t3x-rte_ckeditor_image

Projects that follow the best practices below can voluntarily self-certify and show that they've achieved an Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) best practices badge.

There is no set of practices that can guarantee that software will never have defects or vulnerabilities; even formal methods can fail if the specifications or assumptions are wrong. Nor is there any set of practices that can guarantee that a project will sustain a healthy and well-functioning development community. However, following best practices can help improve the results of projects. For example, some practices enable multi-person review before release, which can both help find otherwise hard-to-find technical vulnerabilities and help build trust and a desire for repeated interaction among developers from different companies. To earn a badge, all MUST and MUST NOT criteria must be met, all SHOULD criteria must be met OR be unmet with justification, and all SUGGESTED criteria must be met OR unmet (we want them considered at least). If you want to enter justification text as a generic comment, instead of being a rationale that the situation is acceptable, start the text block with '//' followed by a space. Feedback is welcome via the GitHub site as issues or pull requests There is also a mailing list for general discussion.

We gladly provide the information in several locales, however, if there is any conflict or inconsistency between the translations, the English version is the authoritative version.
If this is your project, please show your baseline badge status on your project page! The baseline badge status looks like this: Baseline badge level for project 11718 is baseline-2 Here is how to embed the baseline badge:
You can show your baseline badge status by embedding this in your markdown file:
[![OpenSSF Baseline](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/11718/baseline)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/11718)
or by embedding this in your HTML:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/11718"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/11718/baseline"></a>


These are the Baseline Level 3 criteria. These are criteria version v2025.10.10.

Baseline Series: Baseline Level 1 Baseline Level 2 Baseline Level 3

        

 Basics

  • General

    Note that other projects may use the same name.

    Image support in CKEditor for the TYPO3 ecosystem

    Please use SPDX license expression format; examples include "Apache-2.0", "BSD-2-Clause", "BSD-3-Clause", "GPL-2.0+", "LGPL-3.0+", "MIT", and "(BSD-2-Clause OR Ruby)". Do not include single quotes or double quotes.
    If there is more than one language, list them as comma-separated values (spaces optional) and sort them from most to least used. If there is a long list, please list at least the first three most common ones. If there is no language (e.g., this is a documentation-only or test-only project), use the single character "-". Please use a conventional capitalization for each language, e.g., "JavaScript".
    The Common Platform Enumeration (CPE) is a structured naming scheme for information technology systems, software, and packages. It is used in a number of systems and databases when reporting vulnerabilities.

 Controls 19/20 ●

  • Controls


    Enough for a badge!

    When a job is assigned permissions in a CI/CD pipeline, the source code or configuration MUST only assign the minimum privileges necessary for the corresponding activity. [OSPS-AC-04.02]
    Configure the project's CI/CD pipelines to assign the lowest available permissions to users and services by default, elevating permissions only when necessary for specific tasks. In some version control systems, this may be possible at the organizational or repository level. If not, set permissions at the top level of the pipeline.

    GitHub Actions workflows assign minimum necessary privileges per job. Workflow-level permissions: {} (none by default). Each job explicitly declares only required permissions (e.g., contents: read, security-events: write). Step-security/harden-runner monitors execution.


    Enough for a badge!

    When an official release is created, all assets within that release MUST be clearly associated with the release identifier or another unique identifier for the asset. [OSPS-BR-02.02]
    Assign a unique version identifier to each software asset produced by the project, following a consistent naming convention or numbering scheme. Examples include SemVer, CalVer, or git commit id.

    All release assets clearly associated with version identifier. GitHub Releases bundle source archives, SLSA provenance, and attestation files under the version tag. Composer package versioned consistently via Packagist.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST define a policy for managing secrets and credentials used by the project. The policy should include guidelines for storing, accessing, and rotating secrets and credentials. [OSPS-BR-07.02]
    Document how secrets and credentials are managed and used within the project. This should include details on how secrets are stored (e.g., using a secrets management tool), how access is controlled, and how secrets are rotated or updated. Ensure that sensitive information is not hard-coded in the source code or stored in version control systems.

    Secrets Management section in SECURITY.md documents storage (GitHub Encrypted Secrets), access (admin-only), rotation policy (on team changes or compromise), prevention (.gitignore, harden-runner), and audit (GitHub audit log): https://github.com/netresearch/t3x-rte_ckeditor_image/blob/main/SECURITY.md


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST contain instructions to verify the integrity and authenticity of the release assets. [OSPS-DO-03.01]
    Instructions in the project should contain information about the technology used, the commands to run, and the expected output. When possible, avoid storing this documentation in the same location as the build and release pipeline to avoid a single breach compromising both the software and the documentation for verifying the integrity of the software.

    README.md 'Verifying Releases' section provides instructions for verifying SLSA provenance via gh attestation verify: https://github.com/netresearch/t3x-rte_ckeditor_image/blob/main/README.md


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST contain instructions to verify the expected identity of the person or process authoring the software release. [OSPS-DO-03.02]
    The expected identity may be in the form of key IDs used to sign, issuer and identity from a sigstore certificate, or other similar forms. When possible, avoid storing this documentation in the same location as the build and release pipeline to avoid a single breach compromising both the software and the documentation for verifying the integrity of the software.

    README.md 'Verifying Releases' section provides instructions for verifying GPG-signed tags and release author identity via git tag -v and git log --show-signature: https://github.com/netresearch/t3x-rte_ckeditor_image/blob/main/README.md


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include a descriptive statement about the scope and duration of support for each release. [OSPS-DO-04.01]
    In order to communicate the scope and duration of support for the project's released software assets, the project should have a SUPPORT.md file, a "Support" section in SECURITY.md, or other documentation explaining the support lifecycle, including the expected duration of support for each release, the types of support provided (e.g., bug fixes, security updates), and any relevant policies or procedures for obtaining support.

    SECURITY.md 'Support Policy' section documents support scope and duration per version, including active support, security-only support, and end-of-life status: https://github.com/netresearch/t3x-rte_ckeditor_image/blob/main/SECURITY.md


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST provide a descriptive statement when releases or versions will no longer receive security updates. [OSPS-DO-05.01]
    In order to communicate the scope and duration of support for security fixes, the project should have a SUPPORT.md or other documentation explaining the project's policy for security updates.

    SECURITY.md 'Support Policy' section states: 'When a TYPO3 LTS version reaches end of life, the corresponding extension version will no longer receive security updates.' Version-specific EOL status documented in support table: https://github.com/netresearch/t3x-rte_ckeditor_image/blob/main/SECURITY.md


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST have a policy that code collaborators are reviewed prior to granting escalated permissions to sensitive resources. [OSPS-GV-04.01]
    Publish an enforceable policy in the project documentation that requires code collaborators to be reviewed and approved before being granted escalated permissions to sensitive resources, such as merge approval or access to secrets. It is recommended that vetting includes establishing a justifiable lineage of identity such as confirming the contributor's association with a known trusted organization.

    CONTRIBUTING.md 'Permission escalation' section documents the review process: contribution history required, team member sponsorship, admin approval, audit logging: https://github.com/netresearch/t3x-rte_ckeditor_image/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, all compiled released software assets MUST be delivered with a software bill of materials. [OSPS-QA-02.02]
    It is recommended to auto-generate SBOMs at build time using a tool that has been vetted for accuracy. This enables users to ingest this data in a standardized approach alongside other projects in their environment.

    PHP extension distributed as source code via Composer. No compiled release assets. Software bill of materials not applicable as there are no compiled binary releases — dependencies resolved at install time by Composer.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release comprising multiple source code repositories, all subprojects MUST enforce security requirements that are as strict or stricter than the primary codebase. [OSPS-QA-04.02]
    Any additional subproject code repositories produced by the project and compiled into a release must enforce security requirements as applicable to the status and intent of the respective codebase. In addition to following the corresponding OSPS Baseline requirements, this may include requiring a security review, ensuring that it is free of vulnerabilities, and ensuring that it is free of known security issues.

    This is a single-project extension without subprojects. No subprojects exist to enforce security requirements upon.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, project's documentation MUST clearly document when and how tests are run. [OSPS-QA-06.02]
    Add a section to the contributing documentation that explains how to run the tests locally and how to run the tests in the CI/CD pipeline. The documentation should explain what the tests are testing and how to interpret the results.

    Testing documentation in CONTRIBUTING.md, Makefile help target, and CI workflow files. Tests run on every push to main and all PRs via GitHub Actions. Test commands documented: composer ci:test:php:unit, composer ci:test:php:functional, npm test.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project's documentation MUST include a policy that all major changes to the software produced by the project should add or update tests of the functionality in an automated test suite. [OSPS-QA-06.03]
    Add a section to the contributing documentation that explains the policy for adding or updating tests. The policy should explain what constitutes a major change and what tests should be added or updated.

    PR template (.github/pull_request_template.md) requires test plan for all contributions. CI enforces test execution. Recent changes demonstrate policy adherence with test additions for major features (visible in CHANGELOG.md).


    Not enough for a badge.

    When a commit is made to the primary branch, the project's version control system MUST require at least one non-author human approval of the changes before merging. [OSPS-QA-07.01]
    Configure the project's version control system to require at least one non-author human approval of changes before merging into the release or primary branch. This can be achieved by requiring a pull request to be reviewed and approved by at least one other collaborator before it can be merged.

    Solo maintainer project. Branch protection includes review requirements but does not consistently enforce non-author human approval. Automated review (GitHub Copilot) supplements but does not replace human review requirement.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project MUST perform a threat modeling and attack surface analysis to understand and protect against attacks on critical code paths, functions, and interactions within the system. [OSPS-SA-03.02]
    Threat modeling is an activity where the project looks at the codebase, associated processes and infrastructure, interfaces, key components and "thinks like a hacker" and brainstorms how the system be be broken or compromised. Each identified threat is listed out so the project can then think about how to proactively avoid or close off any gaps/vulnerabilities that could arise. Ensure this is updated for new features or breaking changes.

    Threat model documented in Documentation/Architecture/Threat-Model.md covering 7 identified threats (XSS, SSRF, CSS injection, protocol injection, privilege escalation, ReDoS, SVG XSS), trust boundaries, and mitigations for all critical code paths: https://github.com/netresearch/t3x-rte_ckeditor_image/blob/main/Documentation/Architecture/Threat-Model.md


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, any vulnerabilities in the software components not affecting the project MUST be accounted for in a VEX document, augmenting the vulnerability report with non-exploitability details. [OSPS-VM-04.02]
    Establish a VEX feed communicating the exploitability status of known vulnerabilities, including assessment details or any mitigations in place preventing vulnerable code from being executed.

    VEX document at vex.json tracks non-affecting vulnerabilities in OpenVEX format. CVE-2025-45769 (firebase/php-jwt) documented as not_affected with justification vulnerable_code_not_in_execute_path: https://github.com/netresearch/t3x-rte_ckeditor_image/blob/main/vex.json


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST include a policy that defines a threshold for remediation of SCA findings related to vulnerabilities and licenses. [OSPS-VM-05.01]
    Document a policy in the project that defines a threshold for remediation of SCA findings related to vulnerabilities and licenses. Include the process for identifying, prioritizing, and remediating these findings.

    SECURITY.md defines vulnerability response SLAs: 48-hour acknowledgment, 7-day critical fix. Dependency Review action blocks PRs with high-severity CVEs. Dependabot (daily checks) and Renovate (auto-merge minor/patch) enforce continuous remediation thresholds.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST include a policy to address SCA violations prior to any release. [OSPS-VM-05.02]
    Document a policy in the project to address applicable Software Composition Analysis results before any release, and add status checks that verify compliance with that policy prior to release.

    CI pipeline runs Dependency Review action on all PRs to detect SCA violations before merge. Composer audit configured to track known vulnerabilities. High-severity CVEs block PR acceptance.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, all changes to the project's codebase MUST be automatically evaluated against a documented policy for malicious dependencies and known vulnerabilities in dependencies, then blocked in the event of violations, except when declared and suppressed as non-exploitable. [OSPS-VM-05.03]
    Create a status check in the project's version control system that runs a Software Composition Analysis tool on all changes to the codebase. Require that the status check passes before changes can be merged.

    Dependency Review GitHub Action automatically evaluates all codebase changes against known vulnerability databases. Dependabot alerts for new CVEs. Renovate auto-updates dependencies to patched versions.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST include a policy that defines a threshold for remediation of SAST findings. [OSPS-VM-06.01]
    Document a policy in the project that defines a threshold for remediation of Static Application Security Testing (SAST) findings. Include the process for identifying, prioritizing, and remediating these findings.

    PHPStan at level 10 (strictest) fails CI on any new violation — effectively a zero-tolerance SAST policy. CodeQL analysis runs on every push and PR. PHPStan baseline (phpstan-baseline.neon) tracks known exclusions with documented justifications.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, all changes to the project's codebase MUST be automatically evaluated against a documented policy for security weaknesses and blocked in the event of violations except when declared and suppressed as non-exploitable. [OSPS-VM-06.02]
    Create a status check in the project's version control system that runs a Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tool on all changes to the codebase. Require that the status check passes before changes can be merged.

    CodeQL and PHPStan automatically evaluate all codebase changes on every push and PR. Both tools fail the CI pipeline on detection of security weaknesses. Weekly scheduled CodeQL scans provide additional coverage.



This data is available under the Community Data License Agreement – Permissive, Version 2.0 (CDLA-Permissive-2.0). This means that a Data Recipient may share the Data, with or without modifications, so long as the Data Recipient makes available the text of this agreement with the shared Data. Please credit Sebastian Mendel and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Sebastian Mendel.
Entry created on 2026-01-09 06:04:47 UTC, last updated on 2026-02-25 23:29:35 UTC. Last lost passing badge on 2026-02-18 18:05:31 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2026-02-18 18:16:24 UTC.