tfw

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 14047 is in_progress 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/14047/baseline)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14047)
or by embedding this in your HTML:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14047"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14047/baseline"></a>


These are the Baseline Level 1 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 Java framework for building large-scale applications using immutable data structures and transactional state management, with a hierarchical component model inspired by Clemens Szyperski's component-programming principles.

    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 23/24 ●

  • Controls


    Enough for a badge!

    When a user attempts to read or modify a sensitive resource in the project's authoritative repository, the system MUST require the user to complete a multi-factor authentication process. [OSPS-AC-01.01]
    Enforce multi-factor authentication for the project's version control system, requiring collaborators to provide a second form of authentication when accessing sensitive data or modifying repository settings. Passkeys are acceptable for this control.

    TFW's GitHub organization requires two-factor authentication for all organization members and outside collaborators. Access to the authoritative TFW repository therefore requires MFA. The organization enforces this requirement through GitHub's organization-level two-factor authentication policy.


    Enough for a badge!

    When a new collaborator is added, the version control system MUST require manual permission assignment, or restrict the collaborator permissions to the lowest available privileges by default. [OSPS-AC-02.01]
    Most public version control systems are configured in this manner. Ensure the project's version control system always assigns the lowest available permissions to collaborators by default when added, granting additional permissions only when necessary.

    New collaborators are added through GitHub repository permissions, with repository access explicitly granted by a project maintainer. GitHub requires the maintainer to select the collaborator's repository role when granting access, and access is limited to the minimum permissions necessary for the collaborator's responsibilities.


    Enough for a badge!

    When a direct commit is attempted on the project's primary branch, an enforcement mechanism MUST prevent the change from being applied. [OSPS-AC-03.01]
    If the VCS is centralized, set branch protection on the primary branch in the project's VCS. Alternatively, use a decentralized approach, like the Linux kernel's, where changes are first proposed in another repository, and merging changes into the primary repository requires a specific separate act.

    The project's primary branch (master) is protected using GitHub branch protection. The OpenSSF Scorecard Branch-Protection check verifies that the primary branch is protected. This protection prevents direct changes from being applied to the primary branch and requires changes to follow the protected branch workflow.


    Enough for a badge!

    When an attempt is made to delete the project's primary branch, the version control system MUST treat this as a sensitive activity and require explicit confirmation of intent. [OSPS-AC-03.02]
    Set branch protection on the primary branch in the project's version control system to prevent deletion.

    The project's primary branch (master) is protected using GitHub branch protection. The OpenSSF Scorecard Branch-Protection check verifies that the primary branch is protected against deletion. As a result, attempts to delete the primary branch are blocked by the version control system rather than being silently applied.


    Enough for a badge!

    When a CI/CD pipeline operates on untrusted metadata, those parameters MUST be sanitized and validated prior to use in the pipeline. [OSPS-BR-01.01]
    CI/CD pipelines should sanitize (quote, escape or exit on expected values) all metadata inputs which correspond to untrusted sources. This includes data such as branch names, commit messages, tags, pull request titles, and author information.

    TFW's GitHub Actions workflows do not directly interpolate untrusted GitHub metadata into shell commands. Where workflow metadata is used by scripts, it is passed through environment variables or action inputs and handled as data rather than executable shell content. The project's workflows are also checked with zizmor for GitHub Actions security issues, and the current workflows use pinned action commits.


    Enough for a badge!

    When a CI/CD pipeline operates on untrusted code snapshots, it MUST prevent access to privileged CI/CD credentials and assets. [OSPS-BR-01.03]
    CI/CD pipelines should isolate untrusted code snapshots from privileged credentials and assets. In particular, projects should be careful to ensure that workflows which build or execute code prior to review by a collaborator do not have access to CI/CD credentials.

    TFW separates untrusted pull-request code from privileged CI/CD operations. PR workflows run with read-only permissions and do not retain checkout credentials. Pitest results are passed as an artifact to a separate trusted workflow_run workflow, which performs the privileged PR update without checking out or executing PR code. This separation has been validated through successful PR, Dependabot, security scanning, and Pitest runs.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project lists a URI as an official project channel, that URI MUST be exclusively delivered using encrypted channels. [OSPS-BR-03.01]
    Configure the project's websites and version control systems to use encrypted channels such as SSH or HTTPS for data transmission. Ensure all tools and domains referenced in project documentation can only be accessed via encrypted channels.

    TFW's official project channels use HTTPS exclusively. The authoritative GitHub repository, documentation, issues, pull requests, and other project links are accessed through HTTPS URLs. The project does not identify unencrypted HTTP URLs as official project channels. TFW relies on the security controls provided by GitHub rather than operating the project-channel infrastructure itself.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project lists a URI as an official distribution channel, that channel MUST be protected from adversary-in-the-middle attacks using cryptographically authenticated channels. [OSPS-BR-03.02]
    Artifacts distributed by the project should be distributed through channels which ensure integrity and authenticity. Use of HTTPS for downloads, signed releases, or distribution through trusted package managers are all acceptable methods to protect against adversary-in-the-middle attacks.

    TFW distributes its source and release information through GitHub and its Java artifacts through Maven Central. The project's official GitHub repository and release URLs use HTTPS, providing an encrypted and authenticated connection to GitHub. Published Maven artifacts are distributed through Maven Central over its authenticated HTTPS service. TFW relies on the security controls provided by these established hosting and distribution platforms rather than operating the distribution infrastructure itself.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST prevent the unintentional storage of unencrypted sensitive data, such as secrets and credentials, in the version control system. [OSPS-BR-07.01]
    Configure .gitignore or equivalent to exclude files that may contain sensitive information. Use pre-commit hooks and automated scanning tools to detect and prevent the inclusion of sensitive data in commits.

    TFW uses GitHub's Secret Protection and Push Protection for the public TFW repository. Secret Protection provides secret scanning, while Push Protection helps prevent detected secrets from being committed to the repository. The project also keeps credentials and authentication tokens out of source code and uses GitHub's protected secret mechanisms for CI/CD credentials.


    Not enough for a badge.

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include user guides for all basic functionality. [OSPS-DO-01.01]
    Create user guides or documentation for all basic functionality of the project, explaining how to install, configure, and use the project's features. If there are any known dangerous or destructive actions available, include highly-visible warnings.

    No appropriate folder found for documentation basics. [documentation_basics]


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include a guide for reporting defects. [OSPS-DO-02.01]
    It is recommended that projects use their VCS default issue tracker. If an external source is used, ensure that the project documentation and contributing guide clearly and visibly explain how to use the reporting system. It is recommended that project documentation also sets expectations for how defects will be triaged and resolved.

    TFW provides a public defect-reporting mechanism through GitHub Issues in the authoritative TFW repository. Users can report defects, provide supporting information, and discuss the issue with project maintainers through the public issue tracker.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST have one or more mechanisms for public discussions about proposed changes and usage obstacles. [OSPS-GV-02.01]
    Establish one or more mechanisms for public discussions within the project, such as mailing lists, instant messaging, or issue trackers, to facilitate open communication and feedback.

    GitHub supports public discussions on proposed changes (via pull requests) and usage obstacles (via issues).


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST include an explanation of the contribution process, or clearly state that public contributions are not accepted [OSPS-GV-03.01]
    Create a CONTRIBUTING.md or CONTRIBUTING/ directory to outline the contribution process including the steps for submitting changes, and engaging with the project maintainers.

    TFW documents its contribution process in CONTRIBUTING.md. The guide explains when contributors should discuss changes in an issue, when they may proceed directly to a pull request, development and testing requirements, pull-request expectations, code-quality requirements, security reporting, commit messages, and the review process.


    Enough for a badge!

    The license for the source code MUST meet the OSI Open Source Definition or the FSF Free Software Definition. [OSPS-LE-02.01]
    Add a LICENSE file to the project's repo with a license that is an approved license by the Open Source Initiative (OSI), or a free license as approved by the Free Software Foundation (FSF). Examples of such licenses include the MIT, BSD 2-clause, BSD 3-clause revised, Apache 2.0, Lesser GNU General Public License (LGPL), and the GNU General Public License (GPL). Releasing to the public domain meets this control if there are no other encumbrances such as patents.

    The MIT license for the repository contents is approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI).


    Enough for a badge!

    The license for the released software assets MUST meet the OSI Open Source Definition or the FSF Free Software Definition. [OSPS-LE-02.02]
    If a different license is included with released software assets, ensure it is an approved license by the Open Source Initiative (OSI), or a free license as approved by the Free Software Foundation (FSF). Examples of such licenses include the MIT, BSD 2-clause, BSD 3-clause revised, Apache 2.0, Lesser GNU General Public License (LGPL), and the GNU General Public License (GPL). Note that the license for the released software assets may be different than the source code.

    TFW releases its Java artifacts under the MIT License, the same OSI-approved license used for the project's source code. The released artifacts are published to Maven Central from the TFW project, and the project documentation identifies the MIT License as the license governing the software.


    Enough for a badge!

    The license for the source code MUST be maintained in the corresponding repository's LICENSE file, COPYING file, LICENSES/ directory, or LICENSE/ directory. [OSPS-LE-03.01]
    Include the project's source code license in the project's LICENSE file, COPYING file, LICENSES/ directory, or LICENSE/ directory to provide visibility and clarity on the licensing terms. The filename MAY have an extension. If the project has multiple repositories, ensure that each repository includes the license file.

    License file found in repository.


    Enough for a badge!

    The license for the released software assets MUST be included in the released source code, or in a LICENSE file, COPYING file, or LICENSE/ directory alongside the corresponding release assets. [OSPS-LE-03.02]
    Include the project's released software assets license in the released source code, or in a LICENSE file, COPYING file, or LICENSE/ directory alongside the corresponding release assets to provide visibility and clarity on the licensing terms. The filename MAY have an extension. If the project has multiple repositories, ensure that each repository includes the license file.

    TFW is released under the MIT License. The authoritative license file is maintained in the repository at https://github.com/tfw-org/tfw/blob/master/LICENSE.md. The released main JAR also includes the same LICENSE.md file, so the license accompanies the released software artifact.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project's source code repository MUST be publicly readable at a static URL. [OSPS-QA-01.01]
    Use a common VCS such as GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket. Ensure the repository is publicly readable. Avoid duplication or mirroring of repositories unless highly visible documentation clarifies the primary source. Avoid frequent changes to the repository that would impact the repository URL. Ensure the repository is public.

    Repository is publicly available on GitHub.


    Enough for a badge!

    The version control system MUST contain a publicly readable record of all changes made, who made the changes, and when the changes were made. [OSPS-QA-01.02]
    Use a common VCS such as GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket to maintain a publicly readable commit history. Avoid squashing or rewriting commits in a way that would obscure the author of any commits.

    Repository git metadata is publicly available on GitHub.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the package management system supports it, the source code repository MUST contain a dependency list that accounts for the direct language dependencies. [OSPS-QA-02.01]
    This may take the form of a package manager or language dependency file that enumerates all direct dependencies such as package.json, Gemfile, or go.mod.

    The project uses Maven for dependency management and the source repository contains a pom.xml that explicitly declares its direct Java dependencies. GitHub's Dependency Graph successfully parses this manifest and identifies the project's direct dependencies separately from transitive dependencies. The project also configures the CycloneDX Maven plugin to generate SBOMs, and the released artifacts include the SBOM in both JSON and XML formats. Together, the Maven POM, GitHub Dependency Graph, and published SBOM provide a machine-readable dependency inventory accounting for the project's direct language dependencies.


    Enough for a badge!

    Projects with multiple repositories MUST document a list of codebases that are part of the project. [OSPS-QA-04.01]
    Document any additional subproject code repositories produced by the project and compiled into a release. This documentation should include the status and intent of the respective codebase.

    The TFW project has two repositories, documented in the README. "tfw" contains the TFW framework and release code. "tfw-fuzzing" contains only ClusterFuzzLite fuzzing corpus data and does not contain source code or components used to build TFW.


    Enough for a badge!

    The version control system MUST NOT contain generated executable artifacts. [OSPS-QA-05.01]
    Remove generated executable artifacts in the project's version control system. It is recommended that any scenario where a generated executable artifact appears critical to a process such as testing, it should be instead be generated at build time or stored separately and fetched during a specific well-documented pipeline step.

    OpenSSF Scorecard v5.5.0 reports Binary-Artifacts = 10/10 for github.com/tfw-org/tfw, indicating that no generated executable/binary artifacts are present in the source repository. The repository also excludes Maven build output (target/) and compiled Java class files (*.class) through .gitignore. Generated release artifacts are instead produced by the build and published separately to Maven Central. Therefore, the active version-control repository does not contain generated executable artifacts.


    Enough for a badge!

    The version control system MUST NOT contain unreviewable binary artifacts. [OSPS-QA-05.02]
    Do not add any unreviewable binary artifacts to the project's version control system. This includes executable application binaries, library files, and similar artifacts. It does not include assets such as graphical images, sound or music files, and similar content typically stored in a binary format.

    The active TFW source repository does not contain unreviewable binary artifacts. TFW is maintained as a Java/Maven source repository, with the source code and Maven build configuration stored in version control and generated build artifacts excluded (target/ and *.class). Generated release artifacts are produced by the build and published separately to Maven Central rather than committed to the source repository. The OpenSSF Scorecard v5.5.0 report for TFW also gives the Binary-Artifacts check a score of 10/10, providing independent evidence that the source repository does not contain generated binary artifacts. Therefore, the active version-control repository does not contain binary artifacts that would prevent meaningful source review.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST contain security contacts. [OSPS-VM-02.01]
    Create a security.md (or similarly-named) file that contains security contacts for the project.

    The project documentation contains a dedicated SECURITY.md file that identifies the project's security contact. The file identifies @jdcove2 as the TFW project maintainer and provides instructions for privately reporting security vulnerabilities through GitHub's private vulnerability reporting mechanism.
    Evidence: https://github.com/tfw-org/tfw/blob/master/SECURITY.md



You can use tools and AI systems to propose changes via a simple URL, such as https://www.bestpractices.dev/en/projects/14047/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 jdcove2 and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: jdcove2.
Entry created on 2026-08-13 02:02:07 UTC, last updated on 2026-09-12 22:32:55 UTC.