BRL-CAD

Projekte, die den nachfolgenden Best Practices folgen, können sich freiwillig selbst zertifizieren und zeigen, dass sie einen Core-Infrastruktur-Initiative (CII) Badge erhalten haben.

Es gibt keine Auswahl an Praktiken, die garantieren können, dass Software niemals Fehler oder Schwachstellen hat. Selbst formale Methoden können fehlschlagen, wenn die Spezifikationen oder Annahmen falsch sind. Auch gibt es keine Auswahl an Praktiken, die garantieren können, dass ein Projekt eine gesunde und gut funktionierende Entwicklungsgemeinschaft erhalten wird. Allerdings können Best Practices dabei helfen, die Ergebnisse von Projekten zu verbessern. Zum Beispiel ermöglichen einige Praktiken die Mehrpersonen-Überprüfung vor der Freigabe, die sowohl helfen können ansonsten schwer zu findende technische Schwachstellen zu finden und gleichzeitig dazu beitragen Vertrauen und den Wunsch nach wiederholter Zusammenarbeit zwischen Entwicklern verschiedener Unternehmen zu schaffen. Um ein Badge zu verdienen, müssen alle MÜSSEN und MÜSSEN NICHT Kriterien erfüllt sein, alle SOLLTEN Kriterien müssen erfüllt sein oder eine Rechtfertigung enthalten, und alle EMPFHOLEN Kriterien müssen erfüllt sein oder nicht (wir wollen sie zumindest berücksichtigt wissen)). Feedback ist willkommen auf derGitHub-Website als Issue oder Pull-Request. Es gibt auch eine E-Mail-Liste für allgemeine Diskussionen

Wir stellen Ihnen gerne die Informationen in mehreren Sprachen zur Verfügung, allerdings ist die Englische Version maßgeblich, insbesondere wenn es Konflikte oder Inkonsistenzen zwischen den Übersetzungen gibt.
Wenn dies Ihr Projekt ist, zeigen Sie bitte Ihren Badge-Status auf Ihrer Projektseite! Der Badge-Status sieht so aus: Badgelevel für Projekt 66 ist passing Hier ist, wie man es einbetten:
Sie können Ihren Badgestatus anzeigen, indem Sie folgendes in Ihre Markdown-Datei einbetten:
[![CII Best Practices](https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/projects/66/badge)](https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/projects/66)
oder indem Sie folgendes in Ihr HTML einbetten:
<a href="https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/projects/66"><img src="https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/projects/66/badge"></a>


Dies sind die Kriterien das Level Silber. Sie können auch die Kriterien für die Level Passing oder Gold sehen.



 Grundlagen 2/17

  • Identifizierung

    Hinweis: Andere Projekte können den selben Namen benutzen.

    BRL-CAD is an open source solid modeling system with interactive 3D geometry editing, high-performance ray tracing for rendering, hybrid representation geometry conversion, and processing for geometric analysis.

  • Prerequisites


    Genug für ein Badge!

    The project MUST achieve a passing level badge. [achieve_passing]
  • Grundlegende Informationen auf der Projektwebseite


    Genug für ein Badge!

    The information on how to contribute MUST include the requirements for acceptable contributions (e.g., a reference to any required coding standard). (URL erforderlich) [contribution_requirements]
  • Projektüberwachung


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project SHOULD have a legal mechanism where all developers of non-trivial amounts of project software assert that they are legally authorized to make these contributions. The most common and easily-implemented approach for doing this is by using a Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO), where users add "signed-off-by" in their commits and the project links to the DCO website. However, this MAY be implemented as a Contributor License Agreement (CLA), or other legal mechanism. (URL erforderlich) [dco]
    The DCO is the recommended mechanism because it's easy to implement, tracked in the source code, and git directly supports a "signed-off" feature using "commit -s". To be most effective it is best if the project documentation explains what "signed-off" means for that project. A CLA is a legal agreement that defines the terms under which intellectual works have been licensed to an organization or project. A contributor assignment agreement (CAA) is a legal agreement that transfers rights in an intellectual work to another party; projects are not required to have CAAs, since having CAA increases the risk that potential contributors will not contribute, especially if the receiver is a for-profit organization. The Apache Software Foundation CLAs (the individual contributor license and the corporate CLA) are examples of CLAs, for projects which determine that the risks of these kinds of CLAs to the project are less than their benefits.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST clearly define and document its project governance model (the way it makes decisions, including key roles). (URL erforderlich) [governance]
    There needs to be some well-established documented way to make decisions and resolve disputes. In small projects, this may be as simple as "the project owner and lead makes all final decisions". There are various governance models, including benevolent dictator and formal meritocracy; for more details, see Governance models. Both centralized (e.g., single-maintainer) and decentralized (e.g., group maintainers) approaches have been successfully used in projects. The governance information does not need to document the possibility of creating a project fork, since that is always possible for FLOSS projects.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Das Projekt MUSS einen Code of Conduct etablieren und an einem üblichen Ort veröffentlichen. (URL erforderlich) [code_of_conduct]
    Projects may be able to improve the civility of their community and to set expectations about acceptable conduct by adopting a code of conduct. This can help avoid problems before they occur and make the project a more welcoming place to encourage contributions. This should focus only on behavior within the community/workplace of the project. Example codes of conduct are the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct and the Linux kernel code of conflict.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Das Projekt MUSS klar und deutlich die Rollen- auf Aufgabenverteilung dokumentieren, inklusive einzelnen Tätigkeiten, die von den Rollenträgern ausgeführt werden müssen. Es MUSS eindeutig sein wer welche Rolle hat, auch wenn es in anderer Form dokumentiert ist. (URL erforderlich) [roles_responsibilities]
    Die Dokumentation für Governance und Rollen und Verantwortlichkeiten können an einem Ort sein.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST be able to continue with minimal interruption if any one person is incapacitated or killed. In particular, the project MUST be able to create and close issues, accept proposed changes, and release versions of software, within a week of confirmation that an individual is incapacitated or killed. This MAY be done by ensuring someone else has any necessary keys, passwords, and legal rights to continue the project. Individuals who run a FLOSS project MAY do this by providing keys in a lockbox and a will providing any needed legal rights (e.g., for DNS names). (URL erforderlich) [access_continuity]

    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Das Projekt SOLLTE einen Bus-Faktor von 2 oder mehr haben. (URL erforderlich) [bus_factor]
    A "bus factor" (aka "truck factor") is the minimum number of project members that have to suddenly disappear from a project ("hit by a bus") before the project stalls due to lack of knowledgeable or competent personnel. The truck-factor tool can estimate this for projects on GitHub. For more information, see Assessing the Bus Factor of Git Repositories by Cosentino et al.

  • Dokumentation


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST have a documented roadmap that describes what the project intends to do and not do for at least the next year. (URL erforderlich) [documentation_roadmap]
    The project might not achieve the roadmap, and that's fine; the purpose of the roadmap is to help potential users and constributors understand the intended direction of the project. It need not be detailed.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Das Projekt MUSS in der Dokumentation die Architektur (alias High-Level-Design) der vom Projekt entwickelten Software bereitstellen. Wenn das Projekt keine Software produziert, wählen Sie "nicht anwendbar" (N/A). (URL erforderlich) [documentation_architecture]
    A software architecture explains a program's fundamental structures, i.e., the program's major components, the relationships among them, and the key properties of these components and relationships.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST document what the user can and cannot expect in terms of security from the software produced by the project (its "security requirements"). (URL erforderlich) [documentation_security]
    Dies sind Sicherheitsanforderungen, die die Software erfüllen soll.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST provide a "quick start" guide for new users to help them quickly do something with the software. (URL erforderlich) [documentation_quick_start]
    The idea is to show users how to get started and make the software do anything at all. This is critically important for potential users to get started.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST make an effort to keep the documentation consistent with the current version of the project results (including software produced by the project). Any known documentation defects making it inconsistent MUST be fixed. If the documentation is generally current, but erroneously includes some older information that is no longer true, just treat that as a defect, then track and fix as usual. [documentation_current]
    The documentation MAY include information about differences or changes between versions of the software and/or link to older versions of the documentation. The intent of this criterion is that an effort is made to keep the documentation consistent, not that the documentation must be perfect.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project repository front page and/or website MUST identify and hyperlink to any achievements, including this best practices badge, within 48 hours of public recognition that the achievement has been attained. (URL erforderlich) [documentation_achievements]
    An achievement is any set of external criteria that the project has specifically worked to meet, including some badges. This information does not need to be on the project website front page. A project using GitHub can put achievements on the repository front page by adding them to the README file.

  • Zugänglichkeit und Internationalisierung


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project (both project sites and project results) SHOULD follow accessibility best practices so that persons with disabilities can still participate in the project and use the project results where it is reasonable to do so. [accessibility_best_practices]
    For web applications, see the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.0) and its supporting document Understanding WCAG 2.0; see also W3C accessibility information. For GUI applications, consider using the environment-specific accessibility guidelines (such as Gnome, KDE, XFCE, Android, iOS, Mac, and Windows). Some TUI applications (e.g. `ncurses` programs) can do certain things to make themselves more accessible (such as `alpine`'s `force-arrow-cursor` setting). Most command-line applications are fairly accessible as-is. This criterion is often N/A, e.g., for program libraries. Here are some examples of actions to take or issues to consider:
    • Provide text alternatives for any non-text content so that it can be changed into other forms people need, such as large print, braille, speech, symbols or simpler language ( WCAG 2.0 guideline 1.1)
    • Color is not used as the only visual means of conveying information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or distinguishing a visual element. ( WCAG 2.0 guideline 1.4.1)
    • The visual presentation of text and images of text has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1, except for large text, incidental text, and logotypes ( WCAG 2.0 guideline 1.4.3)
    • Make all functionality available from a keyboard (WCAG guideline 2.1)
    • A GUI or web-based project SHOULD test with at least one screen-reader on the target platform(s) (e.g. NVDA, Jaws, or WindowEyes on Windows; VoiceOver on Mac & iOS; Orca on Linux/BSD; TalkBack on Android). TUI programs MAY work to reduce overdraw to prevent redundant reading by screen-readers.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The software produced by the project SHOULD be internationalized to enable easy localization for the target audience's culture, region, or language. If internationalization (i18n) does not apply (e.g., the software doesn't generate text intended for end-users and doesn't sort human-readable text), select "not applicable" (N/A). [internationalization]
    Localization "refers to the adaptation of a product, application or document content to meet the language, cultural and other requirements of a specific target market (a locale)." Internationalization is the "design and development of a product, application or document content that enables easy localization for target audiences that vary in culture, region, or language." (See W3C's "Localization vs. Internationalization".) Software meets this criterion simply by being internationalized. No localization for another specific language is required, since once software has been internationalized it's possible for others to work on localization.

  • Andere


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Wenn die Projektseiten (Website, Repository und Download-URLs) Passwörter für die Authentifizierung von externen Benutzern speichern, müssen die Passwörter als iterierte Hashes mit einem per-User-Salt unter Verwendung eines Key-Stretching (iterierten) Algorithmus (z.B. PBKDF2, Bcrypt oder Scrypt). Wenn die Projektseiten hierfür keine Passwörter speichern, wählen Sie "nicht anwendbar" (N/A) aus. [sites_password_security]
    Note that the use of GitHub meets this criterion. This criterion only applies to passwords used for authentication of external users into the project sites. If the project sites must log in to other sites, they may need to store passwords for that purpose differently (since using an algorithm like Bcrypt would make those passwords useless). This applies criterion crypto_password_storage to the project sites, similar to sites_https.

 Verbesserungs/Nacharbeits -Kontrolle 0/1

  • Vorherige Versionen


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST maintain the most often used older versions of the product or provide an upgrade path to newer versions. If the upgrade path is difficult, the project MUST document how to perform the upgrade (e.g., the interfaces that have changed and detailed suggested steps to help upgrade). [maintenance_or_update]

 Berichterstattung 1/3

  • Bug-Report Prozess


    Genug für ein Badge!

    Das Projekt MUSS ein Issue-Tracking-System zur Verwaltung einzelner Issues verwenden. [report_tracker]
  • Anfälligkeits-Prozessbericht


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST give credit to the reporter(s) of all vulnerability reports resolved in the last 12 months, except for the reporter(s) who request anonymity. If there have been no vulnerabilities resolved in the last 12 months, select "not applicable" (N/A). (URL erforderlich) [vulnerability_report_credit]

    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Das Projekt MUSS den Prozess für die Meldung von Schwachstellen auf der Projektseite veröffentlichen. (URL erforderlich) [vulnerability_response_process]
    This is strongly related to vulnerability_report_process, which requires that there be a documented way to report vulnerabilities. It also related to vulnerability_report_response, which requires response to vulnerability reports within a certain time frame.

 Qualität 3/19

  • Programmierstil


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST identify the specific coding style guides for the primary languages it uses, and require that contributions generally comply with it. (URL erforderlich) [coding_standards]
    In most cases this is done by referring to some existing style guide(s), possibly listing differences. These style guides can include ways to improve readability and ways to reduce the likelihood of defects (including vulnerabilities). Many programming languages have one or more widely-used style guides. Examples of style guides include Google's style guides and SEI CERT Coding Standards.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST automatically enforce its selected coding style(s) if there is at least one FLOSS tool that can do so in the selected language(s). [coding_standards_enforced]
    This MAY be implemented using static analysis tool(s) and/or by forcing the code through code reformatters. In many cases the tool configuration is included in the project's repository (since different projects may choose different configurations). Projects MAY allow style exceptions (and typically will); where exceptions occur, they MUST be rare and documented in the code at their locations, so that these exceptions can be reviewed and so that tools can automatically handle them in the future. Examples of such tools include ESLint (JavaScript) and Rubocop (Ruby).

  • Produktivsystem


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Build systems for native binaries MUST honor the relevant compiler and linker (environment) variables passed in to them (e.g., CC, CFLAGS, CXX, CXXFLAGS, and LDFLAGS) and pass them to compiler and linker invocations. A build system MAY extend them with additional flags; it MUST NOT simply replace provided values with its own. If no native binaries are being generated, select "not applicable" (N/A). [build_standard_variables]
    It should be easy to enable special build features like Address Sanitizer (ASAN), or to comply with distribution hardening best practices (e.g., by easily turning on compiler flags to do so).


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The build and installation system SHOULD preserve debugging information if they are requested in the relevant flags (e.g., "install -s" is not used). If there is no build or installation system (e.g., typical JavaScript libraries), select "not applicable" (N/A). [build_preserve_debug]
    E.G., setting CFLAGS (C) or CXXFLAGS (C++) should create the relevant debugging information if those languages are used, and they should not be stripped during installation. Debugging information is needed for support and analysis, and also useful for measuring the presence of hardening features in the compiled binaries.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The build system for the software produced by the project MUST NOT recursively build subdirectories if there are cross-dependencies in the subdirectories. If there is no build or installation system (e.g., typical JavaScript libraries), select "not applicable" (N/A). [build_non_recursive]
    The project build system's internal dependency information needs to be accurate, otherwise, changes to the project may not build correctly. Incorrect builds can lead to defects (including vulnerabilities). A common mistake in large build systems is to use a "recursive build" or "recursive make", that is, a hierarchy of subdirectories containing source files, where each subdirectory is independently built. Unless each subdirectory is fully independent, this is a mistake, because the dependency information is incorrect.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST be able to repeat the process of generating information from source files and get exactly the same bit-for-bit result. If no building occurs (e.g., scripting languages where the source code is used directly instead of being compiled), select "not applicable" (N/A). [build_repeatable]
    GCC and clang users may find the -frandom-seed option useful; in some cases, this can be resolved by forcing some sort order. More suggestions can be found at the reproducible build site.

  • Installationssystem


    Genug für ein Badge!

    The project MUST provide a way to easily install and uninstall the software produced by the project using a commonly-used convention. [installation_common]
    Examples include using a package manager (at the system or language level), "make install/uninstall" (supporting DESTDIR), a container in a standard format, or a virtual machine image in a standard format. The installation and uninstallation process (e.g., its packaging) MAY be implemented by a third party as long as it is FLOSS.

    CMake build system provides for installation and uninstallation.



    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The installation system for end-users MUST honor standard conventions for selecting the location where built artifacts are written to at installation time. For example, if it installs files on a POSIX system it MUST honor the DESTDIR environment variable. If there is no installation system or no standard convention, select "not applicable" (N/A). [installation_standard_variables]

    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST provide a way for potential developers to quickly install all the project results and support environment necessary to make changes, including the tests and test environment. This MUST be performed with a commonly-used convention. [installation_development_quick]
    This MAY be implemented using a generated container and/or installation script(s). External dependencies would typically be installed by invoking system and/or language package manager(s), per external_dependencies.

  • Externe gepflegte Komponenten


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Das Projekt MUSS externe Abhängigkeiten in computerlesbarer Form auflisten. (URL erforderlich) [external_dependencies]
    Dies geschieht in der Regel mit den Konventionen des Paketmanagers und / oder des Buildsystems. Dies hilft auch installation_development_quick zu erfüllen.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    Projects MUST monitor or periodically check their external dependencies (including convenience copies) to detect known vulnerabilities, and fix exploitable vulnerabilities or verify them as unexploitable. [dependency_monitoring]
    This can be done using an origin analyzer / dependency checking tool such as OWASP's Dependency-Check, Sonatype's Nexus Auditor, Black Duck's Protex, Synopsys' Protecode, and Bundler-audit (for Ruby). Some package managers include mechanisms to do this. It is acceptable if the components' vulnerability cannot be exploited, but this analysis is difficult and it is sometimes easier to simply update or fix the part.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST either:
    1. make it easy to identify and update reused externally-maintained components; or
    2. use the standard components provided by the system or programming language.
    Then, if a vulnerability is found in a reused component, it will be easy to update that component. [updateable_reused_components]
    A typical way to meet this criterion is to use system and programming language package management systems. Many FLOSS programs are distributed with "convenience libraries" that are local copies of standard libraries (possibly forked). By itself, that's fine. However, if the program *must* use these local (forked) copies, then updating the "standard" libraries as a security update will leave these additional copies still vulnerable. This is especially an issue for cloud-based systems; if the cloud provider updates their "standard" libaries but the program won't use them, then the updates don't actually help. See, e.g., "Chromium: Why it isn't in Fedora yet as a proper package" by Tom Callaway.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project SHOULD avoid using deprecated or obsolete functions and APIs where FLOSS alternatives are available in the set of technology it uses (its "technology stack") and to a supermajority of the users the project supports (so that users have ready access to the alternative). [interfaces_current]
  • Automatisierte Test-Suite


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    An automated test suite MUST be applied on each check-in to a shared repository for at least one branch. This test suite MUST produce a report on test success or failure. [automated_integration_testing]
    This requirement can be viewed as a subset of test_continuous_integration, but focused on just testing, without requiring continuous integration.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST add regression tests to an automated test suite for at least 50% of the bugs fixed within the last six months. [regression_tests_added50]

    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST have FLOSS automated test suite(s) that provide at least 80% statement coverage if there is at least one FLOSS tool that can measure this criterion in the selected language. [test_statement_coverage80]
    Many FLOSS tools are available to measure test coverage, including gcov/lcov, Blanket.js, Istanbul, and JCov. Note that meeting this criterion is not a guarantee that the test suite is thorough, instead, failing to meet this criterion is a strong indicator of a poor test suite.

  • Neue Funktionalitäts-Überprüfung


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST have a formal written policy that as major new functionality is added, tests for the new functionality MUST be added to an automated test suite. [test_policy_mandated]

    Genug für ein Badge!

    The project MUST include, in its documented instructions for change proposals, the policy that tests are to be added for major new functionality. [tests_documented_added]
    Allerdings ist auch eine informelle Regel akzeptabel, solange die Tests in der Praxis hinzugefügt werden.

  • Warnhinweise


    Genug für ein Badge!

    Projects MUST be maximally strict with warnings in the software produced by the project, where practical. [warnings_strict]
    Some warnings cannot be effectively enabled on some projects. What is needed is evidence that the project is striving to enable warning flags where it can, so that errors are detected early.

    Compilation is maximally strict. Warnings are considered errors. Actual gcc/clang warnings currently in effect: -pedantic -pedantic-errors -Wall -Wextra -Wundef -Wfloat-equal -Wshadow -Wbad-function-cast -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wc++-compat -Winline -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wdocumentation -Wno-c11-extensions -Werror


 Sicherheit 6/13

  • Wissen über sichere Entwicklungspraktiken


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST implement secure design principles (from "know_secure_design"), where applicable. If the project is not producing software, select "not applicable" (N/A). [implement_secure_design]
    For example, the project results should have fail-safe defaults (access decisions should deny by default, and projects' installation should be secure by default). They should also have complete mediation (every access that might be limited must be checked for authority and be non-bypassable). Note that in some cases principles will conflict, in which case a choice must be made (e.g., many mechanisms can make things more complex, contravening "economy of mechanism" / keep it simple).

  • Verwende grundlegend gute kryptographische Praktiken

    Beachte, dass einige Software keine kryptographischen Mechanismen verwenden muss.

    Genug für ein Badge!

    The default security mechanisms within the software produced by the project MUST 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]
    Sorgen über den CBC-Modus in SSH werden in CERT: SSH CBC vulnerability erläutert.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project SHOULD support multiple cryptographic algorithms, so users can quickly switch if one is broken. Common symmetric key algorithms include AES, Twofish, and Serpent. Common cryptographic hash algorithm alternatives include SHA-2 (including SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384 AND SHA-512) and SHA-3. [crypto_algorithm_agility]

    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST support storing authentication credentials (such as passwords and dynamic tokens) and private cryptographic keys in files that are separate from other information (such as configuration files, databases, and logs), and permit users to update and replacement them without code recompilation. If the project never processes authentication credentials and private cryptographic keys, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_credential_agility]

    Genug für ein Badge!

    The software produced by the project SHOULD support secure protocols for all of its network communications, such as SSHv2 or later, TLS1.2 or later (HTTPS), IPsec, SFTP, and SNMPv3. Insecure protocols such as FTP, HTTP, telnet, SSLv3 or earlier, and SSHv1 SHOULD be disabled by default, and only enabled if the user specifically configures it. If the software produced by the project does not support network comunications, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_used_network]

    There is un unencrypted network communication with an encrypted equivalent.



    Genug für ein Badge!

    The software produced by the project SHOULD, if it supports or uses TLS, support at least TLS version 1.2. Note that the predecessor of TLS was called SSL. If the software does not use TLS, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_tls12]

    There is no SSL / TLS communication in BRL-CAD.



    Genug für ein Badge!

    The software produced by the project MUST, if it supports TLS, perform TLS certificate verification by default when using TLS, including on subresources. If the software does not use TLS, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_certificate_verification]

    There is no SSL / TLS communication in BRL-CAD.



    Genug für ein Badge!

    The software produced by the project MUST, if it supports TLS, perform certificate verification before sending HTTP headers with private information (such as secure cookies). If the software does not use TLS, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_verification_private]

    There is no SSL / TLS communication in BRL-CAD.


  • Sicheres Release


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST cryptographically sign releases of the project results intended for widespread use, and there MUST be a documented process explaining to users how they can obtain the public signing keys and verify the signature(s). The private key for these signature(s) MUST NOT be on site(s) used to directly distribute the software to the public. If releases are not intended for widespread use, select "not applicable" (N/A). [signed_releases]
    The project results include both source code and any generated deliverables where applicable (e.g., executables, packages, and containers). Generated deliverables MAY be signed separately from source code. These MAY be implemented as signed git tags (using cryptographic digital signatures). Projects MAY provide generated results separately from tools like git, but in those cases, the separate results MUST be separately signed.


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    It is SUGGESTED that in the version control system, each important version tag (a tag that is part of a major release, minor release, or fixes publicly noted vulnerabilities) be cryptographically signed and verifiable as described in signed_releases. [version_tags_signed]
  • Andere Sicherheitsissues


    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project results MUST check all inputs from potentially untrusted sources to ensure they are valid (a *whitelist*), and reject invalid inputs, if there are any restrictions on the data at all. [input_validation]
    Note that comparing input against a list of "bad formats" (aka a *blacklist*) is normally not enough, because attackers can often work around a blacklist. In particular, numbers are converted into internal formats and then checked if they are between their minimum and maximum (inclusive), and text strings are checked to ensure that they are valid text patterns (e.g., valid UTF-8, length, syntax, etc.). Some data may need to be "anything at all" (e.g., a file uploader), but these would typically be rare.


    Genug für ein Badge!

    Hardening mechanisms SHOULD be used in the software produced by the project so that software defects are less likely to result in security vulnerabilities. [hardening]
    Hardening mechanisms may include HTTP headers like Content Security Policy (CSP), compiler flags to mitigate attacks (such as -fstack-protector), or compiler flags to eliminate undefined behavior. For our purposes least privilege is not considered a hardening mechanism (least privilege is important, but separate).

    BRL-CAD extensively uses compiler flags (including -fstack-protector) and static analysis tools (Coverity) to minimize or eliminate undefined behavior. BRL-CAD has extensive testing strategies in place to detect security issues and unexpected behavior.



    Unbekannte erforderliche Informationen, nicht genug für ein Badge.

    The project MUST provide an assurance case that justifies why its security requirements are met. The assurance case MUST include: a description of the threat model, clear identification of trust boundaries, an argument that secure design principles have been applied, and an argument that common implementation security weaknesses have been countered. (URL erforderlich) [assurance_case]
    An assurance case is "a documented body of evidence that provides a convincing and valid argument that a specified set of critical claims regarding a system’s properties are adequately justified for a given application in a given environment" ( "Software Assurance Using Structured Assurance Case Models", Thomas Rhodes et al, NIST Interagency Report 7608). Trust boundaries are boundaries where data or execution changes its level of trust, e.g., a server's boundaries in a typical web application. It's common to list secure design principles (such as Saltzer and Schroeer) and common implementation security weaknesses (such as the OWASP top 10 or CWE/SANS top 25), and show how each are countered. The BadgeApp assurance case may be a useful example. This is related to documentation_security, documentation_architecture, and implement_secure_design.

 Analyse 1/2

  • Statische Codeanalyse


    Genug für ein Badge!

    The project MUST use at least one static analysis tool with rules or approaches to look for common vulnerabilities in the analyzed language or environment, if there is at least one FLOSS tool that can implement this criterion in the selected language. [static_analysis_common_vulnerabilities]
  • Dynamische Codeanalyse


    Nicht genug für ein Badge.

    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) MUST 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]
    Beispiele für Mechanismen zur Erkennung von Arbeitsspeicher Sicherheitsproblemen sind Adresse Sanitizer (ASAN) (verfügbar in GCC und LLVM), Memory Sanitizer und valgrind. Andere möglicherweise verwendete Werkzeuge sind Thread Sanitizer und Undefined Behavior Sanitizer. Weit verbreitete Assertions würden auch funktionieren.

    Dynamic analysis is not currently part of BRL-CAD's release repertoire, but several tools are used periodically and have been used in the past including gcov, valgrind, dmalloc, and purify.



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

Projekt Badge Eintrag im Besitz von: Christopher Sean Morrison.
Eintrag erstellt auf 2016-02-16 19:22:11 UTC, zuletzt aktualisiert auf 2016-08-26 22:10:07 UTC. Letztes erreichtes Badge auf 2016-08-22 03:14:40 UTC.

Zurück