Trinity

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 badge status on your project page! The badge status looks like this: Badge level for project 14772 is silver Here is how to embed it:
You can show your badge status by embedding this in your markdown file:
[![OpenSSF Best Practices](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14772/badge)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14772)
or by embedding this in your HTML:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14772"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14772/badge"></a>


These are the Silver level criteria. You can also view the Passing or Gold level criteria.

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

        

 Basics 17/17 ●

  • General

    Note that other projects may use the same name.

    A personal AI agent for your own machine: remembers you, learns procedures, acts through tools behind a permission gate, and never loses your work. Elixir/OTP and Phoenix LiveView, shipped as a desktop app. Apache-2.0.

    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.
  • Prerequisites


    The project MUST achieve a passing level badge. [achieve_passing]

  • Basic project website content


    The information on how to contribute MUST include the requirements for acceptable contributions (e.g., a reference to any required coding standard). (URL required) [contribution_requirements]

    CONTRIBUTING.md states the requirements for an acceptable contribution and links the engineering rules, the proof standard and the rules of evidence that bind every change: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


  • Project oversight


    The project SHOULD have a legal mechanism where all developers of non-trivial amounts of project software assert that they are legally authorized to make these contributions. The most common and easily-implemented approach for doing this is by using a Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO), where users add "signed-off-by" in their commits and the project links to the DCO website. However, this MAY be implemented as a Contributor License Agreement (CLA), or other legal mechanism. (URL required) [dco]
    The DCO is the recommended mechanism because it's easy to implement, tracked in the source code, and git directly supports a "signed-off" feature using "commit -s". To be most effective it is best if the project documentation explains what "signed-off" means for that project. A CLA is a legal agreement that defines the terms under which intellectual works have been licensed to an organization or project. A contributor assignment agreement (CAA) is a legal agreement that transfers rights in an intellectual work to another party; projects are not required to have CAAs, since having CAA increases the risk that potential contributors will not contribute, especially if the receiver is a for-profit organization. The Apache Software Foundation CLAs (the individual contributor license and the corporate CLA) are examples of CLAs, for projects which determine that the risks of these kinds of CLAs to the project are less than their benefits.

    Every commit carries a Developer Certificate of Origin sign-off. It is enforced by a local hook and independently by CI, so a bypassed hook still fails the build rather than passing quietly: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md



    The project MUST clearly define and document its project governance model (the way it makes decisions, including key roles). (URL required) [governance]
    There needs to be some well-established documented way to make decisions and resolve disputes. In small projects, this may be as simple as "the project owner and lead makes all final decisions". There are various governance models, including benevolent dictator and formal meritocracy; for more details, see Governance models. Both centralized (e.g., single-maintainer) and decentralized (e.g., group maintainers) approaches have been successfully used in projects. The governance information does not need to document the possibility of creating a project fork, since that is always possible for FLOSS projects.

    GOVERNANCE.md documents how decisions are made, who makes them, how a decision is recorded before it is implemented, and how someone becomes a committer: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md



    The project MUST adopt a code of conduct and post it in a standard location. (URL required) [code_of_conduct]
    Projects may be able to improve the civility of their community and to set expectations about acceptable conduct by adopting a code of conduct. This can help avoid problems before they occur and make the project a more welcoming place to encourage contributions. This should focus only on behavior within the community/workplace of the project. Example codes of conduct are the Linux kernel code of conduct, the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct, the Debian Code of Conduct, the Ubuntu Code of Conduct, the Fedora Code of Conduct, the GNOME Code Of Conduct, the KDE Community Code of Conduct, the Python Community Code of Conduct, The Ruby Community Conduct Guideline, and The Rust Code of Conduct.

    The project MUST clearly define and publicly document the key roles in the project and their responsibilities, including any tasks those roles must perform. It MUST be clear who has which role(s), though this might not be documented in the same way. (URL required) [roles_responsibilities]
    The documentation for governance and roles and responsibilities may be in one place.

    MAINTAINERS.md names each maintainer, their GitHub account and their scope, and states plainly which powers rest with the author alone rather than implying they are shared: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/MAINTAINERS.md



    The project MUST be able to continue with minimal interruption if any one person dies, is incapacitated, or is otherwise unable or unwilling to continue support of the project. In particular, the project MUST be able to create and close issues, accept proposed changes, and release versions of software, within a week of confirmation of the loss of support from any one individual. This MAY be done by ensuring someone else has any necessary keys, passwords, and legal rights to continue the project. Individuals who run a FLOSS project MAY do this by providing keys in a lockbox and a will providing any needed legal rights (e.g., for DNS names). (URL required) [access_continuity]

    GOVERNANCE.md has a Continuity section: if any one maintainer becomes unavailable the others hold the access to create and close issues, accept changes and publish a release, and nothing in the ordinary workflow requires a specific individual. The exceptions (organisation administration, the domain, the security mailbox) are named rather than left to be discovered: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md



    The project SHOULD have a "bus factor" of 2 or more. (URL required) [bus_factor]
    A "bus factor" (aka "truck factor") is the minimum number of project members that have to suddenly disappear from a project ("hit by a bus") before the project stalls due to lack of knowledgeable or competent personnel. The truck-factor tool can estimate this for projects on GitHub. For more information, see Assessing the Bus Factor of Git Repositories by Cosentino et al.

    The project has three maintainers with review, merge, tag and release rights, which closes availability (see access_continuity). It does not yet have a bus factor of two in the sense this criterion means: every commit in the tree to date has one author, so the knowledge to continue the work has not been demonstrated to be held by more than one person. Recorded as R22 in https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/docs/06-risk-register.md with a lift condition a reader can check: reviews and merged changes from a maintainer other than the author, in the git history.


  • Documentation


    The project MUST have a documented roadmap that describes what the project intends to do and not do for at least the next year. (URL required) [documentation_roadmap]
    The project might not achieve the roadmap, and that's fine; the purpose of the roadmap is to help potential users and contributors understand the intended direction of the project. It need not be detailed.

    ROADMAP.md sets out what the project intends to do and what it intends not to do over the next year, the next four milestones in order, and the three things that matter most: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/ROADMAP.md



    The project MUST include documentation of the architecture (aka high-level design) of the software produced by the project. If the project does not produce software, select "not applicable" (N/A). (URL required) [documentation_architecture]
    A software architecture explains a program's fundamental structures, i.e., the program's major components, the relationships among them, and the key properties of these components and relationships.

    https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/docs/01-architecture.md . The layering it describes is enforced at compile time rather than described: a violation fails the build.



    The project MUST document what the user can and cannot expect in terms of security from the software produced by the project (its "security requirements"). (URL required) [documentation_security]
    These are the security requirements that the software is intended to meet.

    docs/07-security-model.md states the trust boundaries and what the software does and does not protect against: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/docs/07-security-model.md



    The project MUST provide a "quick start" guide for new users to help them quickly do something with the software. (URL required) [documentation_quick_start]
    The idea is to show users how to get started and make the software do anything at all. This is critically important for potential users to get started.

    The README carries a quick start under Running from source: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity#running-from-source



    The project MUST make an effort to keep the documentation consistent with the current version of the project results (including software produced by the project). Any known documentation defects making it inconsistent MUST be fixed. If the documentation is generally current, but erroneously includes some older information that is no longer true, just treat that as a defect, then track and fix as usual. [documentation_current]
    The documentation MAY include information about differences or changes between versions of the software and/or link to older versions of the documentation. The intent of this criterion is that an effort is made to keep the documentation consistent, not that the documentation must be perfect.

    Each document names the increment it was written at, and documentation hygiene is part of the definition of done for every change (docs/03-conventions.md). Corrections are appended rather than rewritten, so a superseded statement stays visible next to the one that replaced it instead of vanishing.



    The project repository front page and/or website MUST identify and hyperlink to any achievements, including this best practices badge, within 48 hours of public recognition that the achievement has been attained. (URL required) [documentation_achievements]
    An achievement is any set of external criteria that the project has specifically worked to meet, including some badges. This information does not need to be on the project website front page. A project using GitHub can put achievements on the repository front page by adding them to the README file.

    The badge is displayed and hyperlinked at the top of the repository front page: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity


  • Accessibility and internationalization


    The project (both project sites and project results) SHOULD follow accessibility best practices so that persons with disabilities can still participate in the project and use the project results where it is reasonable to do so. [accessibility_best_practices]
    For web applications, see the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.0) and its supporting document Understanding WCAG 2.0; see also W3C accessibility information. For GUI applications, consider using the environment-specific accessibility guidelines (such as Gnome, KDE, XFCE, Android, iOS, Mac, and Windows). Some TUI applications (e.g. `ncurses` programs) can do certain things to make themselves more accessible (such as `alpine`'s `force-arrow-cursor` setting). Most command-line applications are fairly accessible as-is. This criterion is often N/A, e.g., for program libraries. Here are some examples of actions to take or issues to consider:
    • Provide text alternatives for any non-text content so that it can be changed into other forms people need, such as large print, braille, speech, symbols or simpler language ( WCAG 2.0 guideline 1.1)
    • Color is not used as the only visual means of conveying information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or distinguishing a visual element. ( WCAG 2.0 guideline 1.4.1)
    • The visual presentation of text and images of text has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1, except for large text, incidental text, and logotypes ( WCAG 2.0 guideline 1.4.3)
    • Make all functionality available from a keyboard (WCAG guideline 2.1)
    • A GUI or web-based project SHOULD test with at least one screen-reader on the target platform(s) (e.g. NVDA, Jaws, or WindowEyes on Windows; VoiceOver on Mac & iOS; Orca on Linux/BSD; TalkBack on Android). TUI programs MAY work to reduce overdraw to prevent redundant reading by screen-readers.

    No accessibility assessment has been carried out on the web interface. The project records this as unmet rather than claim a conformance it has not measured.



    The software produced by the project SHOULD be internationalized to enable easy localization for the target audience's culture, region, or language. If internationalization (i18n) does not apply (e.g., the software doesn't generate text intended for end-users and doesn't sort human-readable text), select "not applicable" (N/A). [internationalization]
    Localization "refers to the adaptation of a product, application or document content to meet the language, cultural and other requirements of a specific target market (a locale)." Internationalization is the "design and development of a product, application or document content that enables easy localization for target audiences that vary in culture, region, or language." (See W3C's "Localization vs. Internationalization".) Software meets this criterion simply by being internationalized. No localization for another specific language is required, since once software has been internationalized it's possible for others to work on localization.

    The web layer is internationalized through gettext (lib/trinity_web/gettext.ex and priv/gettext/), so user-facing strings are extractable and localizable without code changes.


  • Other


    If the project sites (website, repository, and download URLs) store passwords for authentication of external users, the passwords MUST be stored as iterated hashes with a per-user salt by using a key stretching (iterated) algorithm (e.g., Argon2id, Bcrypt, Scrypt, or PBKDF2). If the project sites do not store passwords for this purpose, select "not applicable" (N/A). [sites_password_security]
    Note that the use of GitHub meets this criterion. This criterion only applies to passwords used for authentication of external users into the project sites (aka inbound authentication). If the project sites must log in to other sites (aka outbound authentication), they may need to store authorization tokens for that purpose differently (since storing a hash would be useless). This applies criterion crypto_password_storage to the project sites, similar to sites_https.

    The project sites store no passwords for authentication of external users. The repository and its pages are hosted on GitHub and the project operates no site of its own that authenticates users.


 Change Control 1/1 ●

  • Previous versions


    The project MUST maintain the most often used older versions of the product or provide an upgrade path to newer versions. If the upgrade path is difficult, the project MUST document how to perform the upgrade (e.g., the interfaces that have changed and detailed suggested steps to help upgrade). [maintenance_or_update]

    The project has published no releases. It is pre-alpha and distributed as source, so there is no older version to maintain and no upgrade path to document yet.


 Reporting 3/3 ●

  • Bug-reporting process


    The project MUST use an issue tracker for tracking individual issues. [report_tracker]

    GitHub Issues is enabled and in use for tracking individual issues: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/issues


  • Vulnerability report process


    The project MUST give credit to the reporter(s) of all vulnerability reports resolved in the last 12 months, except for the reporter(s) who request anonymity. If there have been no vulnerabilities resolved in the last 12 months, select "not applicable" (N/A). (URL required) [vulnerability_report_credit]

    No vulnerability has been reported or resolved in the last 12 months. SECURITY.md commits in advance to crediting reporters in the release notes unless they ask otherwise.



    The project MUST have a documented process for responding to vulnerability reports. (URL required) [vulnerability_response_process]
    This is strongly related to vulnerability_report_process, which requires that there be a documented way to report vulnerabilities. It also related to vulnerability_report_response, which requires response to vulnerability reports within a certain time frame.

    SECURITY.md documents where to send a report, what to include, the acknowledgement target, the coordinated disclosure expectation and how credit is given: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/SECURITY.md


 Quality 19/19 ●

  • Coding standards


    The project MUST identify the specific coding style guides for the primary languages it uses, and require that contributions generally comply with it. (URL required) [coding_standards]
    In most cases this is done by referring to some existing style guide(s), possibly listing differences. These style guides can include ways to improve readability and ways to reduce the likelihood of defects (including vulnerabilities). Many programming languages have one or more widely-used style guides. Examples of style guides include Google's style guides and SEI CERT Coding Standards.

    docs/03-conventions.md identifies the conventions for the primary language (Elixir) and requires compliance: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/docs/03-conventions.md



    The project MUST automatically enforce its selected coding style(s) if there is at least one FLOSS tool that can do so in the selected language(s). [coding_standards_enforced]
    This MAY be implemented using static analysis tool(s) and/or by forcing the code through code reformatters. In many cases the tool configuration is included in the project's repository (since different projects may choose different configurations). Projects MAY allow style exceptions (and typically will); where exceptions occur, they MUST be rare and documented in the code at their locations, so that these exceptions can be reviewed and so that tools can automatically handle them in the future. Examples of such tools include ESLint (JavaScript), Rubocop (Ruby), and devtools check (R).

    Enforced automatically on every commit by the gate: mix format --check-formatted for the standard Elixir formatter, and mix credo --strict --all for the style and consistency rules. A change that does not comply fails the build.


  • Working build system


    Build systems for native binaries MUST honor the relevant compiler and linker (environment) variables passed in to them (e.g., CC, CFLAGS, CXX, CXXFLAGS, and LDFLAGS) and pass them to compiler and linker invocations. A build system MAY extend them with additional flags; it MUST NOT simply replace provided values with its own. If no native binaries are being generated, select "not applicable" (N/A). [build_standard_variables]
    It should be easy to enable special build features like Address Sanitizer (ASAN), or to comply with distribution hardening best practices (e.g., by easily turning on compiler flags to do so).

    The native parts of the build honour the toolchain's own variables rather than replacing them: the packaging workflow sets CARGO_TARGET_*_LINKER and the Rust toolchain is read from rust-toolchain.toml, and the build extends these rather than overriding values passed in. The BEAM half of the build has no CC/CFLAGS equivalent, since Elixir compiles to bytecode rather than native objects.



    The build and installation system SHOULD preserve debugging information if they are requested in the relevant flags (e.g., "install -s" is not used). If there is no build or installation system (e.g., typical JavaScript libraries), select "not applicable" (N/A). [build_preserve_debug]
    E.G., setting CFLAGS (C) or CXXFLAGS (C++) should create the relevant debugging information if those languages are used, and they should not be stripped during installation. Debugging information is needed for support and analysis, and also useful for measuring the presence of hardening features in the compiled binaries.

    Debug information is preserved by the build. The project strips it explicitly and only where it must: its core policy hash is computed over stripped bytecode, because the debug chunk varies between builds; the build itself strips nothing.



    The build system for the software produced by the project MUST NOT recursively build subdirectories if there are cross-dependencies in the subdirectories. If there is no build or installation system (e.g., typical JavaScript libraries), select "not applicable" (N/A). [build_non_recursive]
    The project build system's internal dependency information needs to be accurate, otherwise, changes to the project may not build correctly. Incorrect builds can lead to defects (including vulnerabilities). A common mistake in large build systems is to use a "recursive build" or "recursive make", that is, a hierarchy of subdirectories containing source files, where each subdirectory is independently built. Unless each subdirectory is fully independent, this is a mistake, because the dependency information is incorrect.

    The build system is Mix, which resolves the whole application as one dependency graph rather than recursing into subdirectories.



    The project MUST be able to repeat the process of generating information from source files and get exactly the same bit-for-bit result. If no building occurs (e.g., scripting languages where the source code is used directly instead of being compiled), select "not applicable" (N/A). [build_repeatable]
    GCC and clang users may find the -frandom-seed option useful; in some cases, this can be resolved by forcing some sort order. More suggestions can be found at the reproducible build site.

    Measured rather than asserted; method and result are in https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/docs/packaging.md . Two forced MIX_ENV=prod mix compile --force runs over the same tree: 219 of 243 compiled modules are byte-identical, and the 24 that differ do so only in the Dbgi (debug info) and ExCk (compile metadata) chunks. The Code chunk, the executable bytecode, is identical in all 243 modules, so the compiled behaviour is reproducible. The residual variation is a known property of the BEAM toolchain rather than of this project, and the project already accounts for it: its core policy hash is taken over stripped bytecode for exactly this reason.


  • Installation system


    The project MUST provide a way to easily install and uninstall the software produced by the project using a commonly-used convention. [installation_common]
    Examples include using a package manager (at the system or language level), "make install/uninstall" (supporting DESTDIR), a container in a standard format, or a virtual machine image in a standard format. The installation and uninstallation process (e.g., its packaging) MAY be implemented by a third party as long as it is FLOSS.

    Two conventional paths. A single self-contained binary per platform, built and smoke-tested on Linux, macOS and Windows; and the standard mix path from source, documented in the README. Uninstalling the binary is deleting it, as it carries its own runtime.



    The installation system for end-users MUST honor standard conventions for selecting the location where built artifacts are written to at installation time. For example, if it installs files on a POSIX system it MUST honor the DESTDIR environment variable. If there is no installation system or no standard convention, select "not applicable" (N/A). [installation_standard_variables]

    The software is delivered as a single self-contained binary with no POSIX installation step, so there is no DESTDIR or prefix convention to honour.



    The project MUST provide a way for potential developers to quickly install all the project results and support environment necessary to make changes, including the tests and test environment. This MUST be performed with a commonly-used convention. [installation_development_quick]
    This MAY be implemented using a generated container and/or installation script(s). External dependencies would typically be installed by invoking system and/or language package manager(s), per external_dependencies.

    asdf install reads the pinned toolchain from .tool-versions, then mix setup installs dependencies, creates the database and builds assets; mix test then runs the full suite. Both are commonly-used conventions in this language and both are in the README.


  • Externally-maintained components


    The project MUST list external dependencies in a computer-processable way. (URL required) [external_dependencies]
    Typically this is done using the conventions of package manager and/or build system. Note that this helps implement installation_development_quick.

    Dependencies are listed computer-processably three ways: mix.exs and mix.lock (the language's own machine-readable manifest and lock file), VERSIONS.md with the pin for each and the reason it was chosen, and a CycloneDX software bill of materials generated by the build on every commit and shipped alongside every packaged binary. The bill states its own coverage inside the document. See https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/VERSIONS.md



    Projects MUST monitor or periodically check their external dependencies (including convenience copies) to detect known vulnerabilities, and fix exploitable vulnerabilities or verify them as unexploitable. [dependency_monitoring]
    This can be done using an origin analyzer / dependency checking tool / software composition analysis tool such as OWASP's Dependency-Check, Sonatype's Nexus Auditor, Synopsys' Black Duck Software Composition Analysis, and Bundler-audit (for Ruby). Some package managers include mechanisms to do this. It is acceptable if the components' vulnerability cannot be exploited, but this analysis is difficult and it is sometimes easier to simply update or fix the part.

    mix hex.audit and mix deps.audit run as gate steps on every commit, so a dependency with a known advisory fails the build. Dependabot is enabled for further alerts. Known unfixed advisories in dependencies are recorded in the public risk register with their scope and the condition that would close them, rather than left in an alerts tab.



    The project MUST either:
    1. make it easy to identify and update reused externally-maintained components; or
    2. use the standard components provided by the system or programming language.
    Then, if a vulnerability is found in a reused component, it will be easy to update that component. [updateable_reused_components]
    A typical way to meet this criterion is to use system and programming language package management systems. Many FLOSS programs are distributed with "convenience libraries" that are local copies of standard libraries (possibly forked). By itself, that's fine. However, if the program *must* use these local (forked) copies, then updating the "standard" libraries as a security update will leave these additional copies still vulnerable. This is especially an issue for cloud-based systems; if the cloud provider updates their "standard" libraries but the program won't use them, then the updates don't actually help. See, e.g., "Chromium: Why it isn't in Fedora yet as a proper package" by Tom Callaway.

    Every reused component is a standard Hex package resolved by the language's own package manager, pinned in VERSIONS.md and verified against the lock file by the build. There are no vendored convenience copies of third-party source in the tree.



    The project SHOULD avoid using deprecated or obsolete functions and APIs where FLOSS alternatives are available in the set of technology it uses (its "technology stack") and to a supermajority of the users the project supports (so that users have ready access to the alternative). [interfaces_current]

    Dependencies are tracked to current stable releases and the choice of each is recorded with the date it was measured. A retired package carrying an open cross-site scripting advisory was identified and replaced rather than pinned around.


  • Automated test suite


    An automated test suite MUST be applied on each check-in to a shared repository for at least one branch. This test suite MUST produce a report on test success or failure. [automated_integration_testing]
    This requirement can be viewed as a subset of test_continuous_integration, but focused on just testing, without requiring continuous integration.

    mix gate runs on every push and every pull request, on the shared repository, and reports success or failure as a required check. It runs formatting, a compile with warnings as errors, the architectural boundary check, a release build check, static analysis, dependency and licence audits, the full test suite and a coverage floor.



    The project MUST add regression tests to an automated test suite for at least 50% of the bugs fixed within the last six months. [regression_tests_added50]

    Policy in docs/03-conventions.md: a fixed defect gets a regression test naming it, committed failing first so that it is demonstrated to discriminate, with the fix commit referring to it. Applied well above half: recent examples include a release-only compile failure, a biased random-code generator and a workflow token scope, each of which gained a test in the same change as its fix.



    The project MUST have FLOSS automated test suite(s) that provide at least 80% statement coverage if there is at least one FLOSS tool that can measure this criterion in the selected language. [test_statement_coverage80]
    Many FLOSS tools are available to measure test coverage, including gcov/lcov, Blanket.js, Istanbul, JCov, and covr (R). Note that meeting this criterion is not a guarantee that the test suite is thorough, instead, failing to meet this criterion is a strong indicator of a poor test suite.

    Statement coverage is 80.31%, measured by the language's own coverage tool as part of the build. The figure for every increment is recorded in coverage.tsv in the repository root and the build enforces a floor against it, so a drop fails rather than passes quietly.


  • New functionality testing


    The project MUST have a formal written policy that as major new functionality is added, tests for the new functionality MUST be added to an automated test suite. [test_policy_mandated]

    A written policy, not a habit: the Tests section of docs/03-conventions.md states that major new functionality is accompanied by tests for it in the automated suite, in the same change: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/docs/03-conventions.md



    The project MUST include, in its documented instructions for change proposals, the policy that tests are to be added for major new functionality. [tests_documented_added]
    However, even an informal rule is acceptable as long as the tests are being added in practice.

    CONTRIBUTING.md states the policy in its instructions for change proposals: major new functionality comes with tests in the same change, and a fixed bug gets a regression test naming the defect: https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


  • Warning flags


    Projects MUST be maximally strict with warnings in the software produced by the project, where practical. [warnings_strict]
    Some warnings cannot be effectively enabled on some projects. What is needed is evidence that the project is striving to enable warning flags where it can, so that errors are detected early.

    The build compiles with --warnings-as-errors, so any compiler warning fails it. Credo runs in strict mode with all checks enabled, and the architectural boundary checker is a compile-time enforcement rather than a lint.


 Security 13/13 ●

  • Secure development knowledge


    The project MUST implement secure design principles (from "know_secure_design"), where applicable. If the project is not producing software, select "not applicable" (N/A). [implement_secure_design]
    For example, the project results should have fail-safe defaults (access decisions should deny by default, and projects' installation should be secure by default). They should also have complete mediation (every access that might be limited must be checked for authority and be non-bypassable). Note that in some cases principles will conflict, in which case a choice must be made (e.g., many mechanisms can make things more complex, contravening "economy of mechanism" / keep it simple).

    The assurance case carries a table mapping each classical secure design principle to the specific place in the tree where it is realised, so the claim can be checked rather than believed: economy of mechanism (one side-effect membrane), fail-safe defaults (an unrecognised tool tier asks for approval; no approved algorithm means the effect is refused), complete mediation (approvals are re-derived from a canonical hash of the exact call at execution), least privilege, separation of privilege (identity is separate from authority), open design, and defence in depth. https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/docs/10-assurance-case.md


  • Use basic good cryptographic practices

    Note that some software does not need to use cryptographic mechanisms. If your project produces software that (1) includes, activates, or enables encryption functionality, and (2) might be released from the United States (US) to outside the US or to a non-US-citizen, you may be legally required to take a few extra steps. Typically this just involves sending an email. For more information, see the encryption section of Understanding Open Source Technology & US Export Controls.

    The default security mechanisms within the software produced by the project MUST NOT depend on cryptographic algorithms or modes with known serious weaknesses (e.g., the SHA-1 cryptographic hash algorithm or the CBC mode in SSH). [crypto_weaknesses]
    Concerns about CBC mode in SSH are discussed in CERT: SSH CBC vulnerability.

    No SHA-1, no ECB, and no unauthenticated cipher modes anywhere in the project's own code; a test sweeps the tree for them on every commit. Signatures are Ed25519, or ECDSA P-384 when FIPS mode is enabled; the authenticated-encryption construction is AES-256-GCM. These are measured inside a FIPS-mode container on a dedicated build leg rather than asserted.



    The project SHOULD support multiple cryptographic algorithms, so users can quickly switch if one is broken. Common symmetric key algorithms include AES, Twofish, and Serpent. Common cryptographic hash algorithm alternatives include SHA-2 (including SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384 AND SHA-512) and SHA-3. [crypto_algorithm_agility]

    The signing algorithm enters through a single seam and is selected at boot, with the choice bound by a key registry row rather than by anything embedded in the signed records: Ed25519 by default and ECDSA P-384 under FIPS. Keys can be rotated without changing code, and records name the key that signed them, so a switch does not invalidate what came before.



    The project MUST support storing authentication credentials (such as passwords and dynamic tokens) and private cryptographic keys in files that are separate from other information (such as configuration files, databases, and logs), and permit users to update and replace them without code recompilation. If the project never processes authentication credentials and private cryptographic keys, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_credential_agility]

    Private keys and credentials live in files in the data directory, separate from configuration, databases and logs, and can be replaced without recompiling. The build refuses a commit containing secret material, and tests assert that no token material appears in records or in model context.



    The software produced by the project SHOULD support secure protocols for all of its network communications, such as SSHv2 or later, TLS1.2 or later (HTTPS), IPsec, SFTP, and SNMPv3. Insecure protocols such as FTP, HTTP, telnet, SSLv3 or earlier, and SSHv1 SHOULD be disabled by default, and only enabled if the user specifically configures it. If the software produced by the project does not support network communications, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_used_network]

    All outbound network communication uses TLS through the runtime's own TLS implementation. The floor is TLS 1.2 (the default set is 1.3 and 1.2) and the project does not lower it. This is pinned by a test that asserts the runtime's supported versions rather than the sentence in the README.



    The software produced by the project SHOULD, if it supports or uses TLS, support at least TLS version 1.2. Note that the predecessor of TLS was called SSL. If the software does not use TLS, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_tls12]

    TLS 1.3 and 1.2 are the supported versions; 1.1 and 1.0 are available in the runtime but are not in the default set and the project does not enable them. Asserted by a test against the runtime rather than documented.



    The software produced by the project MUST, if it supports TLS, perform TLS certificate verification by default when using TLS, including on subresources. If the software does not use TLS, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_certificate_verification]

    Certificate verification is on by default for every TLS client in the project. There is no verify_none, and no option disabling verification, anywhere in the tree.



    The software produced by the project MUST, if it supports TLS, perform certificate verification before sending HTTP headers with private information (such as secure cookies). If the software does not use TLS, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_verification_private]

    As above: verification is performed by default on every connection, so it necessarily precedes any request carrying credentials. No code path sends credentials over an unverified connection.


  • Secure release


    The project MUST cryptographically sign releases of the project results intended for widespread use, and there MUST be a documented process explaining to users how they can obtain the public signing keys and verify the signature(s). The private key for these signature(s) MUST NOT be on site(s) used to directly distribute the software to the public. If releases are not intended for widespread use, select "not applicable" (N/A). [signed_releases]
    The project results include both source code and any generated deliverables where applicable (e.g., executables, packages, and containers). Generated deliverables MAY be signed separately from source code. These MAY be implemented as signed git tags (using cryptographic digital signatures). Projects MAY provide generated results separately from tools like git, but in those cases, the separate results MUST be separately signed.

    The project has published no releases. It is pre-alpha and distributed as source; packaged binaries are built and smoke-tested on three operating systems on every change to a packaging input, but none is published for general use. Every packaged artifact already carries build provenance attested through the build workflow's own identity and recorded in a public transparency log, verifiable by whoever holds the binary. Signing releases with a project-held key is scheduled work in the release pipeline (see https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/ROADMAP.md, milestone M6) and will be in place before any release is published.



    It is SUGGESTED that in the version control system, each important version tag (a tag that is part of a major release, minor release, or fixes publicly noted vulnerabilities) be cryptographically signed and verifiable as described in signed_releases. [version_tags_signed]

    Version tags are annotated but not yet cryptographically signed. Planned alongside the release signing pipeline, so that the tag and the artifact it produces are signed by the same held key rather than by two unrelated mechanisms.


  • Other security issues


    The project results MUST check all inputs from potentially untrusted sources to ensure they are valid (an *allowlist*), and reject invalid inputs, if there are any restrictions on the data at all. [input_validation]
    Note that comparing input against a list of "bad formats" (aka a *denylist*) is normally not enough, because attackers can often work around a denylist. In particular, numbers are converted into internal formats and then checked if they are between their minimum and maximum (inclusive), and text strings are checked to ensure that they are valid text patterns (e.g., valid UTF-8, length, syntax, etc.). Some data may need to be "anything at all" (e.g., a file uploader), but these would typically be rare.

    Everything arriving from outside the machine is labelled untrusted at the boundary, carrying its origin, a source reference, a digest and a taint that summaries inherit, and is never treated as instruction. Tool arguments are validated against a declared schema and malformed arguments are denied rather than repaired. Filesystem paths are validated against configured roots and a path escaping its root is rejected rather than normalised. Protocol tokens are validated for issuer, audience, expiry and not-before against an algorithm allow-list.



    Hardening mechanisms SHOULD be used in the software produced by the project so that software defects are less likely to result in security vulnerabilities. [hardening]
    Hardening mechanisms may include HTTP headers like Content Security Policy (CSP), compiler flags to mitigate attacks (such as -fstack-protector), or compiler flags to eliminate undefined behavior. For our purposes least privilege is not considered a hardening mechanism (least privilege is important, but separate).

    Memory-safe languages throughout (Elixir on the BEAM, Rust in the desktop shell, no C or C++ of the project's own). Beyond the language: one compile-time side-effect membrane that runtime-registered code cannot enter, approvals bound to a canonical hash of the exact call, iteration and token and wall-clock caps owned by the code rather than passed in as arguments, and build tokens narrowed to read with writes declared per job.



    The project MUST provide an assurance case that justifies why its security requirements are met. The assurance case MUST include: a description of the threat model, clear identification of trust boundaries, an argument that secure design principles have been applied, and an argument that common implementation security weaknesses have been countered. (URL required) [assurance_case]
    An assurance case is "a documented body of evidence that provides a convincing and valid argument that a specified set of critical claims regarding a system’s properties are adequately justified for a given application in a given environment" ("Software Assurance Using Structured Assurance Case Models", Thomas Rhodes et al, NIST Interagency Report 7608). Trust boundaries are boundaries where data or execution changes its level of trust, e.g., a server's boundaries in a typical web application. It's common to list secure design principles (such as Saltzer and Schroeer) and common implementation security weaknesses (such as the OWASP top 10 or CWE/SANS top 25), and show how each are countered. The BadgeApp assurance case may be a useful example. This is related to documentation_security, documentation_architecture, and implement_secure_design.

    docs/10-assurance-case.md is a structured argument with all four parts this criterion requires: a threat model naming five adversaries and the capability assumed for each, and what is explicitly outside it; the trust boundaries stated rather than referenced; an argument that secure design principles were applied, mapped principle by principle to where each is realised in the tree; and a table of common implementation weakness classes with the counter for each and the limit stated where a counter is incomplete. It then decomposes the top-level claim into ten claims, each with argument, checkable evidence and its limit. https://github.com/ScriptKittyOS/Trinity/blob/main/docs/10-assurance-case.md


 Analysis 2/2 ●

  • Static code analysis


    The project MUST use at least one static analysis tool with rules or approaches to look for common vulnerabilities in the analyzed language or environment, if there is at least one FLOSS tool that can implement this criterion in the selected language. [static_analysis_common_vulnerabilities]
    Static analysis tools that are specifically designed to look for common vulnerabilities are more likely to find them. That said, using any static tools will typically help find some problems, so we are suggesting but not requiring this for the 'passing' level badge.

    Sobelow, a static analysis tool built for this language's web framework and its common vulnerability classes, runs as a gate step on every commit and fails the build on a finding. Credo in strict mode and the compiler with warnings as errors run beside it, and the architectural boundary checker rejects a call that crosses a layer at compile time.


  • Dynamic code analysis


    If the software produced by the project includes software written using a memory-unsafe language (e.g., C or C++), then at least one dynamic tool (e.g., a fuzzer or web application scanner) MUST be routinely used in combination with a mechanism to detect memory safety problems such as buffer overwrites. If the project does not produce software written in a memory-unsafe language, choose "not applicable" (N/A). [dynamic_analysis_unsafe]
    Examples of mechanisms to detect memory safety problems include Address Sanitizer (ASAN) (available in GCC and LLVM), Memory Sanitizer, and valgrind. Other potentially-used tools include thread sanitizer and undefined behavior sanitizer. Widespread assertions would also work.

    The project's own code contains no memory-unsafe language: the application is Elixir on the BEAM and the desktop shell is Rust, both memory-safe, and there is no C or C++ written by this project.



You can use tools and AI systems to propose changes via a simple URL, such as https://www.bestpractices.dev/en/projects/14772/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 Ayla Croft and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Ayla Croft.
Entry created on 2026-09-23 14:16:11 UTC, last updated on 2026-09-24 00:04:30 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2026-09-23 16:09:37 UTC.