cpace

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 12767 is baseline-3 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/12767/baseline)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/12767)
or by embedding this in your HTML:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/12767"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/12767/baseline"></a>


These are the Baseline Level 3 criteria. These are criteria version v2026.02.19.

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

        

 Basics

  • General

    Note that other projects may use the same name.

    The README at https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace clearly states: “CPace draft-irtf-cfrg-cpace-21 implementation for the CPACE-RISTR255-SHA512 suite, written in Go. It provides an auditable draft implementation that is not yet production-ready.”

    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 21/21 ●

  • 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 are configured with explicit permissions: blocks that grant only the minimum required privileges for each job (typically contents: read and similar limited scopes). The project’s CI security practices and policy are documented in docs/ci-policy.md.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/ci-policy.md


    Enough for a badge!

    CI/CD pipelines which accept trusted collaborator input MUST sanitize and validate that input prior to use in the pipeline. [OSPS-BR-01.04]
    CI/CD pipelines should sanitize (quote, escape or exit on expected values) all collaborator inputs on explicit workflow executions. While collaborators are generally trusted, manual inputs to a workflow cannot be reviewed and could be abused by an account takeover or insider threat.

    The project’s CI/CD pipelines primarily execute deterministic commands (go test, govulncheck, gosec, etc.) and do not directly process untrusted collaborator input in a risky manner. Any input used follows standard GitHub Actions sanitization practices. CI security policy is documented in docs/ci-policy.md.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/ci-policy.md


    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.

    Official releases are created using Git tags with clear version identifiers (e.g., v0.1.0). All release assets on GitHub are automatically associated with the corresponding release tag and version.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/releases


    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.

    SECURITY.md defines a secrets and credentials policy covering storage, access, and rotation. It requires secrets to stay out of the repository and public logs/issues, limits automation secrets to GitHub Actions secrets/environment secrets or an approved secret manager, prefers short-lived/OIDC credentials, requires least-privilege access, blocks secrets from public fork PRs, and requires immediate rotation on suspected exposure plus at least annual rotation for unavoidable long-lived credentials.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/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.

    release-verification.md documents how to verify release integrity and authenticity. Official releases are signed annotated Git tags verified with git verify-tag; current releases have no attached binary assets, and future attached assets must be signed directly or listed in a signed manifest with cryptographic hashes.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/release-verification.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.

    release-verification.md documents how to verify the expected release author identity. Official release tags are expected to be signed annotated Git tags by Joshua Sargent the-sarge@the-sarge.com, and the documentation instructs users to inspect the tagger identity and verify the tag signature with git verify-tag. If a future release is produced by automation, the release notes must identify that process and signing identity.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/release-verification.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 documents the support scope and duration for releases. Current v0.x prereleases are draft snapshots; the latest prerelease is supported for security reporting, vulnerability triage, and best-effort fixes, while older v0.x prereleases are superseded by newer prereleases. No v0.x release has a guaranteed maintenance duration or production support window, and a production-ready support policy will be defined before any v1.0.0 release or production-readiness claim.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/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 states when v0.x prereleases stop receiving security updates: only the latest v0.x prerelease receives security triage and best-effort fixes, and older v0.x prereleases are superseded when a newer prerelease is published.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/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.

    The project documentation defines that code collaborators are reviewed before receiving escalated permissions to sensitive resources such as repository administration, branch protection, release publishing, GitHub Actions secrets, environments, and security advisory access.


    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.

    The project publishes no compiled released software assets. Official releases are source/module releases via signed Git tags. The release checklist states that any future compiled release asset must be delivered with an SBOM.


    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.

    The project releases from a single source repository and has no released multi-repository subprojects. The release checklist states that any future multi-repository release must enforce security requirements at least as strict as this primary repository.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/release-checklist.md


    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.

    The project releases from a single source repository and has no released multi-repository subprojects. The release checklist states that any future multi-repository release must enforce security requirements at least as strict as this primary repository.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/release-checklist.md


    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.

    CONTRIBUTING.md states that major behavior, API, parser/framing, security, protocol, CI/release, or dependency changes should add or update automated tests covering the changed functionality, or explain substitute evidence.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


    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.

    The project is authored and maintained by a single individual. main requires status checks, but it does not require one non-author human approval before merging. Meeting this requires adding at least one trusted reviewer/collaborator and enabling required approving reviews in branch protection.
    Evidence for current documented required PR gate: https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/ci-policy.md


    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.

    docs/threat-model.md includes explicit attack surface analysis for critical paths including public API entry points, wire parsing, context-info construction, scalar/public-share handling, confirmation, exporter/session lifecycle, dependencies, and release/CI processes.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/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.

    The project documents that dependency vulnerabilities found by SCA but assessed as non-exploitable are recorded in docs/vex.md with non-exploitability rationale. Current dependency review reports no known vulnerabilities, so no current VEX entries are required.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/vex.md
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/dependency-review.md


    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.

    The project defines SCA remediation thresholds for vulnerabilities, malicious dependencies, and licenses, including release blocking for unresolved exploitable vulnerabilities and unknown or incompatible licenses unless documented as non-exploitable or explicitly resolved.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/security-gates.md


    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.

    The release checklist and security-gates policy require SCA violations to be resolved, approved, or documented as non-exploitable before any release.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/release-checklist.md
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/security-gates.md


    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.

    The project has a required Dependency Gate status check that runs SCA tooling on pull requests before merge. It blocks codebase changes when dependency vulnerabilities or dependency policy violations are detected, except for documented non-exploitable/VEX cases.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/.github/workflows/dependency-gate.yml
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/security-gates.md


    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.

    The project defines SAST remediation thresholds for CodeQL, gosec, ast-grep, and manual security review findings, with documented false-positive or non-exploitable suppressions.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/security-gates.md


    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.

    The project has a required SAST Gate status check that runs SAST tooling on pull requests before merge. It blocks codebase changes when security weaknesses are detected, except for documented false-positive or non-exploitable suppressions.
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/.github/workflows/sast-gate.yml
    https://github.com/the-sarge/cpace/blob/main/docs/security-gates.md



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 Joshua Sargent and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Joshua Sargent.
Entry created on 2026-05-07 03:42:31 UTC, last updated on 2026-05-08 06:16:03 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2026-05-08 06:16:03 UTC.