Brazilian Utils

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 14695 is baseline-1 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/14695/baseline)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14695)
or by embedding this in your HTML:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14695"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14695/baseline"></a>


These are the Baseline Level 2 criteria. These are criteria version v2026.08.28.

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

        

 Basics

  • General

    Note that other projects may use the same name.

    Utils library for specific Brazilian businesses

    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 18/19 ●

  • Controls


    Enough for a badge!

    When a CI/CD task is executed with no permissions specified, the CI/CD system MUST default the task's permissions to the lowest permissions granted in the pipeline. [OSPS-AC-04.01]
    Configure the project's settings to assign the lowest available permissions to new pipelines by default, granting additional permissions only when necessary for specific tasks.

    Every workflow declares a top-level permissions: contents: read, so any job that does not state its own permissions runs read-only; the few jobs that need more (release-please, the dataset PR job, the Scorecard upload) escalate at job level only. zizmor's excessive-permissions audit runs on every pull request and fails the build if a workflow drops this.


    Enough for a badge!

    When an official release is created, that release MUST be assigned a unique version identifier. [OSPS-BR-02.01]
    Assign a unique version identifier to each release produced by the project, following a consistent naming convention or numbering scheme. Examples include SemVer, CalVer, or git commit id.

    Releases follow Semantic Versioning and are cut by release-please: each one gets a git tag (e.g. v2.4.0), a GitHub Release and the matching version on npm (https://www.npmjs.com/package/@brazilian-utils/brazilian-utils?activeTab=versions). CHANGELOG.md records every version.


    Enough for a badge!

    When an official release is created, that release MUST contain a descriptive log of functional and security modifications. [OSPS-BR-04.01]
    Ensure that all releases include a descriptive change log. It is recommended to ensure that the change log is human-readable and includes details beyond commit messages, such as descriptions of the security impact or relevance to different use cases. To ensure machine readability, place the content under a markdown header such as "## Changelog".

    CHANGELOG.md is generated by release-please from the Conventional Commits history and the same text becomes the GitHub Release notes; security fixes appear as fix: entries and any advisory is linked from the release.


    Enough for a badge!

    When a build and release pipeline ingests dependencies, it MUST use standardized tooling where available. [OSPS-BR-05.01]
    Use a common tooling for your ecosystem, such as package managers or dependency management tools to ingest dependencies at build time. This may include using a dependency file, lock file, or manifest to specify the required dependencies, which are then pulled in by the build system.

    CI and the release job install with npm ci from package-lock.json; every GitHub Action is pinned to a full commit SHA and updated by Dependabot (.github/dependabot.yml); the release is built and published only by the workflow.


    Enough for a badge!

    When an official release is created, that release MUST be signed or accounted for in a signed manifest including each asset's cryptographic hashes. [OSPS-BR-06.01]
    Sign all released software assets at build time with a cryptographic signature or attestations, such as GPG or PGP signature, Sigstore signatures, SLSA provenance, or SLSA VSAs. Include the cryptographic hashes of each asset in a signed manifest or metadata file.

    Every version is published with npm provenance: a Sigstore attestation signed by the release workflow's OIDC identity that covers the package tarball and its sha512 integrity hash, recorded in the public transparency log, plus the registry's own signature. Consumers verify both with npm audit signatures; the attestation is shown on the version's Provenance panel on npmjs.com.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include a description of how the project selects, obtains, and tracks its dependencies. [OSPS-DO-06.01]
    It is recommended to publish this information alongside the project's technical & design documentation on a publicly viewable resource such as the source code repository, project website, or other channel.

    CONTRIBUTING.md "Zero runtime dependencies" and "Supply chain" describe the no-runtime-dependency rule, npm ci from the lockfile, SHA-pinned actions, weekly Dependabot updates, OSV-Scanner, audit-ci and lockfile-lint.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST include instructions on how to build the software, including required libraries, frameworks, SDKs, and dependencies. [OSPS-DO-07.01]
    It is recommended to publish this information alongside the project's contributor documentation, such as in CONTRIBUTING.md or other developer task documentation. This may also be documented using Makefile targets or other automation scripts.

    README "Development" and CONTRIBUTING.md "Getting started" document the requirements (Node.js 24 per .nvmrc, npm) and the commands (npm install, npm run check, npm test, npm run build); the toolchain (Vite+) is a dev dependency, nothing global is needed.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST include a list of project members with access to sensitive resources. [OSPS-GV-01.01]
    Document project participants and their roles through such artifacts as members.md, governance.md, maintainers.md, or similar file within the source code repository of the project. This may be as simple as including names or account handles in a list of maintainers, or more complex depending on the project's governance.

    MAINTAINERS.md (https://github.com/brazilian-utils/javascript/blob/main/MAINTAINERS.md) lists the maintainers, the only accounts with write/admin access to the repository and publish rights on npm; .github/CODEOWNERS mirrors it.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST include descriptions of the roles and responsibilities for members of the project [OSPS-GV-01.02]
    Document project participants and their roles through such artifacts as members.md, governance.md, maintainers.md, or similar file within the source code repository of the project.

    MAINTAINERS.md "Roles" defines the contributor, maintainer and automation roles and what each one does (review, merge, release approval on npm with 2FA, triage of security reports, datasets and toolchain upkeep); CONTRIBUTING.md "Governance" points to it.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST include a guide for code contributors that includes requirements for acceptable contributions. [OSPS-GV-03.02]
    Extend the CONTRIBUTING.md or CONTRIBUTING/ contents in the project documentation to outline the requirements for acceptable contributions, including coding standards, testing requirements, and submission guidelines for code contributors. It is recommended that this guide is the source of truth for both contributors and approvers.

    CONTRIBUTING.md requires tests for new behaviour, passing lint/type/coverage/duplication/unused-code/mutation gates, Conventional Commit messages, docs in both languages, no runtime dependencies, no unagreed breaking changes and an API Extractor baseline review; the pull request template repeats the checklist.


    Not enough for a badge.

    The version control system MUST require all code contributors to assert that they are legally authorized to make the associated contributions on every commit. [OSPS-LE-01.01]
    Include a DCO in the project's repository, requiring code contributors to assert that they are legally authorized to commit the associated contributions on every commit. Use a status check to ensure the assertion is made. A CLA also satisfies this requirement. Some version control systems, such as GitHub, may include this in the platform terms of service.

    The DCO sign-off is documented in https://github.com/brazilian-utils/javascript/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#commit-messages but no check enforces it yet, and recent commits carry no Signed-off-by line.


    Enough for a badge!

    When a commit is made to the primary branch, any automated status checks for commits MUST pass or be manually bypassed. [OSPS-QA-03.01]
    Configure the project's version control system to require that all automated status checks pass or require manual acknowledgement before a commit can be merged into the primary branch. It is recommended that any optional status checks are NOT configured as a pass or fail requirement that approvers may be tempted to bypass.

    The Check (format, lint, types, dependency and lockfile checks, API baseline, audit-ci), Tests, Build, Mutation tests and Security workflows run on every pull request and are required status checks on main; a merge with a failing check needs an explicit, audited administrator bypass.


    Enough for a badge!

    Prior to a commit being accepted, the project's CI/CD pipelines MUST run at least one automated test suite to ensure the changes meet expectations. [OSPS-QA-06.01]
    Automated tests should be run prior to every merge into the primary branch. The test suite should be run in a CI/CD pipeline and the results should be visible to all contributors. The test suite should be run in a consistent environment and should be run in a way that allows contributors to run the tests locally. Examples of test suites include unit tests, integration tests, and end-to-end tests.

    The Tests workflow runs the full vitest suite with coverage on every pull request (Node.js 20/22/24/26, Bun, Deno and Chrome/Firefox/Edge/Safari), and the Mutation tests workflow runs Stryker; both are required before merging.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include design documentation demonstrating all actions and actors within the system. [OSPS-SA-01.01]
    Include designs in the project documentation that explains the actions and actors. Actors include any subsystem or entity that can influence another segment in the system. Ensure this is updated for new features or breaking changes.

    CONTRIBUTING.md "Architecture" describes the layout (src/<util>/, _internals, generated datasets), the rule that utilities are synchronous, stateless and side-effect free, the two utilities that perform network I/O and how they treat responses, the trust boundary of the published package, and the actors around the code (consumers, contributors, maintainers, CI, Dependabot, release-please).


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include descriptions of all external software interfaces of the released software assets. [OSPS-SA-02.01]
    Document all software interfaces (APIs) of the released software assets, explaining how users can interact with the software and what data is expected or produced. Ensure this is updated for new features or breaking changes.

    The package's only interface is its exported functions: docs/utilities.md documents every one with parameters, return values and examples, and the public API surface is checked in CI against the reviewed baseline reports/api/brazilian-utils.api.md (API Extractor). The only external interfaces the code itself calls, the public CEP APIs used by getAddressInfoByCep and getCepInfoByAddress, are described in those utilities' docs and in the Architecture section.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project MUST perform a security assessment to understand the most likely and impactful potential security problems that could occur within the software. [OSPS-SA-03.01]
    Performing a security assessment informs both project members as well as downstream consumers that the project understands what problems could arise within the software. Understanding what threats could be realized helps the project manage and address risk. This information is useful to downstream consumers to demonstrate the security acumen and practices of the project. Ensure this is updated for new features or breaking changes.

    SECURITY.md "What's in scope" records the assessment for a zero-dependency utility library: the likely problems are unsafe behaviour of a validator or formatter on adversarial input (ReDoS, prototype pollution, dynamic code), the two utilities that consume external CEP APIs, and the integrity of the build and release tooling; the controls follow from it (mutation-tested suites, no runtime dependencies, SHA-pinned actions, OIDC publishing with provenance, workflow linting, OpenSSF Scorecard on every push).


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST include a policy for coordinated vulnerability disclosure (CVD), with a clear timeframe for response. [OSPS-VM-01.01]
    Create a SECURITY.md file at the root of the directory, outlining the project's policy for coordinated vulnerability disclosure. Include a method for reporting vulnerabilities. Set expectations for how the project will respond and address reported issues.

    SECURITY.md "Response timeline" and "Disclosure": reports are acknowledged within 7 days, assessed within 14 days and fixed or mitigated within 90 days of confirmation; the reporter is kept informed, a new date is agreed when a fix needs longer, and the fix is released together with a GitHub Security Advisory.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST provide a means for private vulnerability reporting directly to the security contacts within the project. [OSPS-VM-03.01]
    Provide a means for security researchers to report vulnerabilities privately to the project. This may be a dedicated email address, a web form, VCS specialized tools, email addresses for security contacts, or other methods.

    SECURITY.md provides two private channels: GitHub Private Vulnerability Reporting on the repository (Security tab → "Report a vulnerability"), which opens a private thread with the maintainers, and the e-mail support@brazilian-utils.com.br.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST publicly publish data about discovered vulnerabilities. [OSPS-VM-04.01]
    Provide information about known vulnerabilities in a predictable public channel, such as a CVE entry, blog post, or other medium. To the degree possible, this information should include affected version(s), how a consumer can determine if they are vulnerable, and instructions for mitigation or remediation.

    SECURITY.md "Disclosure": every confirmed vulnerability is published as a GitHub Security Advisory with a CVE, listing affected and fixed versions and any workaround, at https://github.com/brazilian-utils/javascript/security/advisories. None has been reported to date.



You can use tools and AI systems to propose changes via a simple URL, such as https://www.bestpractices.dev/en/projects/14695/choose/edit?osps_ac_01_01_status=Met&osps_ac_01_01_justification=GitHub+enforced. See our automation proposals system for how to do that. 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 Hyan Mandian and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Hyan Mandian.
Entry created on 2026-09-18 03:05:32 UTC, last updated on 2026-09-18 20:25:27 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2026-09-18 20:24:24 UTC.