Dolibarr ERP CRM

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.

If this is your project, please show your badge status on your project page! The badge status looks like this: Badge level for project 5521 is passing Here is how to embed it:

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

        

 Basics 13/13

  • Identification

    Dolibarr ERP CRM is a modern software package to manage your company or foundation's activity (contacts, suppliers, invoices, orders, stocks, agenda, accounting, ...). It is open source software (written in PHP) and designed for small and medium businesses, foundations and freelancers. You can freely install, use and distribute it as a standalone application or as a web application to use it from every internet access and media.

    What programming language(s) are used to implement the project?
  • Basic project website content


    The project website MUST succinctly describe what the software does (what problem does it solve?). [description_good]

    The project website MUST provide information on how to: obtain, provide feedback (as bug reports or enhancements), and contribute to the software. [interact]

    Entry points are at bottom of the Home page: https://www.dolibarr.org (several links exists to point to the good information)



    La información sobre cómo contribuir DEBE explicar el proceso de contribución (por ejemplo, ¿se utilizan "pull requests" en el proyecto?) (URL required) [contribution]

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

    The CONTRIBUTING.md mention this link hat store all our coding standard: https://wiki.dolibarr.org/index.php?title=Developer_documentation


  • FLOSS license

    What license(s) is the project released under?



    The software produced by the project MUST be released as FLOSS. [floss_license]

    The GPL-3.0-or-later license is approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI).



    It is SUGGESTED that any required license(s) for the software produced by the project be approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI). [floss_license_osi]

    All the code and dependencies are GPL or a license compatible with GPL and approved by OSI. The GPL-3.0-or-later license is approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI).



    The project MUST post the license(s) of its results in a standard location in their source repository. (URL required) [license_location]

    Non-trivial license location file in repository: https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/blob/develop/COPYING.


  • Documentation


    The project MUST provide basic documentation for the software produced by the project. [documentation_basics]

    The project MUST provide reference documentation that describes the external interface (both input and output) of the software produced by the project. [documentation_interface]

    The documentation code for core is at https://doxygen.dolibarr.org The documentation of interfaces API are embedded with application at url http://yourdolibarrurl/api/index.php/explorer (the documentation is dynamically updated according to the setup of installation).


  • Other


    The project sites (website, repository, and download URLs) MUST support HTTPS using TLS. [sites_https]

    Given only https: URLs.



    The project MUST have one or more mechanisms for discussion (including proposed changes and issues) that are searchable, allow messages and topics to be addressed by URL, enable new people to participate in some of the discussions, and do not require client-side installation of proprietary software. [discussion]

    Discussion for dev is on github issue and PR issues. Other kind of discussion are on forums https://www.dolibarr.org/forums



    The project SHOULD provide documentation in English and be able to accept bug reports and comments about code in English. [english]

    English is official language for code comments and bug report (even if community is mostly french and spanish speaking).



    The project MUST be maintained. [maintained]


(Advanced) What other users have additional rights to edit this badge entry? Currently: []



  • Repositorio público para el control de versiones de código fuente


    El proyecto DEBE tener un repositorio público para el control de versiones de código fuente que sea legible públicamente y tenga URL. [repo_public]

    Repository on GitHub, which provides public git repositories with URLs.



    El repositorio fuente del proyecto DEBE rastrear qué cambios se realizaron, quién realizó los cambios y cuándo se realizaron los cambios. [repo_track]

    Repository on GitHub, which uses git. git can track the changes, who made them, and when they were made.



    To enable collaborative review, the project's source repository MUST include interim versions for review between releases; it MUST NOT include only final releases. [repo_interim]

    Each version has a tag and interim version for next release is available on branch "develop" that is public too. For maintenance version, interim code can be reach by using the name of the branch (for example branch 14.0 will contains interim version for version 14.0.5 if last release was 14.0.4)



    It is SUGGESTED that common distributed version control software be used (e.g., git) for the project's source repository. [repo_distributed]

    Repository on GitHub, which uses git. git is distributed.


  • Numeración única de versión


    The project results MUST have a unique version identifier for each release intended to be used by users. [version_unique]

    It is SUGGESTED that the Semantic Versioning (SemVer) or Calendar Versioning (CalVer) version numbering format be used for releases. It is SUGGESTED that those who use CalVer include a micro level value. [version_semver]


    It is SUGGESTED that projects identify each release within their version control system. For example, it is SUGGESTED that those using git identify each release using git tags. [version_tags]

    The tag is automatically added by our script that build the release (so no way to forget it). This script is embedded into the directory dev/build/ with the sources.


  • Notas de lanzamiento


    The project MUST provide, in each release, release notes that are a human-readable summary of major changes in that release to help users determine if they should upgrade and what the upgrade impact will be. The release notes MUST NOT be the raw output of a version control log (e.g., the "git log" command results are not release notes). Projects whose results are not intended for reuse in multiple locations (such as the software for a single website or service) AND employ continuous delivery MAY select "N/A". (URL required) [release_notes]

    Non-trivial release notes file in repository: https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/blob/develop/ChangeLog. The release note is also generated by the script that build the release so no way to forget a change.



    The release notes MUST identify every publicly known run-time vulnerability fixed in this release that already had a CVE assignment or similar when the release was created. This criterion may be marked as not applicable (N/A) if users typically cannot practically update the software themselves (e.g., as is often true for kernel updates). This criterion applies only to the project results, not to its dependencies. If there are no release notes or there have been no publicly known vulnerabilities, choose N/A. [release_notes_vulns]

    When we commit a fix, the title of fix (re-used into the changelog) mention the CVE that it fixes. Example with this PR: https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/pull/6830


  • Bug-reporting process


    The project MUST provide a process for users to submit bug reports (e.g., using an issue tracker or a mailing list). (URL required) [report_process]

    Link with the bug tracker is provided on bottom of Home page https://www.dolibarr.org that points to this page: https://www.dolibarr.org/bugs-manager.php



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

    The project MUST acknowledge a majority of bug reports submitted in the last 2-12 months (inclusive); the response need not include a fix. [report_responses]


    The project SHOULD respond to a majority (>50%) of enhancement requests in the last 2-12 months (inclusive). [enhancement_responses]

    Currently only 20 PR open (recently) on 14 000+ PR submitted.



    El proyecto DEBE tener un archivo públicamente disponible para informes y respuestas para búsquedas posteriores. (URL required) [report_archive]

    The PR and discussion around them are publicly available at https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/pulls


  • Proceso de informe de vulnerabilidad


    The project MUST publish the process for reporting vulnerabilities on the project site. (URL required) [vulnerability_report_process]

    Link with process is provided on web site on the entry page for Developer documentation https://www.dolibarr.org/developer-documentation.php Link is link "Security information"



    If private vulnerability reports are supported, the project MUST include how to send the information in a way that is kept private. (URL required) [vulnerability_report_private]

    The chapter "Reporting a Vulnerability" into the file https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/blob/develop/SECURITY.md explain different way to report privately a vulnerability.



    The project's initial response time for any vulnerability report received in the last 6 months MUST be less than or equal to 14 days. [vulnerability_report_response]

    The project leader has a look on channel for security report every 5 open days or less.


  • Working build system


    Si el software generado por el proyecto requiere ser construido para su uso, el proyecto DEBE proporcionar un sistema de compilación que pueda satisfactoriamente reconstruir automáticamente el software a partir del código fuente. [build]

    The tool to build package is available with sources into https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/blob/develop/build/makepack-dolibarr.pl The README https://github.com/Dolibarr/dolibarr/blob/develop/build/README explain how to use it.



    Se SUGIERE que se utilicen herramientas comunes para construir el software. [build_common_tools]

    We are using our own script in Perl because we need to build package using different format / standard. But our command line tools then use the common tools for each target (rpm for redhat package, dpkg for Debian/ubuntu, tar for manual zip package, ...)



    El proyecto DEBERÍA ser construible usando solo herramientas FLOSS. [build_floss_tools]

    We are using our own script in Perl because we need to build package using different format / standard. But our command line tools then use the common tools for each target (rpm for redhat package, dpkg for Debian/ubuntu, tar for manual zip package, ...)


  • Automated test suite


    The project MUST use at least one automated test suite that is publicly released as FLOSS (this test suite may be maintained as a separate FLOSS project). The project MUST clearly show or document how to run the test suite(s) (e.g., via a continuous integration (CI) script or via documentation in files such as BUILD.md, README.md, or CONTRIBUTING.md). [test]

    The test suite is available into directory test/phpunit. A readme is available to explain how to launch it locally.



    Un conjunto de pruebas DEBERÍA ser invocable de forma estándar para ese lenguaje. [test_invocation]

    There is no really standard for php language to run a test suite. We are using phpunit but there is no "entry point" to launch it. So we provide a README into dir test to know how to launch it.



    It is SUGGESTED that the test suite cover most (or ideally all) the code branches, input fields, and functionality. [test_most]

    test coverage covers mots frequently used code but few only uncommon features.



    It is SUGGESTED that the project implement continuous integration (where new or changed code is frequently integrated into a central code repository and automated tests are run on the result). [test_continuous_integration]

    Each PR is ran throw the CTI travis to execute unit test and result is a condition to merge the PR


  • New functionality testing


    The project MUST have a general policy (formal or not) that as major new functionality is added to the software produced by the project, tests of that functionality should be added to an automated test suite. [test_policy]

    New features are mostly build with a tool called "modulebuilder" embedded with application. This tool automatically generated the tests on it. So it is an automatic policy however, there is no document that describe this (so i will se "Unmet" for the point "It is SUGGESTED that this policy be documented"...



    The project MUST have evidence that the test_policy for adding tests has been adhered to in the most recent major changes to the software produced by the project. [tests_are_added]

    The tests are embedded with the sources of application and they are included into the same PR than the feature. No documentation exists to ask this way of working but it is the common way it works like this.



    It is SUGGESTED that this policy on adding tests (see test_policy) be documented in the instructions for change proposals. [tests_documented_added]

    New features are mostly build with a tool called "modulebuilder" embedded with application. This tool automatically generated the tests on it. So it is an automatic policy however, there is no document that describe this. So i set this point "Unmet"


  • Banderas de advertencia


    The project MUST enable one or more compiler warning flags, a "safe" language mode, or use a separate "linter" tool to look for code quality errors or common simple mistakes, if there is at least one FLOSS tool that can implement this criterion in the selected language. [warnings]

    We are using a separate linter tool. This tool has be developed as a command line tool bu ourself so we can implement more powerful rules that generic tool for php (that we are using too). Profiles or config files for such tools are embedded with code into dev/xxx directory (where xxx is the tool)



    El proyecto DEBE abordar las advertencias. [warnings_fixed]

    We have set all "warning" as "errors" or have disabled the one we accept into the config files that are embedded with code into dev/xxx directory (where xxx is the tool)



    It is SUGGESTED that projects be maximally strict with warnings in the software produced by the project, where practical. [warnings_strict]

    We do not accept warning. If this is something we think we can, it has been disabled by setup, if we think it is a real warning, we have set warning as "errors" that block the release.


  • Conocimiento de desarrollo seguro


    The project MUST have at least one primary developer who knows how to design secure software. (See ‘details’ for the exact requirements.) [know_secure_design]

    The core developers contains several developers (some of them were old hacker). See what we did for security here: https://wiki.dolibarr.org/index.php?title=Security_information#Features



    At least one of the project's primary developers MUST know of common kinds of errors that lead to vulnerabilities in this kind of software, as well as at least one method to counter or mitigate each of them. [know_common_errors]

    Core developer are helped by a security companies (Yogosha) specialized in finding security bug to be trained on technic to fix such troubles.


  • Use buenas prácticas criptográficas

    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 software produced by the project MUST use, by default, only cryptographic protocols and algorithms that are publicly published and reviewed by experts (if cryptographic protocols and algorithms are used). [crypto_published]


    Si el software producido por el proyecto es una aplicación o una librería, y su propósito principal no es implementar criptografía, entonces DEBE SOLAMENTE invocar un software específicamente diseñado para implementar funciones criptográficas; NO DEBERÍA volver a implementar el suyo. [crypto_call]


    All functionality in the software produced by the project that depends on cryptography MUST be implementable using FLOSS. [crypto_floss]

    All dependencies of project are FLOSS.



    The security mechanisms within the software produced by the project MUST use default keylengths that at least meet the NIST minimum requirements through the year 2030 (as stated in 2012). It MUST be possible to configure the software so that smaller keylengths are completely disabled. [crypto_keylength]

    Implemented with v15+



    The default security mechanisms within the software produced by the project MUST NOT depend on broken cryptographic algorithms (e.g., MD4, MD5, single DES, RC4, Dual_EC_DRBG), or use cipher modes that are inappropriate to the context, unless they are necessary to implement an interoperable protocol (where the protocol implemented is the most recent version of that standard broadly supported by the network ecosystem, that ecosystem requires the use of such an algorithm or mode, and that ecosystem does not offer any more secure alternative). The documentation MUST describe any relevant security risks and any known mitigations if these broken algorithms or modes are necessary for an interoperable protocol. [crypto_working]

    Old hash functions were replaced with password-hash several years ago.



    The default security mechanisms within the software produced by the project SHOULD 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]


    The security mechanisms within the software produced by the project SHOULD implement perfect forward secrecy for key agreement protocols so a session key derived from a set of long-term keys cannot be compromised if one of the long-term keys is compromised in the future. [crypto_pfs]


    If the software produced by the project causes the storing of 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). See also OWASP Password Storage Cheat Sheet. [crypto_password_storage]

    Using password-hash for password hash, so the salt is per password.



    The security mechanisms within the software produced by the project MUST generate all cryptographic keys and nonces using a cryptographically secure random number generator, and MUST NOT do so using generators that are cryptographically insecure. [crypto_random]

  • Entrega garantizada contra ataques de hombre en el medio (MITM)


    The project MUST use a delivery mechanism that counters MITM attacks. Using https or ssh+scp is acceptable. [delivery_mitm]

    Delivery is done using git clone or packages of we are provided a signature file to check if a MITM was done. The signature file is both available with package but also online.



    A cryptographic hash (e.g., a sha1sum) MUST NOT be retrieved over http and used without checking for a cryptographic signature. [delivery_unsigned]

    The signature file is available over https.


  • Vulnerabilidades públicamente conocidas corregidas


    There MUST be no unpatched vulnerabilities of medium or higher severity that have been publicly known for more than 60 days. [vulnerabilities_fixed_60_days]


    Projects SHOULD fix all critical vulnerabilities rapidly after they are reported. [vulnerabilities_critical_fixed]

    According to yogosha (the platform we used to fix security bugs), average delay to fix vulnerability is < 7 days.


  • Otros problemas de seguridad


    The public repositories MUST NOT leak a valid private credential (e.g., a working password or private key) that is intended to limit public access. [no_leaked_credentials]

    Some tools are checking we don't leak such credential into public repositories.


  • Análisis estático de código


    At least one static code analysis tool (beyond compiler warnings and "safe" language modes) MUST be applied to any proposed major production release of the software before its release, if there is at least one FLOSS tool that implements this criterion in the selected language. [static_analysis]

    We are using phpcs + phplint for static analysis tool



    It is SUGGESTED that at least one of the static analysis tools used for the static_analysis criterion include rules or approaches to look for common vulnerabilities in the analyzed language or environment. [static_analysis_common_vulnerabilities]

    We have developed our own static analytics tool to look for common vulnerabilities (based on custom phpunit files)



    All medium and higher severity exploitable vulnerabilities discovered with static code analysis MUST be fixed in a timely way after they are confirmed. [static_analysis_fixed]


    It is SUGGESTED that static source code analysis occur on every commit or at least daily. [static_analysis_often]

  • Dynamic code analysis


    It is SUGGESTED that at least one dynamic analysis tool be applied to any proposed major production release of the software before its release. [dynamic_analysis]

    We are using scrutinize



    It is SUGGESTED that 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) 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]


    It is SUGGESTED that the project use a configuration for at least some dynamic analysis (such as testing or fuzzing) which enables many assertions. In many cases these assertions should not be enabled in production builds. [dynamic_analysis_enable_assertions]

    It is possible to enable a mode on a develop environment to make testing and fuzzing easier (for example, option $dolibarr_authentication_mode can be set to "forceuser" so it is easy to setup tools to login to application).



    All medium and higher severity exploitable vulnerabilities discovered with dynamic code analysis MUST be fixed in a timely way after they are confirmed. [dynamic_analysis_fixed]


This data is available under the Creative Commons Attribution version 3.0 or later license (CC-BY-3.0+). All are free to share and adapt the data, but must give appropriate credit. Please credit Laurent Destailleur and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Laurent Destailleur.
Entry created on 2022-01-11 14:24:52 UTC, last updated on 2022-01-11 15:54:19 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2022-01-11 15:54:19 UTC.

Back