diff --git a/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/analyze.py b/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/analyze.py
index dd3fe1f8fe..13b9342671 100644
--- a/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/analyze.py
+++ b/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/analyze.py
@@ -193,6 +193,14 @@ def add_arguments_to_parser(parser):
                                 "Example: '/path/to/main.cpp', 'lib/*.cpp', "
                                 "*/test*'.")
 
+    parser.add_argument('--review-status-config',
+                        dest="review_status_config",
+                        required=False,
+                        default=argparse.SUPPRESS,
+                        help="Path of review_status.yaml config file which "
+                             "contains review status settings assigned to "
+                             "specific directories, checkers, bug hashes.")
+
     parser.add_argument('-o', '--output',
                         dest="output_path",
                         required=True,
@@ -853,6 +861,18 @@ def __update_skip_file(args):
         shutil.copyfile(args.skipfile, skip_file_to_send)
 
 
+def __update_review_status_config(args):
+    rs_config_to_send = os.path.join(args.output_path, 'review_status.yaml')
+
+    if os.path.exists(rs_config_to_send):
+        os.remove(rs_config_to_send)
+
+    if 'review_status_config' in args:
+        LOG.debug("Copying review status config file %s to %s",
+                  args.review_status_config, rs_config_to_send)
+        shutil.copyfile(args.review_status_config, rs_config_to_send)
+
+
 def __cleanup_metadata(metadata_prev, metadata):
     """ Cleanup metadata.
 
@@ -1098,6 +1118,7 @@ def main(args):
                               compile_cmd_count)
 
     __update_skip_file(args)
+    __update_review_status_config(args)
 
     LOG.debug("Cleanup metadata file started.")
     __cleanup_metadata(metadata_prev, metadata)
diff --git a/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/check.py b/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/check.py
index e116e041e0..3c70c212ee 100644
--- a/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/check.py
+++ b/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/check.py
@@ -400,6 +400,15 @@ def add_arguments_to_parser(parser):
                                     "the analysis is considered as a failed "
                                     "one.")
 
+    analyzer_opts.add_argument('--review-status-config',
+                               dest="review_status_config",
+                               required=False,
+                               default=argparse.SUPPRESS,
+                               help="Path of review_status.yaml config file "
+                                    "which contains review status settings "
+                                    "assigned to specific directories, "
+                                    "checkers, bug hashes.")
+
     clang_has_z3 = analyzer_types.is_z3_capable()
 
     if clang_has_z3:
@@ -872,6 +881,7 @@ def __update_if_key_exists(source, target, key):
                           'disable_all',
                           'ordered_checkers',  # --enable and --disable.
                           'timeout',
+                          'review_status_config',
                           'compile_uniqueing',
                           'report_hash',
                           'enable_z3',
diff --git a/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/parse.py b/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/parse.py
index 458be06e2b..89eae4b91a 100644
--- a/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/parse.py
+++ b/analyzer/codechecker_analyzer/cmd/parse.py
@@ -394,6 +394,15 @@ def get_output_file_path(default_file_name: str) -> Optional[str]:
             context.checker_labels)
 
     for dir_path, file_paths in report_file.analyzer_result_files(args.input):
+        review_status_cfg = os.path.join(dir_path, 'review_status.yaml')
+        if os.path.isfile(review_status_cfg):
+            try:
+                review_status_handler.set_review_status_config(
+                    review_status_cfg)
+            except ValueError as err:
+                LOG.error(err)
+                sys.exit(1)
+
         metadata = get_metadata(dir_path)
 
         if metadata and 'files' in args:
diff --git a/codechecker_common/review_status_handler.py b/codechecker_common/review_status_handler.py
index 2febf4e021..a6b71bec38 100644
--- a/codechecker_common/review_status_handler.py
+++ b/codechecker_common/review_status_handler.py
@@ -7,8 +7,10 @@
 # -------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
+import fnmatch
 import os
 from typing import List, Optional
+import yaml
 
 from codechecker_report_converter.report import Report, SourceReviewStatus
 from codechecker_common.logger import get_logger
@@ -33,13 +35,31 @@ class ReviewStatusHandler:
     3. Review status rule:
         A mapping between bug hashes and review statuses set in the GUI.
 
-    TODO: Option 2. will be handled in a future commit.
     TODO: Option 3. should also be covered by this handler class.
     """
+
+    REVIEW_STATUS_OPTIONS = [
+        'false_positive',
+        'suppress',
+        'confirmed',
+        'intentional']
+
+    ALLOWED_FIELDS = [
+        'filepath_filter',
+        'checker_filter',
+        'report_hash_filter',
+        'review_status',
+        'message']
+
     def __init__(self, source_root=''):
+        """
+        TODO: What happens if multiple report directories are stored?
+        """
+        self.__review_status_yaml = None
         self.__source_root = source_root
         self.__source_comment_warnings = []
         self.__source_commets = {}
+        self.__data = None
 
     def __parse_codechecker_review_comment(
         self,
@@ -63,6 +83,46 @@ def __parse_codechecker_review_comment(
 
         return src_comment_data
 
+    def __validate_review_status_yaml_data(self):
+        """
+        This function validates the data read from review_status.yaml file and
+        raises ValueError with the description of the error if the format is
+        invalid.
+        """
+        if not isinstance(self.__data, list):
+            raise ValueError(
+                f"{self.__review_status_yaml} should be a list of review "
+                "status descriptor objects.")
+
+        for item in self.__data:
+            if not isinstance(item, dict):
+                raise ValueError(
+                    f"Format error in {self.__review_status_yaml}: {item} "
+                    "should be a review status descriptor object.")
+
+            for field in item:
+                if field not in ReviewStatusHandler.ALLOWED_FIELDS:
+                    raise ValueError(
+                        f"Format error in {self.__review_status_yaml}: field "
+                        f"'{field}' is not allowed. Available fields are: "
+                        f"{', '.join(ReviewStatusHandler.ALLOWED_FIELDS)}")
+
+            if 'review_status' not in item:
+                raise ValueError(
+                    f"Format error in {self.__review_status_yaml}: "
+                    f"'review_status' field is missing from {item}.")
+
+            if item['review_status'] \
+                    not in ReviewStatusHandler.REVIEW_STATUS_OPTIONS:
+                raise ValueError(
+                    f"Invalid review status field: {item['review_status']} at "
+                    f"{item} in {self.__review_status_yaml}. Available "
+                    f"options are: "
+                    f"{', '.join(ReviewStatusHandler.REVIEW_STATUS_OPTIONS)}.")
+
+            if item['review_status'] == 'suppress':
+                item['review_status'] = 'false_positive'
+
     def get_review_status(self, report: Report) -> SourceReviewStatus:
         """
         Return the review status of the report based on source code comments.
@@ -71,13 +131,84 @@ def get_review_status(self, report: Report) -> SourceReviewStatus:
         review status returns. This function throws ValueError if the review
         status is ambiguous (see get_review_status_from_source()).
         """
-        rs_from_source = self.get_review_status_from_source(report)
+        # 1. Check if the report has in-source review status setting.
+        review_status = self.get_review_status_from_source(report)
+
+        if review_status:
+            return review_status
 
-        if rs_from_source:
-            return rs_from_source
+        # 2. Check if the report has review status setting in the yaml config.
+        if self.__data:
+            review_status = self.get_review_status_from_config(report)
+            if review_status:
+                return review_status
 
+        # 3. Return "unreviewed" otherwise.
         return SourceReviewStatus(bug_hash=report.report_hash)
 
+    def set_review_status_config(self, config_file):
+        """
+        Set the location of the review_status.yaml config file.
+
+        When the content of multiple report directories are parsed then they
+        may contain separate config files. These need to be given before
+        parsing each report folders.
+        """
+        self.__review_status_yaml = config_file
+
+        with open(self.__review_status_yaml,
+                  encoding='utf-8', errors='ignore') as f:
+            # TODO: Validate format.
+            #  - Can filepath be a list?
+            # TODO: May throw yaml.scanner.ScannerError.
+            try:
+                self.__data = yaml.safe_load(f)
+            except yaml.scanner.ScannerError as err:
+                raise ValueError(
+                    f"Invalid YAML format in {self.__review_status_yaml}:\n"
+                    f"{err}")
+
+        self.__validate_review_status_yaml_data()
+
+    def get_review_status_from_config(
+        self,
+        report: Report
+    ) -> Optional[SourceReviewStatus]:
+        """
+        Return the review status of the given report based on the config file
+        set by set_review_status_config(). If not config file set, or no
+        setting matches the report then None returns.
+        """
+        assert self.__data is not None, \
+            "Review status config file has to be set with " \
+            "set_review_status_config()."
+
+        # TODO: Document "in_source".
+        for item in self.__data:
+            if 'filepath_filter' in item and not fnmatch.fnmatch(
+                    report.file.original_path, item['filepath_filter']):
+                continue
+            if 'checker_filter' in item and \
+                    report.checker_name != item['checker_filter']:
+                continue
+            if 'report_hash_filter' in item and \
+                    not report.report_hash.startswith(
+                        item['report_hash_filter']):
+                continue
+
+            if any(filt in item for filt in
+                   ['filepath_filter', 'checker_filter',
+                    'report_hash_filter']):
+                return SourceReviewStatus(
+                    status=item['review_status'],
+                    message=item['message']
+                    .encode(encoding='utf-8', errors='ignore')
+                    if 'message' in item else b'',
+                    bug_hash=report.report_hash,
+                    in_source=True)
+
+        return None
+
     def get_review_status_from_source(
         self,
         report: Report
@@ -92,6 +223,8 @@ def get_review_status_from_source(
             contains information about the problem in a string.
         - If the soure file changed (which means that the source comments may
             have replaced, changed or removed) then None returns.
+        - If no review status belongs to the report in the source code, then
+            return None.
         TODO: This function either returns a SourceReviewStatus, or raises an
         exception or returns None. This is too many things that a caller needs
         to handle. The reason is that according to the current behaviors,
diff --git a/codechecker_common/util.py b/codechecker_common/util.py
index a58631a2cf..08743f8f35 100644
--- a/codechecker_common/util.py
+++ b/codechecker_common/util.py
@@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ def load_json(path: str, default=None, lock=False, display_warning=True):
 
     return ret
 
+
 def get_linef(fp: TextIO, line_no: int) -> str:
     """'fp' should be (readable) file object.
     Return the line content at line_no or an empty line
diff --git a/docs/analyzer/user_guide.md b/docs/analyzer/user_guide.md
index ca48db0c28..78f69eea7d 100644
--- a/docs/analyzer/user_guide.md
+++ b/docs/analyzer/user_guide.md
@@ -47,15 +47,17 @@
     - [`checkers`](#checkers)
     - [`analyzers`](#analyzers)
   - [Configuring Clang version](#configuring-clang-version)
-  - [Suppressing False positives (source code comments for review status)](#suppressing-false-positives-source-code-comments-for-review-status)
-    - [Supported formats](#supported-formats)
-    - [Change review status of a specific checker result](#change-review-status-of-a-specific-checker-result)
-    - [Change review status of a specific checker result by using a substring of the checker name](#change-review-status-of-a-specific-checker-result-by-using-a-substring-of-the-checker-name)
-    - [Change review status of all checker result](#change-review-status-of-all-checker-result)
-    - [Change review status of all checker result with C style comment](#change-review-status-of-all-checker-result-with-c-style-comment)
-    - [Multi line comments](#multi-line-comments)
-    - [Multi line C style comments](#multi-line-c-style-comments)
-    - [Change review status for multiple checker results in the same line](#change-review-status-for-multiple-checker-results-in-the-same-line)
+  - [Review status handling](#review-status-handling)
+    - [Setting with source code comments](#setting-with-source-code-comments)
+      - [Supported formats](#supported-formats)
+      - [Change review status of a specific checker result](#change-review-status-of-a-specific-checker-result)
+      - [Change review status of a specific checker result by using a substring of the checker name](#change-review-status-of-a-specific-checker-result-by-using-a-substring-of-the-checker-name)
+      - [Change review status of all checker results](#change-review-status-of-all-checker-results)
+      - [Change review status of all checker results with C style comment](#change-review-status-of-all-checker-results-with-c-style-comment)
+      - [Multi line comments](#multi-line-comments)
+      - [Multi line C style comments](#multi-line-c-style-comments)
+      - [Change review status for multiple checker results in the same line](#change-review-status-for-multiple-checker-results-in-the-same-line)
+    - [Setting with config file](#setting-with-config-file)
 ## Overview
 CodeChecker command line tooling provides sub-commands to perform
 **static code analysis** and to store reports into a **web-based storage**.
@@ -68,7 +70,7 @@ The analysis related use-cases can be fully performed without a web-server.
 * [Execuing Static Analysis](#analyze)
 * [Showing analysis results in the command line](#parse)
 * [Applying code fixes](#fixit)
-* [Suppressing false positives with source-code comments](#suppressing-false-positives-source-code-comments-for-review-status)
+* [Suppressing false positives with source-code comments](#setting-with-source-code-comments)
 
 
 ## Quick Analysis
@@ -2419,41 +2421,53 @@ Clang based tools search by default for
 in a path relative to the tool binary.
 `$(dirname /path/to/tool)/../lib/clang/8.0.0/include`
 
-## Suppressing False positives (source code comments for review status)
+## Review status handling
+
+Users can categorize CodeChecker reports by setting their _review status_. A
+report can be _false positive_ or it can also indicate a _confirmed_ bug.
+Sometimes a bug is _intentional_ in a test code. Developers can review the
+reports and assign such a status accordingly with a short comment message. A
+report is _unreviewed_ by default.
+
+The review status is not only a stateless indication of a report, but takes
+effect in situations when CodeChecker needs to determine the set of outstanding
+bugs. For example, a report with _intentional_ or _false positive_ detection
+status is not considered outstanding, because the analyzed project's developers
+don't need to worry about them.
+
+### Setting with source code comments
 
 Source code comments can be used in the source files to change the review
-status of a specific or all checker results found in a particular line of code.
-Source code comment should be above the line where the defect was found, and
+status of a specific report found in a particular line of code.
+Source code comments should be above the line where the defect was found, and
 __no__ empty lines are allowed between the line with the bug and the source
 code comment.
 
-Comment lines staring with `//` or C style `/**/` comments are supported.
+Comment lines staring with `//` or C style `/**/` comments are both supported.
 Watch out for the comment format!
 
-### Supported formats
+#### Supported formats
 The source code comment has the following format:
-```sh
-// codechecker comment type [checker name] comment
+```c
+// codechecker_<comment type> [<checker name>] comment
 ```
 
-Multiple source code comment types are allowed:
+Several source code comment types are allowed:
 
- * `codechecker_suppress`
- * `codechecker_false_positive`
- * `codechecker_intentional`
- * `codechecker_confirmed`
-
-Source code comment change the `review status` of a bug in the following form:
-
- * `codechecker_suppress` and `codechecker_false_positive` to `False positive`
- * `codechecker_intentional` to `Intentional`
- * `codechecker_confirmed` to `Confirmed`.
-
-Note: `codechecker_suppress` does the same as `codechecker_false_positive`.
+ * `codechecker_suppress`: Sets the review status to _false positive_. These
+    reports are not considered outstanding. The limitations of analyzers may
+    cause false positive reports, these can be categorized by this status value.
+ * `codechecker_false_positive`: Same as `codechecker_suppress`.
+ * `codechecker_intentional`: Sets the review status to _intentional_. These
+    reports are not considered outstanding. For example a bug may be intentional
+    in a test code.
+ * `codechecker_confirmed`: Sets the review status to _confirmed_. This is an
+    indication for developers to deal with this report. Such a report is
+    considered outstanding.
 
 You can read more about review status [here](https://github.com/Ericsson/codechecker/blob/master/www/userguide/userguide.md#userguide-review-status)
 
-### Change review status of a specific checker result
+#### Change review status of a specific checker result
 ```cpp
 void test() {
   int x;
@@ -2462,7 +2476,7 @@ void test() {
 }
 ```
 
-### Change review status of a specific checker result by using a substring of the checker name
+#### Change review status of a specific checker result by using a substring of the checker name
 There is no need to specify the whole checker name in the source code comment
 like `deadcode.DeadStores`, because it will not be resilient to package name
 changes. You are able to specify only a substring of the checker name for the
@@ -2476,7 +2490,7 @@ void test() {
 ```
 
 
-### Change review status of all checker result
+#### Change review status of all checker results
 ```cpp
 void test() {
   int x;
@@ -2485,7 +2499,7 @@ void test() {
 }
 ```
 
-### Change review status of all checker result with C style comment
+#### Change review status of all checker results with C style comment
 ```cpp
 void test() {
   int x;
@@ -2494,7 +2508,7 @@ void test() {
 }
 ```
 
-### Multi line comments
+#### Multi line comments
 ```cpp
 void test() {
   int x;
@@ -2507,7 +2521,7 @@ void test() {
 }
 ```
 
-### Multi line C style comments
+#### Multi line C style comments
 ```cpp
 void test() {
   int x;
@@ -2534,7 +2548,7 @@ void test() {
 }
 ```
 
-### Change review status for multiple checker results in the same line
+#### Change review status for multiple checker results in the same line
 You can change multiple checker reports with a single source code comment:
 
 ```cpp
@@ -2545,7 +2559,7 @@ void test() {
 ```
 
 The limitation of this format is that you can't use separate status or message
-for checkers. To solve this problem you can use one of the following format:
+for checkers. To solve this problem you can use one of the following formats:
 
 ```cpp
 void test_simple() {
@@ -2579,3 +2593,45 @@ void testError2() {
   int x = 1 / 0;
 }
 ```
+
+### Setting with config file
+
+Review status can be configured by a config file in YAML format. This config
+file has to represent a list of review status settings:
+
+```yaml
+- filepath_filter: /path/to/project/test/*
+  checker_filter: core.DivideZero
+  message: Division by zero in test files is automatically intentional.
+  review_status: intentional
+- filepath_filter: /path/to/project/important/module/*
+  message: All reports in this module should be investigated.
+  review_status: confirmed
+- filepath_filter: "*/project/test/*"
+  message: If a filter starts with asterix, then it should be quoted due to YAML format.
+  review_status: suppress
+- report_hash_filter: b85851b34789e35c6acfa1a4aaf65382
+  message: This report is false positive.
+  review_status: false_positive
+```
+
+The fields of a review status settings are:
+
+- `filepath_filter` (optional): A glob to a path where the given review status
+  is applied. A [https://docs.python.org/3/library/glob.html](glob) is a path
+  that may contain shell-style wildcards: `*` substitutes zero or more
+  characters, `?` substitutes exactly one character. This filter option is
+  applied on the full path of a source file, even if `--trim-path-prefix` flag
+  is used later.
+- `checker_filter` (optional): Set the review status for only these checkers'
+  reports.
+- `report_hash_filter` (optional): Set the review status for only the checkers
+  having this report hash. A prefix match is applied on report hashes, so it is
+  enough to provide the beginning of a hash. Make sure to use a quite long
+  prefix so it covers one specific report.
+- `message` (optional): A comment message that describes the reason of the
+  setting.
+- `review_status`: The review status to set.
+
+If none of the `_filter` options is provided, then that setting is not applied
+on any report.
diff --git a/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/__init__.py b/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/__init__.py
index 71f8cf8c34..fc3512577b 100644
--- a/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/__init__.py
+++ b/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/__init__.py
@@ -489,7 +489,8 @@ def to_json(self) -> Dict:
             "analyzer_name": self.analyzer_name,
             "category": self.category,
             "type": self.type,
-            "review_status": self.review_status.status,
+            "review_status": self.review_status.status
+            if self.review_status else '',
             "bug_path_events": [e.to_json() for e in self.bug_path_events],
             "bug_path_positions": [
                 p.to_json() for p in self.bug_path_positions],
diff --git a/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/output/html/html.py b/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/output/html/html.py
index 819109e25f..fd4ef21342 100644
--- a/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/output/html/html.py
+++ b/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/output/html/html.py
@@ -249,7 +249,8 @@ def to_macro_expansions(
                 'events': to_bug_path_events(report.bug_path_events),
                 'macros': to_macro_expansions(report.macro_expansions),
                 'notes': to_bug_path_events(report.notes),
-                'reviewStatus': report.review_status.formatted_status(),
+                'reviewStatus': report.review_status.formatted_status()
+                if report.review_status else '',
                 'severity': self.get_severity(report.checker_name)
             })
 
diff --git a/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/output/plaintext.py b/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/output/plaintext.py
index e838770538..c013e13314 100644
--- a/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/output/plaintext.py
+++ b/tools/report-converter/codechecker_report_converter/report/output/plaintext.py
@@ -64,7 +64,8 @@ def format_report(report: Report, content_is_not_changed: bool) -> str:
     out = f"[{report.severity}] {file_path}:{report.line}:{report.column}: " \
           f"{report.message} [{report.checker_name}]"
 
-    if content_is_not_changed and report.review_status.status != 'unreviewed':
+    if content_is_not_changed and report.review_status and \
+            report.review_status.status != 'unreviewed':
         out += f" [{report.review_status.formatted_status()}]"
 
     return out
diff --git a/web/client/codechecker_client/cmd/store.py b/web/client/codechecker_client/cmd/store.py
index 4328277444..668cc75adc 100644
--- a/web/client/codechecker_client/cmd/store.py
+++ b/web/client/codechecker_client/cmd/store.py
@@ -449,6 +449,10 @@ def assemble_zip(inputs,
 
             files_to_compress.add(skip_file_path)
 
+        review_status_file_path = os.path.join(dir_path, 'review_status.yaml')
+        if os.path.exists(review_status_file_path):
+            files_to_compress.add(review_status_file_path)
+
     LOG.debug("Processing report files ...")
 
     # Currently ProcessPoolExecutor fails completely in windows.
diff --git a/web/client/codechecker_client/cmd_line_client.py b/web/client/codechecker_client/cmd_line_client.py
index e18f42d90f..78857207f0 100644
--- a/web/client/codechecker_client/cmd_line_client.py
+++ b/web/client/codechecker_client/cmd_line_client.py
@@ -201,10 +201,21 @@ def get_report_dir_results(
     Absolute paths are expected to the given report directories.
     """
     all_reports = []
-    review_status_handler = ReviewStatusHandler()
 
     processed_path_hashes = set()
-    for _, file_paths in report_file.analyzer_result_files(report_dirs):
+    for report_dir, file_paths in \
+            report_file.analyzer_result_files(report_dirs):
+
+        review_status_handler = ReviewStatusHandler()
+        review_status_cfg = os.path.join(report_dir, 'review_status.yaml')
+        if os.path.isfile(review_status_cfg):
+            try:
+                review_status_handler.set_review_status_config(
+                    review_status_cfg)
+            except ValueError as err:
+                LOG.error(err)
+                sys.exit(1)
+
         for file_path in file_paths:
             # Get reports.
             reports = report_file.get_reports(file_path, checker_labels)
diff --git a/web/server/codechecker_server/api/mass_store_run.py b/web/server/codechecker_server/api/mass_store_run.py
index 8eb9be73ba..f311f9dc69 100644
--- a/web/server/codechecker_server/api/mass_store_run.py
+++ b/web/server/codechecker_server/api/mass_store_run.py
@@ -895,19 +895,20 @@ def get_missing_file_ids(report: Report) -> List[str]:
             analyzer_name = mip.checker_to_analyzer.get(
                 report.checker_name, report.analyzer_name)
 
-            rs_from_source = SourceReviewStatus()
+            review_status = SourceReviewStatus()
+
             try:
-                rs_from_source = \
-                    review_status_handler.get_review_status(report)
-                rs_from_source.author = self.user_name
-                rs_from_source.date = run_history_time
+                review_status = review_status_handler.get_review_status(report)
             except ValueError as err:
                 self.__wrong_src_code_comments.append(str(err))
 
+            review_status.author = self.user_name
+            review_status.date = run_history_time
+
             # False positive and intentional reports are considered as closed
             # reports which is indicated with non-null "fixed_at" date.
             fixed_at = None
-            if rs_from_source.status in ['false_positive', 'intentional']:
+            if review_status.status in ['false_positive', 'intentional']:
                 # Keep in mind that now this is not handling review status
                 # rules, only review status source code comments
                 if old_report and old_report.review_status in \
@@ -919,11 +920,11 @@ def get_missing_file_ids(report: Report) -> List[str]:
             self.__check_report_count()
             report_id = self.__add_report(
                 session, run_id, report, file_path_to_id,
-                rs_from_source, detection_status, detected_at,
+                review_status, detection_status, detected_at,
                 run_history_time, analysis_info, analyzer_name, fixed_at)
 
             self.__new_report_hashes[report.report_hash] = \
-                rs_from_source.status
+                review_status.status
             self.__already_added_report_hashes.add(report_path_hash)
 
             LOG.debug("Storing report done. ID=%d", report_id)
@@ -1061,13 +1062,19 @@ def get_skip_handler(
         # Processing analyzer result files.
         processed_result_file_count = 0
 
-        review_status_handler = ReviewStatusHandler(source_root)
-
         for root_dir_path, _, report_file_paths in os.walk(report_dir):
             LOG.debug("Get reports from '%s' directory", root_dir_path)
 
             skip_handler = get_skip_handler(root_dir_path)
 
+            review_status_handler = ReviewStatusHandler(source_root)
+
+            review_status_cfg = \
+                os.path.join(root_dir_path, 'review_status.yaml')
+            if os.path.isfile(review_status_cfg):
+                review_status_handler.set_review_status_config(
+                    review_status_cfg)
+
             mip = self.__mips[root_dir_path]
             enabled_checkers.update(mip.enabled_checkers)
             disabled_checkers.update(mip.disabled_checkers)