@@ -71,10 +71,10 @@ Are the dependencies still maintained?
7171Risk: High
7272
7373This indicates possible unpatched security vulnerabilities. Therefore, it should
74- be checked regularly whether a project has been archived. Conversely, the OSSF
75- scorecard assumes that with at least one commit a week for 90 days, the project
76- is very actively maintained. However, a lack of active maintenance is not
77- necessarily always a problem: smaller utilities in particular usually do not
74+ be checked regularly whether a project has been archived. Conversely, the
75+ OpenSSF scorecard assumes that with at least one commit a week for 90 days, the
76+ project is very actively maintained. However, a lack of active maintenance is
77+ not necessarily always a problem: smaller utilities in particular usually do not
7878need to be maintained, or only very rarely. So a lack of active maintenance only
7979tells you that you should investigate the situation more closely.
8080
@@ -126,24 +126,13 @@ with their :ref:`SPDX <standard_format_licensing>` licence identifier followed
126126by an appropriate file extension as described in the :ref: `REUSE <reuse >`
127127specification.
128128
129- Are the best practices of the :abbr: ` OpenSSF ( Open Source Security Foundation ) ` being followed?
130- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
129+ OpenSSF Best Practices Badge
130+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
131131
132132Risk: Low
133133
134- The `Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) Best Practices Program
135- <https://github.com/ossf/wg-best-practices-os-developers/> `_ includes a set of
136- security-oriented best practices for open source software development:
137-
138- * the vulnerability reporting procedure is published on the project page
139- * a working build system automatically rebuilds the software from source code
140- * a general policy that tests are added to an automated test suite when
141- important new features are added
142- * various cryptography criteria are met, if applicable
143- * at least one static code analysis tool applied to each planned major
144- production release
145-
146- You can also get a corresponding badge with the `OpenSSF Best Practices Badge Program <https://www.bestpractices.dev/en >`_.
134+ You can also get a corresponding badge with the `OpenSSF Best Practices Badge
135+ Program <https://www.bestpractices.dev/en> `_.
147136
148137Continuous testing
149138------------------
@@ -156,6 +145,9 @@ Risk: Low
156145Before code is merged into pull or merge requests, tests should be performed to
157146help detect errors early and reduce the number of vulnerabilities in a project.
158147
148+ .. seealso ::
149+ * :ref: `coverage-github-actions `
150+
159151Does the project use fuzzing tools?
160152~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
161153
@@ -172,31 +164,20 @@ find the same vulnerabilities.
172164* Is `ClusterFuzzLite <https://google.github.io/clusterfuzzlite/ >`_ used in the
173165 repository?
174166* Are custom language-specific fuzzing features present in the repository, for
175- example with `atheris <https://pypi.org/project/atheris/ >`_ or `OneFuzz
176- <https://github.com/microsoft/onefuzz> `_?
167+ example with `atheris <https://pypi.org/project/atheris/ >`_?
177168
178169Does your project use static code analysis tools?
179170~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
180171
181172Risk: Medium
182173
183- `Static code analysis <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_program_analysis >`_
184- tests the source code before the application is executed. This can prevent known
185- bug classes from being accidentally introduced into the code base.
186-
187- .. _bandit :
188-
189- To check for vulnerabilities, you can use `bandit
190- <https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit> `__, which you can also integrate into your
191- :file: `.pre-commit-hooks.yaml `:
192-
193- .. code-block :: yaml
174+ :term: `Static test procedures ` test the source code before the application is
175+ run. This can prevent known types of errors from being inadvertently introduced
176+ into the codebase.
194177
195- repos :
196- - repo : https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit
197- rev : ' 1.7.5'
198- hooks :
199- - id : bandit
178+ To check for vulnerabilities, you can use `Bandit
179+ <https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit> `__ with :doc: `qa/ruff `, which you can also
180+ integrate into Jupyter Notebooks, IDEs and the pre-commit framework.
200181
201182You can also use :doc: `/productive/qa/pysa ` for `taint
202183<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taint_checking> `_ analyses.
0 commit comments