pixel

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 15211 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/15211/baseline)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/15211)
or by embedding this in your HTML:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/15211"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/15211/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.

    A tool that replaces everything that can be deterministic in repository work: search, symbols, callers, task scope, history, review and Git from one local CLI, so your AI coding agent spends its tokens on the hard part.

    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.

    The repository's default GITHUB_TOKEN permission is read-only, and every workflow declares minimal permissions at the top level, granting write access only to the job that needs it.


    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.

    Each release has a unique Semantic Versioning number, tagged vX.Y.Z (tags are immutable by repository ruleset) and printed by pixel --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".

    Each release's notes are its CHANGELOG.md section (Keep a Changelog), grouped as Added/Changed/Fixed/Security.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md


    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.

    Dependencies are resolved by Cargo from Cargo.toml and a committed Cargo.lock, release builds use --locked, and Dependabot proposes updates.


    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 release archive, Linux bottle and install.sh carries a signed SLSA build-provenance attestation, and each archive ships with its SHA-256 checksum; verification steps are in SECURITY.md.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/SECURITY.md#verifying-a-release


    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 documents the dependency policy: Cargo with a committed lockfile, cargo-deny (deny.toml) on every pull request for advisories, licenses and sources, and Dependabot for updates.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#gates-run-before-every-pr


    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.

    CONTRIBUTING.md lists the prerequisites (Rust toolchain, system packages) and the build commands, including feature flags.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#build


    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.

    GOVERNANCE.md lists the maintainers and, for each sensitive resource (organization and repository settings, repository secrets, release tags and signing, the Homebrew tap, private vulnerability reports), who holds it.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md


    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.

    GOVERNANCE.md describes the maintainers' roles and responsibilities (review and merge, release, security, dependencies and CI, project board) and what contributor write access covers.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md


    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 has a "Definition of done" checklist for pull requests: tests, Clippy with warnings denied, formatting, cargo-deny, mutation testing, changelog fragment, documentation and Conventional Commits.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#definition-of-done


    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.

    Pixel does not require a per-commit sign-off (DCO). Contributions are made under the repository's MIT license through GitHub's terms of service (section D.6, "inbound = outbound"), which every contributor accepts when opening a pull request. The project has two maintainers and a small number of outside contributors, who work from forks and whose pull requests a maintainer must approve; a per-commit sign-off would add friction (history rewrites for any unsigned commit, including AI-agent commits) without a legal need the license and GitHub's terms do not already cover. We will adopt the DCO if the contributor base grows or a downstream consumer requires it.


    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 main branch ruleset requires the Record the green verdict and Dependency policy (cargo-deny) status checks to pass before a pull request merges; maintainers can only bypass explicitly, through GitHub's bypass option.


    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.

    Every pull request runs the full test suite (cargo nextest), Clippy, MSRV, cargo-deny and mutation testing in GitHub Actions, and the main branch only accepts changes through pull requests.


    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.

    ARCHITECTURE.md describes every crate, the daemon and its wire contract, the request path from the CLI, on-disk state, and what pixel install writes for each agent.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/ARCHITECTURE.md


    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 command surface (every subcommand, kept in sync with pixel --help by a test), the JSON envelope and the daemon socket contract are documented in ARCHITECTURE.md and at https://pixel-cli.dev/docs


    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 records the security assessment: trust boundaries (daemon socket permissions, planted history database, sidecar files, command and path injection, network access) and known limitations, alongside CodeQL and OpenSSF Scorecard in CI.

    URL: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/blob/main/SECURITY.md#security-model


    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 sets the coordinated disclosure process: private report through a GitHub security advisory, never a public issue, with a first response within 48 hours.


    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.

    Private vulnerability reporting is enabled on the repository; SECURITY.md links it: https://github.com/Pixel-CLI/pixel/security/advisories/new


    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.

    Fixed vulnerabilities are published as GitHub security advisories and in the Security section of each release's notes in CHANGELOG.md.



You can use tools and AI systems to propose changes via a simple URL, such as https://www.bestpractices.dev/en/projects/15211/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 Navid EMAD and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Navid EMAD.
Entry created on 2026-10-04 11:49:04 UTC, last updated on 2026-10-04 19:27:30 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2026-10-04 17:27:31 UTC.