’t see me apply it, they just see the results,” says Nathan. “It helps me have a healthy skeptical attitude, tempered by needing to get things done to avoid it becoming cynicism.”

For Nathan, high-impact architecture isn’t just about designing new systems, it’s about having the discipline to double-check the unseen connections hiding just beneath the surface.

If these insights have made you curious to learn more about the people who make NextGen operate, you can read more from our careers blog to find other profiles and stories, or join our online community to learn more about what is going on at NextGen and connect directly with our teams.