Veredictum

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14252的徽章级别为silver 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/14252/badge)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14252)
或将其嵌入到HTML中来显示您的徽章状态:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14252"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14252/badge"></a>


这些是白银级别条款。您还可以查看通过黄金级别条款。

Baseline Series: 基准等级1 基准等级2 基准等级3

        

 基本 17/17

  • 常规

    请注意,其他项目可能使用相同的名称。

    An independent conformance instrument for openEHR clinical data repositories. A machine-readable catalogue of 1103 spec-cited test cases and 247 operation bindings is driven against a running CDR over its own REST wire; verdicts are a pure function of the party statement, the recordings, the catalogue and the capability matrix, and the emitted record is sealed with a SHA-256 digest manifest and a detached OpenPGP signature so anyone can re-check it. Every expectation cites the released openEHR specification section it enforces, and the specification text is vendored so each citation resolves.

    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。
  • 先决条件


    项目必须拥有通过徽章。 [achieve_passing]

  • 基本项目网站内容


    关于如何贡献的信息必须包括对可接受的贡献的要求(例如,引用任何所需的编码标准)。 (需要网址) [contribution_requirements]

    CONTRIBUTING.md states the requirements for an acceptable contribution: the gate commands every PR must pass (cargo build/clippy -D warnings/fmt --check/nextest/deny check, plus veredictum validate at zero findings), the hard rules (every expectation cites its specification section; never weaken, skip or delete a test; coverage ratchets up only; a red row is attributed before anything changes; comment form per RFC 505 and RFC 1574), enforced-signed commits, conventional-commit subjects, a same-PR changelog entry, and tests with behaviour changes: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


  • 项目监督


    该项目应该有一个合法机制,所有对项目软件做出显著贡献的开发人员都声明他们有合法授权作出这些贡献。最常用且易于实施的方法是使用开发者原产地证书(DCO),用户可以在其提交中添加“signed-off-by”,另外,项目链接到DCO网站。本条款也可以使用贡献者许可协议(CLA)或其他法律机制实现。 (需要网址) [dco]
    DCO是推荐的机制,因为它易于实现,在源代码中进行跟踪,并且git使用“commit -s”直接支持“签名”功能。更有效的是,项目文件解释了该项目的“签名”手段。 CLA是一项法律协议,用于定义知识产权许可给组织或项目的条款。捐助者转让协议(CAA)是将知识产权权利转让给另一方的法律协议;项目不必具备CAA,因为CAA增加了潜在贡献者不愿贡献的风险,特别是如果接收者是一个营利性组织。 Apache Software Foundation CLA(个人贡献者许可证和公司CLA)是CLA的示例,用于确定项目的这些CLA的风险对项目的影响小于其获益。

    Inbound = outbound, by the licence itself rather than by a separate agreement: Apache-2.0 section 5 places every contribution under the same licence unless the contributor explicitly states otherwise, and CONTRIBUTING.md and GOVERNANCE.md § What this project will not do both restate it — there is no CLA and no copyright assignment, contributors keep their copyright, and the licence stays Apache-2.0 for everyone including the maintainer. Authorship is verifiable rather than asserted: every commit in the history is OpenPGP-signed and the main ruleset refuses an unsigned one. There is no DCO sign-off trailer: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md



    该项目必须明确定义和记录其项目治理模式(决策方式,包括关键角色)。 (需要网址) [governance]
    需要有一些成熟的书面方式来作出决定和解决争端。在小项目中,这可能就像“项目拥有者和负责人做所有最终决定”一样简单。有各种治理模式,包括仁慈的独裁者和正式的精英统治;有关详细信息,请参阅治理模式。集中式(例如,单一维护者)和分散式(例如,组维护者)方法都已经在项目中成功使用。治理信息不需要记录创建项目分支的可能性,因为对于FLOSS项目来说总是可能的。

    GOVERNANCE.md documents the model as it actually is: one maintainer with final say, why the released specifications and not the maintainer decide conformance (including the stated conflict of interest with FerroEHR, a CDR this instrument grades), where decisions are recorded, how a change gets in, how someone becomes a maintainer, and the standing refusals: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md



    该项目必须采取行为守则,并将其发布在标准的位置。 (需要网址) [code_of_conduct]
    项目可能能够提高社区的文明程度,并通过采取行为守则来规定对可接受的行为的期望。这可以帮助在发生问题之前避免问题,并使项目成为更加欢迎的地方来鼓励贡献。这应该只关注项目社区/工作场所的行为。行为规范的示例是贡献者约定行为准则和Linux内核代码冲突

    Contributor Covenant, in the standard root location, with the enforcement contact and the four-tier enforcement ladder, and linked from CONTRIBUTING.md and GOVERNANCE.md: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md



    该项目必须明确定义和公开记录项目中的关键角色及其职责,包括这些角色必须执行的任务。必须清楚指出谁是什么角色,尽管这可能没有以相同的方式记录下来。 (需要网址) [roles_responsibilities]
    治理和角色和职责的文档可以在一个地方。

    GOVERNANCE.md defines the roles and how a change gets in; MAINTAINERS.md names who holds them (one person, since 2026-08-26) and, identity by identity, what each credential can publish; .github/CODEOWNERS carries the review ownership. The three edits that add a maintainer are named explicitly: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/MAINTAINERS.md



    如果任何一个开发者丧失工作能力或丧生,该项目必须能够继续保持最小的中断。特别是,在确认个人无行为能力或死亡的一周内,项目必须能够创建和关闭问题,接受提议的更改和发布软件版本。这可以通过确保其他人有任何必要的密钥,密码和合法权利来继续该项目。运行FLOSS项目的个人可以通过在锁箱中提供密钥,并提供任何所需的合法权利(例如DNS名称)来实现。 (需要网址) [access_continuity]

    Honest: this is met, and MAINTAINERS.md § Publishing identities and § If the maintainer is unavailable say so first-hand rather than promising a plan. Every identity that can publish under this name terminates at one person's GitHub account, one person's hardware, or one person's registrar login: the OpenPGP commit- and tag-signing key is not escrowed, the repository is user-owned so GitHub account recovery is the only route, and crates.io and Zenodo both hang off that same account. Nothing already published disappears (immutable releases, an undeletable container digest, a permanent Zenodo DOI, Apache-2.0 plus public history so a fork is a complete continuation) — but nothing new ships, and no one else could create or close issues, accept a change, or cut a release within a week. The trigger is a second maintainer with write access and a second holder wherever an identity permits one: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/MAINTAINERS.md



    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

    The bus factor is 1. GET /repos/rubentalstra/Veredictum/collaborators returns one login; one person can accept a pull request and cut a release; no organisation or legal entity stands behind the project. The route to a second maintainer, explicitly including one from a competing implementation, is open and documented in GOVERNANCE.md § Becoming a maintainer: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md


  • 文档


    该项目必须有一个文档化的路线图,描述项目打算做什么,至少在下一年做什么。 (需要网址) [documentation_roadmap]
    项目可能没有实现路线图,没关系。路线图的目的是帮助潜在的用户和贡献者了解项目的预期方向。它不需要特别详细。

    A public roadmap board now exists and is linked from the README: https://github.com/users/rubentalstra/projects/5 — planned, in progress and shipped, as a view over the issue tracker, with milestones as releases. The prose halves back it: ARCHITECTURE.md § 11 Gap-fill roadmap is the ordered content plan for the catalogue (querying/AQL first, then the maximal-coverage template round-trip, the scenario/lifecycle suites, the performance and volumetrics chapter — each a bounded, assignable chapter task ordered by procurement value), and GOVERNANCE.md § What this project will not do is the explicit will-not-do half: no CLA or copyright assignment, no expectation without a specification citation, no gate weakened to go green, no verdict a reader cannot re-derive, no paid pass and no privileged party.



    该项目必须包括项目生成的软件的架构(也称为高级别设计)的文档。如果项目不产生软件,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 (需要网址) [documentation_architecture]
    软件架构解释了程序的基本结构,即程序的主要组件,它们之间的关系以及这些组件和关系的关键属性。

    ARCHITECTURE.md is the design record rather than a summary of one: the testable surface and case-core field definitions, the per-operation wire bindings, the outcome taxonomy and ambiguity register, the assertion vocabulary, the verdict computation (§ 8), and the population-anchored performance-class model with its journey decomposition (§ 8.14). The user-facing conformance-method chapter is at https://veredictum.eu/docs/methodology.html : https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/ARCHITECTURE.md



    该项目必须书面记录用户从项目生成的软件的安全性上可以获得和不能指望的内容(其“安全需求”)。 (需要网址) [documentation_security]
    这些是软件意图满足的安全需求。

    Two documents, and neither repeats the other. SECURITY.md carries what a user can and cannot expect: the supported version is the most recent release only — no maintenance branch, no LTS line, no backports — stated with its consequence for anyone publishing a conformance record; the private reporting route and the response commitments; safe harbour; § Scope notes on which classes are security-relevant here (credentials for the system under test, verdict integrity, release-artifact integrity) and which deliberately are not; and the standing warning never to point the runner at a live clinical deployment, because it writes into the system it tests. ASSURANCE_CASE.md carries the argument behind those requirements, boundary by boundary: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/SECURITY.md



    该项目必须为新用户提供“快速启动”指南,以帮助他们快速使用该软件。 (需要网址) [documentation_quick_start]
    这个想法是向用户展示如何入门,使软件完全可以做事情。这对于潜在用户是至关重要的。

    Two of them. The README § Quick start is four commands from a clone to a rendered verdict (validate, copy a party example, run, verdicts), with a prebuilt-binary path and a cargo install path beside it; the documentation site carries the same as its installation and running chapters: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum#quick-start



    项目必须努力使文档与当前版本的项目结果(包括项目生成的软件)保持一致。任何已知的文档缺陷使其不一致必须修正。如果文档基本是最新的,但是错误地包括一些不再是真实的旧信息,那么将其视为缺陷,然后像往常一样进行跟踪和修复。 [documentation_current]
    该文档可以包括有关软件版本之间的差异或更改的信息,与/或链接到旧版本的文档。这个条款的意图在于努力保持文档的一致性,而不是文档必须完美。

    The docs are machine-held to the code. The Docs workflow gates on mdbook-lint over every chapter and a blocking internal link check (lychee) before the site deploys, scripts/checks/site-counts.sh fails if the counts the site prints disagree with what veredictum validate reports over the catalogue, and CI requires a user-visible change to add its CHANGELOG entry in the same pull request. The published API documentation is generated from the source with missing_docs as a lint, so it cannot drift from the code: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/actions/workflows/docs.yml



    项目存储代码库首页和/或网站必须在获得成就的48小时内标识并超链接任何成就,包括此最佳实践徽章。 (需要网址) [documentation_achievements]
    一个成就是项目致力于满足的任何外部条款,包括徽章。该信息不需要在项目网站首页上。使用GitHub的项目可以通过将其添加到README文件中,将成果放在存储代码库首页。

    The README's badge rows are live readings, not claims, and they include this badge (project 14252) beside OpenSSF Scorecard, SLSA Build L3, the Zenodo DOI, CI, CodeQL and the four SonarQube Cloud ratings; the comment beneath them says which read below their ceiling today and why, check by check: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum#readme


  • 无障碍和国际化


    该项目(项目网站和项目成果)都应遵循无障碍最佳做法,使残疾人仍然可以参与项目,并在合理的情况下使用项目成果。 [accessibility_best_practices]
    对于Web应用程序,请参阅 Web 内容无障碍指导 (WCAG 2.0,英文) 以及其支持文档 理解 WCAG 2.0(英文);或者 W3C 无障碍信息(英文). 图形界面(GUI)应用考虑使用环境特定的无障碍指导(例如 Gnome, KDE, XFCE, Android, iOS, Mac, 以及 Windows). 一些TUI应用 (例如,`ncurses` 程序) 可以做一些特定的工作,增强可访问性(例如,`alpine` 的 `force-arrow-cursor` 设置)。多数命令行应用没有特别的无障碍设置。本条款经常是不涉及(N/A),例如,对于组件库。以下是一些要采取的行动或需要考虑的问题的例子:
    • 提供非文字内容的文字替代,以便于转换为其他需要的格式,如大字体、盲文、语音、符号或者简单文字( WCAG 2.0 指导 1.1 (英文))
    • 颜色不被用作传达信息,指示动作,提示响应或区分视觉元素的唯一视觉方式。 ( WCAG 2.0 指导 1.4.1(英文))
    • 文本和文字图像的视觉呈现对比度至少为4.5:1,除了大文本,次要文本和标识符之外。 ( WCAG 2.0 指导 1.4.3(英文))
    • 使用键盘可访问所有功能 (WCAG 指导 2.1)
    • 图形界面应用(GUI)或者Web应用在目标平台上,应该至少使用一种屏幕阅读器测试(例如,NVDA;Jaws;Windows上的WindowEyes;Mac & iOS上的VoiceOver;Linux/BSD上的Orca;Android上的TalkBack)。TUI程序可以减少过度渲染以防止屏幕阅读器的冗余读取。

    Not evaluated systematically, so not claimed. The console is built with accessibility affordances in place — ARIA landmarks and labels on the primary navigation, breadcrumbs, the dark-mode toggle and the toast dismissal, and the journey tests select on those aria-labels, so they cannot silently disappear — but no WCAG audit, axe run or assistive-technology pass has been done, and the console is still under construction (image tags published before its first release carry the CLI as the payload). The CLI itself is plain text on a terminal. The trigger is an accessibility evaluation of the console once its screens settle.



    该项目产生的软件应该被国际化,以便为目标受众的文化,地区或语言进行简单的本地化。如果国际化(i18n)不适用(例如,该软件不会生成针对最终用户的文本,并且不排序可读文本),请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [internationalization]
    本地化“是指适应产品,应用或文档内容以满足特定目标市场(语言环境)的语言,文化和其他要求。国际化是“设计和开发产品,应用或文档内容,使不同文化,地区或语言的目标受众更容易本地化”。 (请参阅 W3C的“本地化与国际化”)。软件只需通过国际化即可达到此标准。不需要另一种特定语言的本地化,因为一旦软件已被国际化,其他人就可以从事本地化。

    Stated honestly rather than claimed or dismissed. The instrument's own machine surface is locale-independent by design (spec-fixed openEHR identifiers, ISO datetimes, integer arithmetic with no clock or locale in the resolvers, locale-independent rendering in the document assets), and clinical content carries its own language codes through the openEHR RM. But the human-readable surface — CLI output, the report and certificate documents, and the console's UI strings — is English-only with no localization mechanism, so a translator has nothing to hook into today. There is no i18n framework and no second locale.


  • 其他


    如果项目站点(网站,存储库和下载URL)存储用于外部用户认证的密码,则必须使用密钥拉伸(迭代)算法将密码存储为具有每用户盐值的迭代散列(例如,PBKDF2,Bcrypt或Scrypt)。如果项目站点不存储密码,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [sites_password_security]
    请注意,使用 GitHub 符合此条款。此条款仅适用于用于外部用户认证到项目站点的密码。如果项目站点必须登录到其他站点,则可能需要为此目的存储密码(因为使用像Bcrypt这样的算法会使这些密码无效)。本条款将 crypto_password_storage 条款应用于项目站点,类似于sites_https条款。

    No project site stores passwords for authentication of external users. The repository and the documentation site are GitHub and GitHub Pages, and the web console has no login at all — which is why its publish flag binds it to loopback and exposing it further is explicitly the operator's decision behind their own gate.


 变更控制 1/1

  • 之前的版本


    该项目必须维护最常用的旧版本的产品提供较新版本的升级路径。如果升级路径很困难,项目必须记录如何执行升级(例如,给出更改的接口描述和详细的建议步骤以帮助升级)。 [maintenance_or_update]

    Actively maintained: four releases in the current cycle (0.0.1-alpha.1 through 0.1.0-alpha.4, the latest on 2026-08-27), a tracker past #100 under continuous triage, Dependabot plus a scheduled latest-deps lane and a weekly published-image scan that files its own tracking issue, and CHANGELOG.md accumulating entries between cuts: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/releases


 报告 3/3

  • 错误报告流程


    项目必须使用问题跟踪器来跟踪每个问题。 [report_tracker]

    GitHub Issues, with three typed templates (defect, enhancement, task), labels and milestones, used for both defects and enhancement requests: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/issues


  • 漏洞报告流程


    除了要求匿名的报告者外,该项目必须对过去12个月内解决的所有漏洞报告的报告者表示感谢。如果过去12个月没有修复漏洞,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 (需要网址) [vulnerability_report_credit]

    SECURITY.md § Credit: reporters are named in the advisory and the changelog by default, using whatever name and link they give, and declining credit costs nothing and changes nothing about how the report is handled: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/SECURITY.md



    该项目必须有一个书面的流程来响应漏洞报告。 (需要网址) [vulnerability_response_process]
    这与security_report_process有很强的相关性,它需要有一个书面的流程来报告漏洞。它还涉及到spam_report_response,它需要在一定时间内响应漏洞报告。

    SECURITY.md § Reporting a vulnerability and § What you can expect: private reporting through GitHub Security Advisories, an acknowledgement within 5 working days with a documented public-escalation fallback if it does not arrive, an assessment with a severity and an intended fix window within 14 calendar days, and a coordinated disclosure date agreed with the reporter rather than imposed. Safe harbour is stated. The commitments are framed as commitments to the reporter, not conditions on them: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/SECURITY.md


 质量 19/19

  • 编码标准


    该项目必须确定其使用的主要语言的具体编码风格指南,并要求贡献一般情况下符合此要求。 (需要网址) [coding_standards]
    在大多数情况下,这是通过参考一些现有的风格指南来完成的,可能列出差异。这些风格指南可以包括提高可读性的方法和减少缺陷可能性(包括漏洞)的方法。许多编程语言有一个或多个广泛使用的风格指南。样式指南的示例包括 Google风格指南(英文) SEI CERT编码标准(英文)

    CONTRIBUTING.md documents the standards and CLAUDE.md carries the full set: rustfmt, clippy at pedantic-deny, the comment form (line comments only, RFC 505 and RFC 1574, with budgets and typed TODO/NOTE conventions), the citation rule for every expectation, and the test discipline. The machine-readable half is in the repository as configuration: rustfmt.toml, clippy.toml and the workspace lint tables in Cargo.toml: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md



    如果至少有一个FLOSS工具可以应用于所选择的语言,项目必须自动执行其选定的编码风格。 [coding_standards_enforced]
    这可以使用静态分析工具和/或通过代码重新格式化强制代码实现。在许多情况下,工具配置包含在项目的存储库中(因为不同的项目可能会选择不同的配置)。项目可以允许风格例外(通常会);在发生例外的情况下(应该很少),它们必须在其位置的代码中记录在案,以便可以对这些例外进行检视,并使工具能够在将来自动处理它们。这些工具的例子包括ESLint(JavaScript)和Rubocop(Ruby)。

    Enforced on every pull request and push, not advisory: cargo fmt --all --check, cargo clippy --locked --workspace --all-targets -- -D warnings (plus the console's ssr and wasm hydrate targets), scripts/checks/comment-style.sh over the whole tree, changelog-structure and same-PR changelog-entry guards, a REUSE lint, an image-label guard, a VEX-advisory guard, zizmor and actionlint over the workflows and hadolint over the Dockerfile — all behind one required conclusion check, with a guard that fails if any job is left out of it: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/actions/workflows/ci.yml


  • 可工作的构建系统


    本地二进制文件的构建系统必须遵守传递给它们的相关编译器和链接器(环境)变量(例如CC,CFLAGS,CXX,CXXFLAGS和LDFLAGS),并将它们传递给编译器和链接器。构建系统可以使用附加标志来扩展它们,但不能简单地用自己的替换提供的值。如果没有生成本地二进制文件,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [build_standard_variables]
    应该很容易启用特殊的构建功能,如地址消毒剂(Address Sanitizer,ASAN),或符合发布加固最佳实践(例如,通过轻松打开编译器标志来实现)。

    The build is cargo end to end, with no bespoke wrapper to swallow anything: it honours the standard cargo and rustc environment conventions (RUSTFLAGS, CARGO_*, profile overrides in Cargo.toml), and native dependencies built through the cc crate honour CC and CFLAGS in the usual way. Nothing in the repository replaces a passed-in flag set.



    构建和安装系统在在相关标志中要求时,应该保留调试信息(例如,“install -s”未被使用)。如果没有构建或安装系统(例如典型的JavaScript库),请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [build_preserve_debug]
    例如,如果使用这些语言,则应该设置CFLAGS(C)或CXXFLAGS(C ++)创建相关的调试信息,并且在安装过程中不应该剥离它们。支持和分析时,需要调试信息,也可用于测量编译二进制文件中加固特性的存在。

    Deliberate, and commented as such in Cargo.toml: the release profile keeps debug = "line-tables-only" so a production panic names its file and line, and strip stays at its default of none because stripping symbols makes traces incomprehensible. overflow-checks = true is kept on in release for the same reason. Nothing strips by default: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/Cargo.toml



    如果子目录中存在交叉依赖关系,则由项目生成的软件的构建系统必须不能递归地构建子目录。如果没有构建或安装系统(例如典型的JavaScript库),请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [build_non_recursive]
    项目构建系统的内部依赖关系信息需要准确,否则,对项目的更改可能无法正确构建。不正确的构建可能会导致缺陷(包括漏洞)。大型构建系统中的常见错误是使用“递归构建”或“递归生成”,即包含源文件的子目录的层次结构,其中每个子目录都是独立构建的。除非每个子目录完全独立,否则这是一个错误,因为依赖关系信息不正确。

    One cargo workspace with one dependency graph, which cargo builds as a single DAG. There is no recursive make and no per-directory build.



    该项目必须能够重复从源代码文件生成的过程,并获得完全相同的比特位结果。如果没有发生构建(例如,直接使用源代码而不是编译使用的脚本语言),请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [build_repeatable]
    GCC和clang用户可能会发现-frandom-seed选项有用;在某些情况下,这可以通过强制某种排序来解决。更多建议可以在可重复构建(英文)站点找到。

    CI builds with --locked against the committed Cargo.lock and a compiler pinned by rust-toolchain.toml; the container build pins its base images by digest (the builder and gcr.io/distroless/cc-debian13:nonroot both by sha256) and a release step checks that the container, rust-toolchain.toml and the Dockerfile agree on the toolchain; release binaries build inside reusable workflows per GitHub's SLSA Build L3 construction and each carries a signed provenance attestation on its digest. A rebuild resolves identical inputs.


  • 安装系统


    该项目必须提供一种使用常用惯例轻松安装和卸载由项目生成的软件的方法。 [installation_common]
    示例包括使用软件包管理器(在系统或语言级别),“make install/uninstall”(支持DESTDIR),标准格式的容器或标准格式的虚拟机映像。安装和卸载过程(例如,打包)可以由第三方FLOSS软件实现。

    Three install paths, all published: prebuilt x86_64 and aarch64 Linux binaries attached to every release with a sha256sum, a CycloneDX SBOM and a Sigstore bundle; a multi-architecture container image on GHCR (ghcr.io/rubentalstra/veredictum); and the crate on crates.io (cargo install veredictum). The installation chapter carries the commands, including the gh attestation verify invocation: https://veredictum.eu/docs/installation.html



    最终用户的安装系统必须遵守用于在安装时选择构建工件写入位置的标准约定。例如,如果在POSIX系统上安装文件,它必须遵守DESTDIR环境变量。如果没有安装系统或没有标准惯例,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [installation_standard_variables]

    Each path follows its ecosystem's own convention rather than inventing one: cargo install honours CARGO_INSTALL_ROOT and --root for the install location (and cargo uninstall removes it), the release tarballs are relocatable single static binaries extracted wherever the operator chooses, and the container image is addressed by tag or digest with the catalogue and specification roots passed in as mounted paths rather than baked in.



    该项目必须为潜在开发人员提供一种快速安装所有项目成果和支持环境所必需的环境,包括测试套件和测试环境。必须通过常规惯例执行。 [installation_development_quick]
    可以使用生成的容器和/或安装脚本来实现。外部依赖关系一般通过调用系统和/或语言包管理器(根据 external_dependencies 条款)进行安装。

    git clone, then cargo run -- validate --root artifacts --specs specs/openehr — the toolchain pins itself from rust-toolchain.toml, so there is nothing to install by hand, and cargo-nextest is the only extra tool and only if you intend to run the suite. CONTRIBUTING.md § Setup and § The gates carry the full sequence: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


  • 外部维护的组件


    项目必须以计算机可处理的方式列出外部依赖关系。 (需要网址) [external_dependencies]
    通常这是使用包管理器和/或构建系统的约定完成的。请注意,这有助于实施 installation_development_quick

    Computer-processable, at three levels: Cargo.toml declares the direct dependency set with each pin commented for why it is there, the committed Cargo.lock is the exact resolved graph (this repository ships a binary, so it is committed deliberately), and every release attaches a generated SPDX repository SBOM plus a per-artifact CycloneDX SBOM, both Sigstore-attested. REUSE.toml declares the licensing of the vendored trees machine-readably: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/Cargo.toml



    项目必须监视或定期检查其外部依赖(包括便利副本)以检测已知的漏洞,并修复可利用的漏洞或将其验证为不可利用的漏洞。 [dependency_monitoring]
    这可以使用源分析器/依赖项检查工具/软件组成分析工具(例如OWASP的Dependency-CheckSonatype的Nexus AuditorSynopsys的Black Duck软件组成分析Bundler-audit(针对Ruby))来完成。一些程序包管理器包括执行此操作的机制。如果无法利用组件的漏洞,这是可以接受的,但是这种分析是困难的,有时简单地更新或修复零件就更容易。

    Four lanes, all running: cargo-deny checks the graph against the RustSec advisory database on every pull request and push; Dependabot raises bump PRs with security updates exempt from the configured cooldowns; a scheduled latest-deps workflow detects in-range upstream breakage; and a weekly Trivy scan of the published container image files or updates its own tracking issue. An accepted advisory needs a published OpenVEX justification in security/vex/, which scripts/checks/vex-advisories.sh enforces: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/deny.toml



    该项目必须满足下述情况之一:
    1. 可以轻松识别和更新重用的外部维护组件;
    2. 使用系统或编程语言提供的标准组件。
    这样,如果在重用的组件中发现了一个漏洞,将容易更新该组件。 [updateable_reused_components]
    符合这一条款的典型方法是使用系统和编程语言的包管理系统。许多FLOSS程序与“便利库”一起分发,这些库是标准库的本地副本(可能是分支)。一般没问题。但是,如果程序*必须*使用这些本地(分支)副本,则“标准”库的安全更新将使这些附加副本仍然易受攻击。这对于基于云的系统尤其是一个问题;如果云提供商更新他们的“标准”库,但程序不会使用它们,那么这些更新实际上不会有帮助。参见,例如,“Chromium:为什么它不在Fedora中作为适当的包”(Tom Callaway)

    Every reused component is identified and updateable in place. Rust dependencies are ordinary cargo pins in one workspace table with a committed lockfile — no vendored or forked crate copies exist. The vendored material that does exist is specification text and clinical-model corpora, not code: it is fetched by committed scripts (scripts/vendor/adl2-archetypes.sh, ckm-archetypes.sh, ckm-templates.sh), hand-editing it is a hard rule violation, and the fix for any finding inside it is always the script plus a re-run, so an update is a re-vendor rather than a patch to maintain.



    该项目应避免使用已弃用或过时的功能和API,如果FLOSS替代品在其使用的技术集合(“技术堆栈”)中以及项目支持的大多数用户中可用(以便用户可以随时访问该替代品)。 [interfaces_current]

    The interface documentation is generated from the same source tree, so it cannot lag the code: the published API documentation is complete (https://docs.rs/veredictum — 100% of the crate documented, with missing_docs as a lint), the JSON Schemas in schemas/ are emitted by the instrument itself and drift-tested against the committed copies, and scripts/checks/site-counts.sh fails if the counts the site states disagree with what validate reports. The command reference chapter documents every subcommand: https://veredictum.eu/docs/commands.html


  • 自动测试套件


    必须将自动测试套件应用于至少一个分支的共享代码库的每次签入。该测试套件必须生成关于测试成功或失败的报告。 [automated_integration_testing]
    这个要求可以被视为test_continuous_integration的一个子集,但是仅仅是测试,而不需要持续集成。

    Integration testing runs above the unit level on every pull request and push: cargo nextest run over the whole workspace including the console's SSR suite, veredictum validate over the entire artifact tree (every machine gate over 1103 cases and 247 bindings, zero findings the only passing result), the console journey tests driving the composed console end to end through a browser, and a screenshot guard that fails when a new screen arrives without a capture. An opt-in mode (UI_E2E_REAL_SUTS=1) composes two real CDRs — FerroEHR's published quickstart and EHRbase's official image pairing — and drives the full wizard against each: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/actions/workflows/ci.yml



    该项目必须为过去六个月内修复的至少50%的错误,在自动化测试套件中添加回归测试。 [regression_tests_added50]

    Applied as a rule rather than a habit: CONTRIBUTING.md § Hard rules forbids weakening, skipping or deleting a test or editing one to route around the defect it exposes, and requires a failing test with a TODO naming its issue when the fix is unclear. In practice, the three document-processing defects the fuzzing lane found (literal nesting depth, brace-expansion variants, a citation-resolution stack overflow) each shipped in 0.1.0-alpha.4 with its pinned regression test and its corpus entry kept: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/releases



    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%语句覆盖率。 [test_statement_coverage80]
    许多FLOSS工具可用于度量测试覆盖范围,包括gcov / lcov,Blanket.js,Istanbul和JCov。请注意,满足这个条款并不能保证测试套件是完备的,而不满足该条款则意味着测试套件很差。

    Statement coverage is above 80%, measured by cargo-llvm-cov and published continuously by SonarQube Cloud, whose live coverage badge sits in the README badge row: https://sonarcloud.io/component_measures?id=rubentalstra_Veredictum&metric=coverage . The Sonar lane runs the suite under cargo-llvm-cov and imports the merged lcov through sonar.rust.lcov.reportPaths on every pull request and push. The coverage denominator is deliberately narrower than the analysis scope, with each exclusion carrying its reason in sonar-project.properties: the suite does not measure itself, the CLI entry point is argument plumbing over library functions the suite already drives, and the two document-renderer modules are checked by regenerate-and-diff against committed artifacts rather than by a unit assertion.


  • 新功能测试


    该项目必须具有正式的书面策略,一旦添加了主要的新功能,新功能的测试必须被添加到自动测试套件中。 [test_policy_mandated]

    CONTRIBUTING.md § Pull requests requires tests to accompany behaviour changes and § Hard rules makes the test discipline non-negotiable (never weaken, skip or delete a test; coverage ratchets up only; a case is added, never removed to make a run green). CI refuses a pull request whose suite is not green, behind the single required conclusion check: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md



    该项目必须在其关于变更建议的书面指导中包括要为主要新功能添加测试的策略。 [tests_documented_added]
    但是,只要在实践中添加了测试,即使是非正式规则也是可以接受的。

    Documented in CONTRIBUTING.md as a stated requirement on every contributor, with the full working discipline in CLAUDE.md, and the gate commands listed so a contributor can run exactly what CI will run: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


  • 警告标志


    在实际允许时,项目必须最大限度地严格修复项目生成的软件中的警告。 [warnings_strict]
    某些项目无法有效启用某些警告。需要证明的是,项目正在努力的启用警告标志,以便早期发现错误。

    Well beyond the defaults. The workspace lint tables put clippy::all and clippy::pedantic at deny and then name dozens of specific bug-class lints at deny (unwrap_used, expect_used, panic, panic_in_result_fn, indexing_slicing, string_slice, as_conversions, iter_over_hash_type, precedence_bits, unchecked_time_subtraction, allow_attributes_without_reason and more, each with its reason in a comment), and the rust table sets unsafe_code = forbid, non_ascii_idents = forbid, dead_code = deny and let_underscore_drop/lock = deny. CI runs clippy with -D warnings on every target, so any of them fails the build: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/Cargo.toml


 安全 13/13

  • 安全开发知识


    该项目必须实施安全设计原则(来自“know_secure_design”)(如适用)。如果项目不生产软件,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [implement_secure_design]
    例如,项目结果应该具有故障安全默认值(默认情况下,访问决策应该拒绝,默认情况下项目的安装应该是安全的),也应该有完全的仲裁(每一个可能被限制的访问权限必须被检查,不可绕过)。请注意,在某些情况下,原则会发生冲突,在这种情况下必须做出选择(例如,许多机制使事情更复杂,违反“机制经济”/“保持最简化”的原则)。

    The security-relevant design is structural, and ASSURANCE_CASE.md § 2 states the boundaries it rests on (https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/ASSURANCE_CASE.md). A verdict is a pure function of four inputs — the party's statement, the recorded results, the catalogue and the capability matrix — so no server-controlled value can influence its own result, and two independent runners given those inputs must compute identical verdicts; the verification pack exists to check exactly that, so the instrument is not trusted on its own word. The system under test is untrusted by definition: its responses are evidence in a comparison, never instructions, and an expectation is refuted by a better reading of the released specification and by nothing else. Records are sealed with a byte-deterministic SHA-256 digest manifest and a detached RFC 9580 signature that verify-record recomputes — and that plain gpg --verify checks without this binary present — with typed refusals for a manifest entry that would read outside the bundle or silently replace another digest; a performance class is re-derived from the embedded HDR histograms rather than read from a stored summary. Credentials are unrepresentable inline: the IXIT holds environment-variable names and a declared key path, never a secret. Least privilege in the supply chain: ephemeral per-run tokens, crates.io Trusted Publishing with no stored token, and a reviewer-gated environment on the one irreversible leg.


  • 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。

    由项目产生的软件中的默认安全机制不得取决于具有已知严重弱点(例如,SHA-1密码散列算法或SSH中的CBC模式)的加密算法或模式。 [crypto_weaknesses]
    CERT:SSH CBC漏洞中讨论了SSH中CBC模式的问题。

    No broken or weak primitive is used or accepted: SHA-256 throughout with no truncation, no MD5, no SHA-1, no DES/3DES/RC4, and TLS through rustls, which implements 1.2 and 1.3 only. Signature verification is a real check rather than a formality — verify-record recomputes every digest and verifies the detached signature, so a substituted byte fails.



    该项目应该支持多种加密算法,如果一个被破解,用户可以快速切换。普通的对称密钥算法包括AES,Twofish和Serpent。通用密码散列算法的选择包括SHA-2(包括SHA-224,SHA-256,SHA-384和SHA-512)和SHA-3。 [crypto_algorithm_agility]

    Corrected and stated precisely, because it is narrower than a plain no. The record format IS agility-ready: the manifest carries a digest_algorithm identifier naming the algorithm every digest below it was taken with, and verification refuses a manifest signed under the wrong algorithm (app/veredictum/src/record.rs), so adding SHA-512 or SHA-3 is a new enum variant and a match arm rather than a format break. The negotiating layers are agile by construction too — TLS versions and suites are negotiated by rustls, and an OpenPGP signature carries its own hash-algorithm identifier. What is not true today is the criterion's own test: only SHA-256 is implemented, so an operator cannot switch if it breaks. The trigger is a second DigestAlgorithm variant with its selection surface, which belongs on an issue before it is claimed here.



    该项目必须支持在与其他信息(如配置文件,数据库和日志)分离的文件中存储身份验证凭据(如密码和动态令牌)以及私有加密密钥,并允许用户更新和替换它们,而无需重新编译代码。如果项目从不处理身份验证凭据和私有加密密钥,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [crypto_credential_agility]

    Nothing is embedded and nothing needs a recompilation to change. A credential for the system under test never enters the repository at all: the party's IXIT declares only the NAME of the environment variable that carries it, so the secret stays in the operator's environment and out of the catalogue, the records and the logs. The signing key is a file path passed as --sign-key at the moment it is used and is never stored by the tool. The project's own publishing credentials store no secret either — the release lane runs on an ephemeral per-run GITHUB_TOKEN and the crate publishes through crates.io Trusted Publishing (OIDC), as recorded identity by identity in MAINTAINERS.md: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/MAINTAINERS.md



    该项目产生的软件应该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或更早版本和SSHv1等不安全协议将被禁用,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]

    All network security uses standard published protocols, never bespoke transport cryptography: TLS through rustls on every outbound connection (reqwest is configured with default features off and the rustls feature on, so no platform TLS backend is silently substituted), and JWT (RFC 7519) bearer authentication against a system under test.



    项目生成的软件(如果支持或使用TLS)应该至少支持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]

    The TLS stack is rustls, which implements TLS 1.2 and 1.3 only — an older protocol version is not representable in the library, so there is nothing to disable and no configuration switch that could re-enable one.



    由项目生成的软件必须,如果它支持TLS,则在使用TLS(包括子资源)时默认执行TLS证书验证。如果软件不使用TLS,请选择“不适用”(N / A)。 [crypto_certificate_verification]

    rustls with webpki certificate verification is the default on every outbound TLS connection, and there is no escape hatch: no danger_accept_invalid_certs, no accept_invalid_hostnames and no insecure or no-verify option is exposed anywhere in the configuration surface or the code.



    项目生成的软件(如果支持TLS)必须在发送具有私有信息(如安全Cookie)的HTTP头之前执行证书验证。如果软件不使用TLS,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [crypto_verification_private]

    Certificate verification happens before anything private is sent: the client is rustls with webpki verification and no way to switch it off, so the JWT bearer token and any basic-auth credential for the system under test only ever travel over a verified TLS session. Private keys are never transmitted or logged — signing is done locally from a key path the operator passes, only the detached signature leaves the process, and pointer_format is a denied lint so addresses cannot leak into Debug output either.


  • 安全发布


    该项目必须加密签名旨在广泛使用的项目结果的发布,并且必须有一个书面流程,向用户解释如何获取公共签名密钥并验证签名。这些签名的私钥不得在项目网站上直接向公众发布。如果发行版本不适用于广泛使用,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [signed_releases]
    项目结果包括源代码和适用的任何生成的可交付成果(例如,可执行文件,包和容器)。生成的交付项可以单独签名源代码。可以用签名的git标签实现(使用加密数字签名)。项目可以从git类似的工具分别提供生成的结果,但在这些情况下,单独的结果必须单独签署。

    Every release is cryptographically signed and independently verifiable. Each artifact carries a Sigstore bundle and a provenance attestation on its digest, built inside reusable workflows per GitHub's documented SLSA Build L3 construction, alongside sha256 sums, a per-artifact CycloneDX SBOM and a generated SPDX repository SBOM that is itself attested; a release step refuses to publish unless every expected asset is attached, and immutable releases are enabled so the assets and tag freeze at publish. Verification is a documented one-liner — gh attestation verify <artifact> -R rubentalstra/Veredictum --signer-workflow rubentalstra/Veredictum/.github/workflows/release-build.yml : https://veredictum.eu/docs/installation.html



    建议在版本控制系统中,每个重要版本标签(作为主要版本的一部分的标签,次要版本或修复公开提到的漏洞)都按照signed_releases中的要求进行加密签名,并可验证。 [version_tags_signed]

    Release tags are OpenPGP-signed by the maintainer key documented in MAINTAINERS.md, and this is enforced rather than customary: the refs/tags/v* ruleset (no bypass) requires a signature and forbids deleting or non-fast-forward-updating a tag, which protects the exact window in which a tag drives the release build. Every commit in the history is signature-verified under the main ruleset as well: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/tags


  • 其他安全问题


    项目结果必须检查来自潜在不受信任来源的所有输入,以确保它们有效( *白名单*),如果对数据有限制,则拒绝无效输入。 [input_validation]
    请注意,将输入与“不良格式”(*黑名单*)的列表进行比较通常是不够的,因为攻击者通常可以绕过黑名单。例如,数字被转换成内部格式,然后检查它们是否在最小和最大(包括)之间,并且检查文本字符串以确保它们是有效的文本模式(例如,有效的UTF-8,长度,语法等)。一些数据可能需要是“任何东西”(例如,文件上传器),但这些数据通常是罕见的。

    Input is validated against a whitelist by construction, not sanitized after the fact. Artifact and party documents are read through strict typed constructors and refused on undeclared or duplicate keys; the catalogue itself is gated by veredictum validate, where zero findings is the only passing result (id uniqueness, citation resolution against the vendored specification text, binding completeness, and coverage of the enumerated wire surface); AQL and citation input is parsed by grammar-exact parsers that reject rather than guess; and every refusal is kept as its own pinned negative test, so a lenient acceptance is a failing test. The lint set removes the classic silent-acceptance paths (indexing_slicing, string_slice, as_conversions all denied). Every reader that parses outside input has a fuzz harness: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/fuzz/README.md



    加固机制应该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。 [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)。

    The container image is hardened and the hardening is machine-checked: a digest-pinned distroless base (gcr.io/distroless/cc-debian13:nonroot) with an explicit numeric USER 65532:65532 so an orchestrator does not have to resolve a name, no shell and no package manager in the runtime layer, a HEALTHCHECK, OCI metadata that a CI guard (scripts/checks/image-labels.sh) checks agrees with itself, hadolint over the Dockerfile on every pull request and Trivy over the published image weekly. The console binds to loopback unless the operator explicitly publishes it. On the process side the release profile keeps overflow-checks = true, and unsafe_code = forbid removes the memory-unsafety class outright: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/docker/Dockerfile



    该项目必须提供一个保证案例,证明其满足安全要求。保证案例必须包括:对威胁模型的描述,明确确定信任边界,确定设计原则得到适用,以及常见安全弱点已经被消减。 (需要网址) [assurance_case]
    一个保证案例是“一个文献记录的证据体系,提供了一个有说服力和有效的论据,指出一组关于系统属性的关键权利要求在给定环境中给定应用程序是充分合理的”(使用结构化保证案例模型的软件保证,Thomas Rhodes等人,NIST机构间报告7608)。信任边界是数据或执行改变其信任级别的边界,例如,典型Web应用程序中的服务器边界。常见做法是列出安全设计原则(例如Saltzer和Schroeer)和常见的实施安全漏洞(例如OWASP前10名或CWE / SANS前25名),并显示每个方案如何抵御。 BadgeApp保证案例可能是一个有用的例子。本条款与documentation_security,documentation_architecture和implement_secure_design等条款有关。

    ASSURANCE_CASE.md is the assurance argument, and every row names a file in this repository so each claim can be opened and checked: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/ASSURANCE_CASE.md . § 1 states the assets an attacker would want (verdict integrity — a wrong green is the worst outcome the product has; record integrity across the bundle, the release tarball and the image; confidentiality of the operator's inputs). § 2 is the trust-boundary table: the catalogue and vendored specifications as trusted-and-gated (validate at zero findings, entry point named), the system under test as untrusted by definition (its responses are evidence in a comparison, never instructions, and it cannot move the reference it is measured against), the operator's IXIT holding credential references only so an inline secret is unrepresentable, every console #[server] fn as a public endpoint bound to loopback by default, and the published record as tamper-evident without this tool (byte-deterministic SHA-256 manifest plus an RFC 9580 detached signature that plain gpg --verify checks). § 3 pairs each security-relevant requirement with the check that fails on violation (unsafe_code = forbid, the denied panic and indexing families, overflow-checks, typed errors at every branching boundary). § 4 names the three rules enforced by review alone rather than hiding them — on the project's own principle that a rule with no failing check is a wish. § 5 states what the case does not claim: no formal verification, no console authentication by design, no sanitizing of what is recorded, and that a verified signature says nothing about the conditions the run executed under. The reporting route stays in SECURITY.md, and a stale claim on that page is handled as a defect in the assurance case.


 分析 2/2

  • 静态代码分析


    如果至少有一个FLOSS工具能够以所选择的语言实现此条款,则该项目必须至少使用一个具有规则或方式的静态分析工具来查找分析语言或环境中的常见漏洞。 [static_analysis_common_vulnerabilities]
    专门设计用于寻找常见漏洞的静态分析工具更有可能找到它们。也就是说,使用任何静态工具通常会帮助找到一些问题,所以我们“通过”级别的徽章建议,但不要求这个条款。

    At least one analyser looks specifically for common vulnerability classes on every pull request: CodeQL runs its security query suites over the Rust and GitHub Actions sources on every push and pull request and again weekly, SonarQube Cloud publishes a security rating on the same events, zizmor audits the workflows for the Actions-specific classes (unpinned uses, credential-persisting checkouts, injectable contexts) at --min-severity=low, Trivy scans the published image, and cargo-deny checks the graph against the RustSec advisory database: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/actions/workflows/codeql.yml


  • 动态代码分析


    如果由项目生成的软件包含使用内存不安全语言编写的软件(例如,C或C ++),项目必须至少使用一个动态工具(例如,fuzzer或web应用扫描程序)与一种检测缓冲区覆写等内存安全问题的机制组合例行使用。如果项目不生成以内存不安全语言编写的软件,请选择“不适用”(N/A)。 [dynamic_analysis_unsafe]
    检测内存安全问题的机制的示例包括AddressSanitizer(ASAN)(可在GCC和LLVM中使用),“Memory Sanitizer” valgrind 。其他可能使用的工具包括ThreadSanitizerUndefinedBehaviorSanitizer。广泛的断言也将起作用。

    There is no memory-unsafe code to analyse. unsafe_code = "forbid" applies to the whole workspace, and forbid cannot be relaxed by an attribute — not even #[allow] compiles under it — so introducing unsafe would require a deliberate change to stop inheriting the lint table rather than a local suppression. The libFuzzer harnesses still run over every outside-input reader with sanitizer instrumentation regardless: https://github.com/rubentalstra/Veredictum/blob/main/Cargo.toml



您可以使用工具和AI系统通过简单的URL提交变更建议,例如 https://www.bestpractices.dev/zh-CN/projects/14252/choose/edit?osps_ac_01_01_status=Met&osps_ac_01_01_justification=GitHub+enforced。请参阅我们的自动化提案系统,了解具体操作方法。 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Ruben Talstra和OpenSSF最佳实践徽章贡献者。

项目徽章条目拥有者: Ruben Talstra.
最后更新于 2026-08-26 14:17:43 UTC, 最后更新于 2026-08-27 17:48:50 UTC。 最后在 2026-08-27 15:20:01 UTC 获得通过徽章。