hve-squad

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 14231 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/14231/baseline)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14231)
or by embedding this in your HTML:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14231"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14231/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.

    APM package that assembles HVE Core agents, prompts, instructions, and skills into one installable bundle for Copilot target environments, and ships a Squad Coordinator that routes your request to a cast of agents in parallel.

    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 20/24 ●

  • Controls


    Unknown required information, not 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.

    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.

    Collaborator access to this personal GitHub repository requires an explicit owner invitation and acceptance, manually granting the collaborator role rather than automatically elevating public users. This satisfies the manual-assignment alternative: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/repository-access-and-collaboration/inviting-collaborators-to-a-personal-repository.


    Not 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 primary-branch PR ruleset deliberately permits an admin bypass for direct sync/release pushes. Thus direct commits are not prevented for every applicable actor. Route those operations through protected PRs and review the bypass design: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/.github/workflows/squad-watch.yml.


    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 primary branch is covered by deletion protection, and GitHub treats changing/deleting the default branch as an explicit administrative operation. The required branch-protection configuration is documented in the Watch workflow: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/.github/workflows/squad-watch.yml.


    Unknown required information, not 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.

    Unknown required information, not 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.

    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.

    Official project, repository, feedback, and documentation links use HTTPS; the documentation site also sends HSTS. Canonical channels are published at https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/README.md and https://peter-n91.github.io/hve-squad/.


    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.

    Official source releases and APM repository downloads use authenticated HTTPS through GitHub, protecting delivery against adversary-in-the-middle attacks. HTTPS is an accepted mechanism for this baseline control; it does not claim releases are separately signed: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/releases and https://peter-n91.github.io/hve-squad/getting-started.html.


    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.

    Secret scanning with push protection, the blocking Checkov secrets scan, exclusion of consumer-local state/dependencies, and the contribution sanitization checklist provide prevention/detection controls: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/.github/workflows/checkov.yml, https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/.gitignore, and https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md.


    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.

    The project provides installation, configuration, usage, troubleshooting, autonomy-mode, and human-gate guidance for its basic functionality: https://peter-n91.github.io/hve-squad/getting-started.html and https://peter-n91.github.io/hve-squad/usage.html.


    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.

    The contribution guide explains filing a bug, required reproduction information, maintainer triage, and when to use private security reporting instead: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#reporting-a-bug.


    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.

    Public GitHub issues and pull requests support discussion of proposed changes and usage obstacles, with contribution guidance linking those channels: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/issues and https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md.


    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.

    CONTRIBUTING.md documents the fork, branch, change-fragment, pull-request, review, and release process: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#how-contributions-reach-the-package.


    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 project's original source is MIT licensed, an OSI-approved open-source license. Separately fetched upstream content retains its own licenses as explained in NOTICE: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/LICENSE and https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/NOTICE.


    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.

    The current source release includes the MIT license for the project's original assets; external dependency licenses are not replaced by that license: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/v0.18.1/LICENSE and https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/NOTICE.


    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.

    The source license is maintained in the repository-root LICENSE file: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/LICENSE.


    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.

    The tagged release source contains LICENSE alongside the released source assets: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/v0.18.1/LICENSE. The current release has no separately attached compiled assets.


    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.

    The authoritative source repository is publicly readable at the stable URL https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad. README identifies it as the source of truth rather than a generated mirror.


    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.

    Public Git history records source changes, author/committer identity, timestamps, and linked pull requests; squash commits preserve PR references and co-author attribution where supplied: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/commits/main/.


    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.

    Direct language dependencies for the documentation tooling are declared in package.json and resolved in package-lock.json; APM assets are declared in apm.yml, and PowerShell test/scanner module versions are identified in the test/build setup: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/package.json and https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/apm.yml.


    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.

    README's Related repositories section identifies the primary source and the generated MCP/plugin sibling codebases, their intent, and how consumers choose between them: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/README.md#related-repositories. External upstream dependencies are documented separately in NOTICE.


    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.

    The authoritative repository contains reviewable source/scripts rather than generated executable binaries. Installed dependencies, generated plugin/deployed asset trees, node_modules, and the built _site are excluded; generated distributions are built separately: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/.gitignore and https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/scripts/Build-SquadPlugin.ps1.


    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 source tree has no committed native executables, compiled libraries, or equivalent unreviewable program binaries. Binary documentation images, videos, and fonts are media assets, not executable/library artifacts under this control: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/tree/main and https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/.gitignore.


    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.

    SECURITY.md identifies the project's security-reporting contact channel, GitHub's private Report a vulnerability form, which routes reports to the project's security maintainers: https://github.com/Peter-N91/hve-squad/blob/main/SECURITY.md#reporting-a-vulnerability.



You can use tools and AI systems to propose changes via a simple URL, such as https://www.bestpractices.dev/en/projects/14231/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 Peter Nehme and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Peter Nehme.
Entry created on 2026-08-25 06:53:21 UTC, last updated on 2026-10-19 21:45:30 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2026-08-25 08:33:58 UTC.