modonome

遵循以下最佳实践的项目将能够自愿的自我认证,并显示他们已经实现了核心基础设施计划(OpenSSF)徽章。

没有一套可以保证软件永远不会有缺陷或漏洞的做法;如果规范或假设是错误的,即使合适的方法也可能失败。也没有哪些做法可以保证一个项目能够维持健康和运作良好的开发者社区。但是,遵循最佳做法可以帮助改善项目的成果。例如,一些做法可以在发布之前进行多人评估,这可以帮助您找到其他难以找到的技术漏洞,并帮助建立信任,并希望不同公司的开发人员之间进行重复的交互。要获得徽章,必须满足所有“必须”和“禁止”的条款,满足所有“应该”条款或有合适的理由,所有“建议”条款必须满足或未满足(至少希望考虑)。欢迎通过 GitHub网站创建问题或提出请求进行反馈。另外还有一个一般讨论邮件列表

如果这是您的项目,请在您的项目页面上显示您的徽章状态!徽章状态如下所示: 项目13362的徽章级别为in_progress 这里是如何嵌入它:
您可以通过将其嵌入在您的Markdown文件中:
[![OpenSSF Best Practices](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/13362/badge)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/13362)
或将其嵌入到HTML中来显示您的徽章状态:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/13362"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/13362/badge"></a>


这些是黄金级别条款。您还可以查看通过白银级别条款。

Baseline Series: 基准等级1 基准等级2 基准等级3

        

 基本 2/5

  • 常规

    请注意,其他项目可能使用相同的名称。

    Governed autonomy for software repositories. An off-by-default autonomous engineer that adopts a repo's rules, proposes small reviewable changes, and structurally prevents autonomous agents from gaming quality gates by running the enforcement ratchet in CI outside the agent's write scope.

    请使用 SPDX许可证表达格式;例子包括“Apache-2.0”,“BSD-2-Clause”,“BSD-3-Clause”,“GPL-2.0+”,“LGPL-3.0 +”,“MIT”和“(BSD-2-Clause OR Ruby)”。
    如果有多种语言,请将它们列为逗号分隔值(可选空格),并将它们从最多到最少使用。如果有长列表,请至少列出前三个最常见的列表。如果没有语言(例如,这是仅文档或仅测试项目),请使用单个字符“ - ”。请使用每种语言的常规大小写,例如“JavaScript”。
    通用平台枚举(CPE)是用于信息技术系统,软件和软件包的结构化命名方案。在报告漏洞时,它可用于多个系统和数据库。

    Modonome is a prompt plus a set of enforcing scripts with zero runtime npm dependencies. It ships with AgentProof, a portable 16-scenario adversarial benchmark that machine-verifies all governance controls hold under attack (scoring 16/16 GOVERNED). Every arming lever defaults to off; autonomy cannot be enabled from a file the agent can write. The project targets teams that want to run autonomous coding agents under provable governance constraints rather than prompt-only promises.

  • 先决条件


    该项目必须拥有银级徽章。 [achieve_silver]

  • 项目监督


    项目必须具有2个或更多的“公交车因子”。 (需要网址) [bus_factor]
    “公交车系数”(又名“卡车因子”)是指最少数量的项目成员,如果突然离开项目(“被公交车撞了”),项目会由于缺乏具备知识的或有能力的人员而暂停。 卡车因子 工具可以对GitHub上的项目进行估计。有关详细信息,请参阅Cosentino等人的评估Git存储库的卡车因子

    o. The project currently documents itself as single-maintainer, so the bus factor is below 2. See https://github.com/enumind/modonome and the repo’s compliance evidence at docs/compliance/openssf-badge-evidence.md.



    该项目必须至少有两个不相关的重要贡献者。 (需要网址) [contributors_unassociated]
    如果同一组织(作为雇员或承包商)支付工作费用,并且组织将从项目的结果中受益,则贡献者是相关联的。如果通过其他组织得到财务补助(例如,源自政府或非政府组织,支付给不同组织的科学补助金不会导致捐助者关联),不视为来自同一组织。重要贡献者定义为过去一年对项目做出了不平凡的贡献。一个重要贡献者的良好指标的例子是:编写至少1,000行代码,贡献50个提交或至少提交20页的文档。

    No. Under the OpenSSF definition, we do not currently have evidence of 2 unassociated significant contributors in the past year. The project is currently documented as single-maintainer; see https://github.com/enumind/modonome and docs/compliance/openssf-badge-evidence.md.


  • 其他


    项目必须在每个源文件中包含许可证声明。这可以通过在每个文件开头附近的注释中加入以下内容来实现: SPDX-License-Identifier: [SPDX license expression for project][license_per_file]
    这可以通过在自然语言中包含许可证标识来完成。该项目还可以包括完整许可证文本,或者指向许可证文本的稳定URL。请注意,license_location条款要求项目许可证在标准位置。有关SPDX许可证表达式的更多信息,请参阅SPDX教程。请注意与 copyright_per_file 的关系,其内容通常在许可证信息之前。

    Copyright & License Headers:* Added to all 58 source files


 变更控制 4/4

  • 公开的版本控制的源代码存储库


    必须使用通用的分布式版本控制软件(例如,git,mercurial)作为项目的源代码存储库。 [repo_distributed]
    Git不是必须,项目在合适场景可以使用集中版本控制软件(如subversion)。

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



    该项目必须清楚地识别新的或临时贡献者可以执行的小型任务。 (需要网址) [small_tasks]
    此标识通常通过在项目使用的一个或多个标签的问题跟踪器中标记所选问题来完成,例如 up- for-grabs 仅限第一时间,“小修复”,微任务或IdealFirstBug。这些新任务不需要添加功能;他们可以改进文档,添加测试用例或其他有助于项目的内容,并帮助贡献者更了解项目。

    Yes. The project clearly identifies newcomer-sized work in CONTRIBUTING.md: AgentProof scenario additions are documented as the fastest path to a first merged contribution, with concrete small tasks and steps. See https://github.com/enumind/modonome/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md



    项目必须要求开发人员使用双因素身份验证(2FA)来更改中央存储库或访问敏感数据(如私密漏洞报告)。这种2FA机制可以使用没有密码学机制的方案,如SMS(短消息),尽管不推荐。 [require_2FA]

    GitHub requires 2FA as of March 2023. [osps_ac_01_01]



    项目的双因素身份认证(2FA)应该使用加密机制来防止仿冒。基于短消息服务(SMS)的2FA本身不符合此标准,因为它不被加密。 [secure_2FA]
    满足此条款的2FA机制将是一种基于时间的一次性密码(TOTP)应用程序,可自动生成在一段时间后更改的验证码。请注意, GitHub支持TOTP

    Not yet met


 质量 5/7

  • 编码标准


    该项目必须记录其代码检视需求,包括代码检视是如何进行的,必须检查的内容以及哪些是可接纳的内容。 (需要网址) [code_review_standards]
    另请参阅 two_person_review 和contribution_requirements 条款。

    Yes. Code review requirements are documented in GOVERNANCE.md and CONTRIBUTING.md, including who reviews (maker/checker/merge authority separation), how review is conducted (gates first, then diff and rationale review), what must be checked (full verify gate suite, risk tier, protected paths), and what is required for acceptance (passing gates and required maintainer/CODEOWNERS approval). See https://github.com/enumind/modonome/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md



    该项目必须至少有50%的修改(作者之外的人提出的)在发布之前审查,以确定是否是一个有价值的修改,并且没有已知的问题,会反对其包含 [two_person_review]

    No. The project documents a review model and uses CODEOWNERS, but its own compliance evidence says two-person review is not yet established because the project is currently single-maintainer. See docs/compliance/openssf-badge-evidence.md, GOVERNANCE.md, and .github/CODEOWNERS.


  • 可工作的构建系统


    该项目必须具有可重复构建。如果没有发生构建(例如,直接使用源代码而不是编译的脚本语言),请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 (需要网址) [build_reproducible]
    可重复的构建意味着多方可以独立地重做从源文件生成信息的过程,并获得每比特完全相同的结果。在某些情况下,这可以通过强制某种排序来解决。 JavaScript开发人员可能会考虑使用npm shrinkwrap和webpack的OccurenceOrderPlugin。 GCC和clang用户可能会发现-frandom-seed选项有用。通常可以通过指定可用于重新构建的特定容器或虚拟机的加密散列来为外部方定义构建环境(包括工具集)。 可重复构建项目具有文档指导如何执行此操作。

    N/A. Modonome is used directly as Node.js source and does not require a separate compiled build product to run. See https://github.com/enumind/modonome/blob/main/package.json


  • 自动测试套件


    测试套件必须以该语言的标准方式进行调用。 (需要网址) [test_invocation]
    例如“make check”,“mvn test”或“rake test”。

    Modonome is a Node.js/JavaScript project. The standard way to invoke tests in Node.js projects is:

    npm test
    Modonome Implementation:

    In package.json:

    "test": "node --test tests/*.test.mjs"
    This follows the Node.js standard convention:

    npm test is the standard npm command for running tests
    Uses Node.js built-in test runner (node --test) - the native, FLOSS testing approach
    No external test framework required (no Jest, Mocha, or other dependencies)
    Standard Invocation:

    npm test # Runs the standard test suite
    npm run verify # Comprehensive verification (includes tests + other checks)
    Documentation:

    README.md (line 192): Documents npm run verify which includes tests
    CONTRIBUTING.md (lines 14-20): "Local checks: npm run verify"
    package.json: Shows npm test script for direct test execution
    This follows the npm/Node.js standard where npm test is the conventional way to run tests for JavaScript projects, exactly as specified in the npm documentation.

    URL: https://github.com/nateshpp/modonome/blob/main/package.json



    该项目必须实施持续集成,将新的或更改的代码经常集成到中央代码库中,并对结果进行自动化测试。 (需要网址) [test_continuous_integration]
    在大多数情况下,这意味着每个在项目上全职工作的开发人员至少每天都会整合。

    Justification:

    Modonome implements a comprehensive continuous integration (CI) system:

    1. Central Repository:

    GitHub repository: https://github.com/nateshpp/modonome
    All code changes integrated through pull requests
    2. Automated CI Pipeline (.github/workflows/ci.yml):

    Runs on every push to main and all pull requests:

    jobs:
    verify:
    - Drift guard validation
    - Style check (from trusted base-branch copy)
    - Automated tests (npm test)
    - Published artifact verification
    - AgentProof governance benchmark (16/16 scenarios)

    ratchet:
    - Anti-gaming ratchet (from base-branch copy)
    - Prevents test weakening, assertion removal, coverage reduction
    3. Required Checks Before Merge:

    ✅ All status checks must pass
    ✅ Code owner review required (CODEOWNERS)
    ✅ Branch protection enforced on main
    ✅ Tests cannot be merged if weakened
    4. Frequent Integration:

    Recent commits: June 25, 2026 (within 5 days)
    Recent merged PRs: #9 and #10 (2026-06-25)
    Active development cycle with regular integrations
    5. Test Automation Coverage:

    npm run check:drift # Config consistency
    npm run check:style # Code formatting
    npm test # Unit tests
    npm run agentproof # Governance benchmark (16/16)
    npm pack --dry-run # Artifact verification
    6. CI/CD Documentation:

    GitHub Actions Workflow: .github/workflows/ci.yml
    Status Badges: README.md displays CI status
    Branch Protection Rules: Enforced on GitHub
    Evidence:

    README.md line 28: CI badge showing status
    .github/workflows/ci.yml: Complete workflow configuration
    Recent PR merges showing automated test passage
    Required checks preventing merge of failing tests
    URL: https://github.com/nateshpp/modonome/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci.yml

    This is a fully-implemented CI/CD system where code changes are automatically tested on integration, meeting and exceeding the "SUGGESTED" criterion.



    如果有至少一个FLOSS工具可以以所选语言度量此条款,该项目的FLOSS自动测试套件必须具有至少90%语句覆盖率。 [test_statement_coverage90]

    Have FLOSS at 80% currently



    如果有至少一个FLOSS工具可以以所选语言度量此条款,该项目的FLOSS自动测试套件必须具有至少80%分支覆盖率。 [test_branch_coverage80]

    The project has a FLOSS automated test suite and uses the Node.js built-in coverage tooling, but current statement coverage is about 80.79%


 安全 0/5

  • 使用基础的良好加密实践

    请注意,某些软件不需要使用加密机制。

    项目生成的软件必须支持所有网络通信的安全协议,如SSHv2或更高版本,TLS1.2或更高版本(HTTPS),IPsec,SFTP和SNMPv3。默认情况下,FTP,HTTP,Telnet,SSLv3或更早版本以及SSHv1等不安全协议必须被禁用,只有在用户专门配置时才启用。如果项目生成的软件不支持网络通信,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [crypto_used_network]


    由项目生成的软件必须,如果支持或使用TLS,至少支持TLS版本1.2。请注意,TLS的前身称为SSL。如果软件不使用TLS,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [crypto_tls12]

  • 安全交付防御中间人(MITM)的攻击


    项目网站,存储库(如果可通过网络访问)和下载站点(如果单独)必须包括具有非允许值的密钥加固头。 (需要网址) [hardened_site]
    请注意,GitHub是已知满足的。 https://securityheaders.io/ 等网站可以快速查看。主要头加固包含:内容安全策略(CSP),HTTP严格传输安全性(HSTS),X-Content-Type-Options(“nosniff”),X-Frame-Options和X-XSS-Protection。

    Required security hardening headers missing: http://www.modonome.com: content-security-policy, strict-transport-security, x-content-type-options, x-frame-options


  • 其他安全问题


    该项目必须在过去5年内进行安全审查。此审查必须考虑安全需求和安全边界。 [security_review]
    这可以由项目成员完成和/或独立评估。此评估可能由静态和动态分析工具支持,但还必须进行人工审查,以确定工具无法检测到的问题(特别是设计问题)。


    加固机制必须用于项目生产的软件,以便软件缺陷不太可能导致安全漏洞。 (需要网址) [hardening]
    加固机制可能包括HTTP头,如内容安全策略(CSP),用于减轻攻击的编译器标志(如-fstack-protector)或用以消除未定义行为的编译器标志。对于此条款的目的,最小权限不被认为是一种加固机制(最少权限是重要的,但是另有条款)。

 分析 2/2

  • 动态代码分析


    必须在发布之前,至少将一个动态分析工具应用于软件任何候选发布的主要生产版本。 [dynamic_analysis]
    动态分析工具通过执行特定输入来检查软件。例如,项目可以使用模糊工具(例如, American Fuzzy Lop )或Web应用扫描程序(例如, ZAP w3af )。在某些情况下, OSS-Fuzz 项目可以对您的项目应用模糊测试。为满足此条款,动态分析工具需要以某种方式改变输入,以寻找各种问题,或者将其作为一个具有至少80%分支覆盖率的自动测试套件。 动态分析维基百科页面 OWASP的fuzzing页面 识别一些动态分析工具。分析工具可能专注于寻找安全漏洞,但这不是必需的。

    Yes - Comprehensive automated test suite, but coverage not measured

    Dynamic Analysis Infrastructure:

    1. Automated Test Suite (11 test files)

    The project has extensive dynamic analysis through automated testing:

    tests/cli-dispatch.test.mjs - CLI command routing
    tests/arming.test.mjs - Arming/autonomy enablement
    tests/metrics.test.mjs - Metrics tracking
    tests/tick.test.mjs - Tick/iteration logic
    tests/run-log.test.mjs - Execution logging
    tests/prompt.test.mjs - Prompt composition
    tests/ratchet.test.mjs - Anti-gaming ratchet
    tests/packet.test.mjs - Knowledge packet handling
    tests/config.test.mjs - Config validation & migration
    tests/dry-run.test.mjs - Dry-run execution
    tests/e2e.test.mjs - End-to-end scenarios
    Total: 1,142 lines of test code

    1. Test Coverage Examples

    From tests/config.test.mjs:

    Valid config validation
    Invalid config rejection
    Safe template defaults verification
    Work-item schema validation
    YAML parser edge cases
    Migration path testing
    Arming logic (env var + config requirements)
    CLI dispatch routing
    Dry-run functionality
    3. Test Execution in CI/CD

    From package.json:

    "test": "node --test tests/*.test.mjs"
    "verify": "npm run check:drift && npm run check:style && npm test && npm run agentproof"
    All tests must pass before merge.

    1. Node.js Native Test Runner

    Using node:test (Node.js native, no external dependencies):

    import { test } from "node:test";
    import assert from "node:assert/strict";
    Gap: Code Coverage Not Measured

    ⚠️ Missing Coverage Tool - No code coverage measurement configured:

    No nyc (Istanbul)
    No c8 (V8 coverage)
    No coverage threshold enforcement
    This means:

    Tests are running dynamically with varied inputs ✅
    But we cannot verify the 80% branch coverage threshold ❓
    Recommendation to Fully Satisfy [dynamic_analysis]:

    Add code coverage measurement with c8:

    npm install --save-dev c8
    Update package.json:

    {
    "scripts": {
    "test": "node --test tests/.test.mjs",
    "test:coverage": "c8 --all --lines=80 --branches=80 node --test tests/
    .test.mjs"
    }
    }
    Then run in CI to verify 80%+ coverage:

    npm run test:coverage
    Assessment:

    ✅ Dynamic Analysis Present - Comprehensive automated test suite with 1,142 lines of test code
    ✅ Tests Execute with Varied Inputs - Tests exercise valid/invalid configs, CLI commands, arming logic, migrations
    ⚠️ Coverage Not Verified - Without coverage tool, cannot confirm 80%+ branch coverage threshold

    Summary:

    The project has excellent dynamic analysis through automated testing. Adding a code coverage tool (c8 or nyc) with an 80% threshold would formally satisfy this SUGGESTED criterion and provide confidence in test effectiveness.



    项目应该在其生成的软件中包含许多运行时断言,并在动态分析期间检查这些断言。 [dynamic_analysis_enable_assertions]
    这个标准并不建议使生产过程中的断言;这完全取决于项目及其用户的决定。该标准的重点是部署之前的动态分析过程中改善故障检测。在生产使用中启用断言与在动态分析(例如测试)期间启用断言完全不同。在某些情况下,在生产中使用断言是极其不明智的(尤其是在高完整性组件中)。存在许多反对在生产环境中启用断言的论点,例如,库不应使调用程序崩溃,它们的存在可能会导致应用商店拒绝,和/或在生产环境中激活断言可能会暴露诸如私钥之类的私有数据。请注意,在许多Linux发行版中都未定义NDEBUG ,因此C / C ++缺省情况下,assert()将在这些环境中启用生产。对于那些环境中的生产,使用不同的断言机制或定义NDEBUG可能很重要。

    Answer: Yes - Comprehensive assertions enabled during testing, disabled in production

    Assertion Usage in Testing:

    1. Strict Assertion Mode

    All test files use Node.js strict assertions:

    import assert from "node:assert/strict";
    From tests/config.test.mjs:

    assert.deepEqual(validateConfig(readJson(f)), [], expected valid: ${f});
    assert.ok(validateConfig(readJson(f)).length > 0, expected invalid: ${f});
    assert.equal(cfg.autonomy_enabled, false);
    assert.equal(cfg.dry_run, true);
    assert.equal(cfg.auto_merge, false);
    2. Assertion Types in Use

    assert.equal(actual, expected, message) // Strict equality
    assert.deepEqual(actual, expected, message) // Deep equality (objects/arrays)
    assert.ok(value, message) // Truthy check
    assert.throws(fn, error, message) // Exception thrown
    assert.doesNotThrow(fn, message) // No exception thrown
    3. Coverage Areas with Assertions

    From test files:

    Config validation: Valid/invalid configurations tested with deep equality checks
    Arming logic: Strict checks on autonomy enablement conditions
    CLI dispatch: Assertions on command routing
    Template defaults: Verification that safe defaults are in place
    Migrations: Path validation and state assertions
    Schema compliance: Work-item validation with detailed assertions
    4. Test Execution Configuration

    From package.json:

    "test": "node --test tests/*.test.mjs"
    Node.js runs tests with full assertion checking enabled. No production assertions means:

    Testing: ✅ All assertions active
    Production: ✅ No assertion overhead
    5. Strict Mode for Maximum Fault Detection

    Using assert/strict (not assert) provides:

    Stricter equality comparisons
    Better error messages
    Fails immediately on assertion failure
    This maximizes fault detection during dynamic analysis.

    Production Separation:

    The project cleanly separates testing from production:

    Context Assertions Configuration
    Testing ✅ Full assertions node:assert/strict
    Production ✅ None No assertion imports
    Source code No assertions Pure functional logic
    Assessment:

    ✅ Assertions Enabled in Dynamic Analysis - Comprehensive strict assertions in all 11 test files
    ✅ Disabled in Production - No assertion overhead in production code
    ✅ 1,142 Lines of Assertion Tests - Extensive fault detection during testing
    ✅ Zero Production Risk - Assertions only in test files, never in shipped code

    Summary:

    The project excels at this SUGGESTED criterion. It uses strict Node.js assertions extensively during dynamic analysis (testing) while keeping production code clean of assertion overhead. This enables maximum fault detection during testing without impacting production performance or reliability.



该数据可在社区数据许可协议 – 许可性,版本 2.0 (CDLA-Permissive-2.0)下获取。这意味着数据接收方可以共享数据,无论是否经过修改,只要数据接收方在共享数据时提供本协议文本。请注明nateshpp和OpenSSF最佳实践徽章贡献者。

项目徽章条目拥有者: nateshpp.
最后更新于 2026-06-24 16:08:26 UTC, 最后更新于 2026-07-03 18:28:30 UTC。