Wireshark

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 294 is in_progress 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

    Wireshark is a network protocol analyzer. It captures network packets and displays them in a form that humans can understand.

    What programming language(s) are used to implement the project?

  • Basic project website content


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://www.wireshark.org/ says:

    Wireshark is the world's foremost network protocol analyzer. It lets you see what's happening on your network at a microscopic level. It is the de facto (and often de jure) standard across many industries and educational institutions.

    Wireshark development thrives thanks to the contributions of networking experts across the globe. It is the continuation of a project that started in 1998.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Our Q&A site and bug tracker are linked under "Get Help" in the top menu.


    Enough for a badge!

    Habari juu ya jinsi ya kuchangia LAZIMA ieleze mchakato wa uchangiaji (kwa mfano, je! Maombi ya kuvuta yanatumika?) (URL required) [contribution]

    https://www.wireshark.org/develop.html https://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsdg_html_chunked/ChSrcContribute.html#ChSrcSend


    Enough for a badge!

    Habari juu ya jinsi ya kuchangia INAPASWA kujumuisha mahitaji ya michango inayokubalika (k.m., rejeleo la kiwango chochote kinachohitajika cha usimbaji). (URL required) [contribution_requirements]

    We describe our code requirements at https://www.wireshark.org/docs/wsdg_html_chunked/ChSrcContribute.html#ChSrcSend

    We provide additional details in README.developer in the sources.


  • FLOSS license

    What license(s) is the project released under?


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Our sources include a COPYING file at the top of the tree: https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=tree

    Every release includes a source tarball: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-announce/201607/msg00001.html


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=blob;f=COPYING


  • Documentation


    Enough for a badge!

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

    The User's Guide, man pages, and Developer's Guide are available at https://www.wireshark.org/docs/


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Both the User's Guide and the 'wireshark' man page describe the UI.


  • Other


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Given only https: URLs.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Mailing lists: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/

    Q&A site: https://ask.wireshark.org/


    Enough for a badge!

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

    The User's Guide, Developer's Guide, man pages, bug reports, and code review are all in English.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST be maintained. [maintained]


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



  • Public version-controlled source repository


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST have a version-controlled source repository that is publicly readable and has a URL. [repo_public]

    Code review: https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/dashboard/self

    Read-only mirror: https://github.com/wireshark/wireshark


    Enough for a badge!

    The project's source repository MUST track what changes were made, who made the changes, and when the changes were made. [repo_track]

    We use Git, which does all of these. Prior to that we used Subversion and prior to that we used CVS.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Git commits are built continuously using Buildbot: https://buildbot.wireshark.org/wireshark-master/waterfall

    Automated builds, including source tarballs, Windows installers, and macOS installers are available at https://www.wireshark.org/download/automated/


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We use Git.


  • Unique version numbering


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/ReleaseNumbers


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We use Git tags.


  • Release notes


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Release notes are tracked in an AsciiDoc document in the sources. Notes for each release are sent as part of an announcement email and posted on the web site.

    https://www.wireshark.org/docs/relnotes/ https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-announce/201607/msg00001.html


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We request and report CVEs for each vulnerability that we or others find. These are included in the release notes and as separate advisories.


  • Bug-reporting process


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    https://bugs.wireshark.org/


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://bugs.wireshark.org/


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We try to triage and fix bugs as they come in. We also have yearly bug sprints at our conference (Sharkfest).


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Most of these are addressed within a few days of posting.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST have a publicly available archive for reports and responses for later searching. (URL required) [report_archive]

    Bugs are available at https://bugs.wireshark.org


  • Vulnerability report process


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Instructions are at the bottom of https://www.wireshark.org/security/


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    This is noted at the bottom of https://www.wireshark.org/security/


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We typically respond within one or two days.


  • Working build system


    Enough for a badge!

    Ikiwa programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi inahitaji ujenzi wa matumizi, mradi LAZIMA utoe mfumo wa kujenga ambao unaweza kujenga programu kiotomatiki kutoka kwa chanzo-msimbo. [build]

    https://buildbot.wireshark.org/wireshark-master/waterfall


    Enough for a badge!

    INAPENDEKEZWA kuwa zana za kawaida zitumike kujenga programu. [build_common_tools]

    We support building with GNU Autotools, CMake, GCC, Clang, and Visual C++.


    Enough for a badge!

    Mradi UNAPASWA kujengwa kwa kutumia zana za FLOSS pekee yake. [build_floss_tools]

    This is the case for Linux, macOS and other Unix-like systems. Building on Windows requires Visual C++.


  • Automated test suite


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We include a test suite in the "test" directory of the sources.


    Enough for a badge!

    A test suite SHOULD be invocable in a standard way for that language. [test_invocation]

    The test suite is a set of bash scripts.


    Barely enough for a badge.

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

    Tests mainly cover the CLI version of the program. We test the UI, but not most of its features.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Tests are run continuously by Buildbot.


  • New functionality testing


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We do this for the CLI as noted above, but the policy is informal.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Our test directory has had nearly 270 commits in the past 6 months (Mar 22 to Aug 8, 2016)


    Barely enough for a badge.

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

    We simply don't have this documented.


  • Warning flags


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    The master branch has "warnings as errors" compiler flags enabled for GCC, Clang, and Visual C++. We also use Coverity, Clang's scan-build, and the Visual Studio analyzer to look for problems.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST address warnings. [warnings_fixed]

    We do this continuously.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We enable as many compiler warnings as is practical.


  • Secure development knowledge


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Several of our developers are experienced with secure software design. We also cover security in our documentation and in presentations at Sharkfest.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Due to the size and age of our code base, our developers routinely run into these sorts of errors.


  • 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.

    Enough for a badge!

    Programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi LAZIMA itumie, kwa chaguo-msingi, tu itifaki za kriptografia na mifumbo ambazo zimechapishwa hadharani na kukaguliwa na wataalam (ikiwa itifaki za kriptografia na mafumbo imetumika). [crypto_published]

    We use common libraries such as GNUTLS where we can.


    Enough for a badge!

    Ikiwa programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi ni programu au maktaba, na kusudi lake la msingi sio kutekeleza usimbuaji, basi INAPASWA tu kuita programu iliyoundwa kihususa kutekeleza kazi za kielelezo; HAIPASWI kutekeleza-upya shughuli hiyo. [crypto_call]

    We have had to implement our own 802.11 decryption, but that's the primary purpose of the software.


    Enough for a badge!

    Utendaji wote katika programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi ambayo inategemea usimbuaji LAZIMA iweze kutekelezwa kwa kutumia FLOSS. [crypto_floss]

    All of our cryptography code is FLOSS, either our own or separate libraries.


    Enough for a badge!

    Mifumo ya usalama ndani ya programu inayozalishwa na mradi LAZIMA itumie kwa msingi keylengths ambazo angalau zinakidhi mahitaji ya chini ya NIST kufikia mwaka wa 2030 (kama ilivyoelezwa mnamo 2012). LAZIMA iwe rahisi kusanidi programu ili keylengths ndogo zimezimwa kabisa. [crypto_keylength]

    Wireshark itself doesn't rely on cryptography as it is commonly used. Our purpose is to show users network traffic. In some cases we can decrypt the traffic. In some of those cases the mechanisms and keylengths are quite insecure.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Wireshark itself doesn't rely on cryptography as it is commonly used. Our purpose is to show users network traffic. In some cases we can decrypt the traffic. In some of those cases the mechanisms and keylengths are quite insecure.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    Wireshark itself doesn't rely on cryptography as it is commonly used. Our purpose is to show users network traffic. In some cases we can decrypt the traffic. In some of those cases the mechanisms and keylengths are quite insecure.


    Enough for a badge!

    Mifumo ya usalama ndani ya programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi INAPASWA kutekeleza kwa ukamilifu usiri wa umbele ya itifaki za makubaliano ya funguo ili funguo la kipindi kilicho tokana na kikao cha vifungo muda-mrefu haziwezi kuridhi mabaya ikiwa mojawapo ya vifunguo vya muda-mrefu imeridhi mabaya katika usoni. [crypto_pfs]

    Wireshark itself doesn't rely on cryptography as it is commonly used. Our purpose is to show users network traffic. In some cases we can decrypt the traffic. In some of those cases the mechanisms and keylengths are quite insecure.


    Enough for a badge!

    Ikiwa programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi imesababisha uhifadhi wa nywila kwa minajili ya uthibitishaji ya watumiaji wa kutoka nje, nywila LAZIMA zihifadhiwe kwa mficho uliorudiarudia na chumvi kwa kila-mtumiaji kwa kutumia kanuni ya upanuaji (rudiarudia) wa funguo (k.m., Argon2id, Bcrypt, Scrypt, or PBKDF2). Ona pia Kurasadogo ya Uhifadhi wa Nywila la OWASP). [crypto_password_storage]

    Wireshark doesn't depend on any sort of authentication.


    Enough for a badge!

    Mifumo ya usalama ndani ya programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi LAZIMA itoe funguo zote za kriptologia na nonces kwa kutumia kitengeneza cha nambari za bahati kuptia kriptologia salama, na ISIWEZE kufanya hivo kutumia vitengenezi zisizo salama kikriptologia. [crypto_random]

    Wireshark itself doesn't rely on cryptography as it is commonly used. Our purpose is to show users network traffic. In some cases we can decrypt the traffic. In some of those cases the mechanisms and keylengths are quite insecure.


  • Secured delivery against man-in-the-middle (MITM) attacks


    Enough for a badge!

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

    For the servers that we control, downloads are available over HTTPS.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Release announcements are signed using GPG. The signed content includes SHA256, RMD160, SHA1, and MD5 checksums for each of our release packages.


  • Publicly known vulnerabilities fixed


    Not enough for a badge.

    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]

    We have a few bugs found via fuzz testing that are still under discussion and/or will require a significant effort to fix.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We make every effort to do so.


  • Other security issues


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We try to maintain good operational security.


  • Static code analysis


    Enough for a badge!

    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 use Coverity, Clang's scan-build, and the Visual Studio static analyzer.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    I believe Coverity does this.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We look for and fix them as they are reported.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We try to run analysis at least daily, if not for each build. Coverity restricts us to twice a week.


  • Dynamic code analysis


    Enough for a badge!

    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 fuzz test and run our code under Valgrind continuously.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    One of our tools (editcap) can introduce random errors into a packet capture. We use it for continuous fuzzing. Other organizations use other tools such as AFL to test our code and report errors to us.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    We fuzz under Valgrind and under ASAN.


    Enough for a badge!

    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]

    New bug reports are automatically created for fuzz failures. We try to fix new reports as quickly as possible.



This data is available under the Creative Commons Attribution version 3.0 license (CC-BY-3.0) per the terms of use. All are free to share and adapt the data, but must give appropriate credit. Please credit Gerald Combs and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Gerald Combs.
Entry created on 2016-08-15 17:16:38 UTC, last updated on 2016-08-15 18:37:42 UTC.

Back