FFmpeg

Projects that follow the best practices below can voluntarily self-certify and show that they've achieved an Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) best practices badge.

If this is your project, please show your badge status on your project page! The badge status looks like this: Badge level for project 235 is in_progress Here is how to embed it:

These are the Passing level criteria. You can also view the Silver or Gold level criteria.

        

 Basics 13/13 ●

  • Identification

    FFmpeg is the leading multimedia framework, able to decode, encode, transcode, mux, demux, stream, filter and play pretty much anything that humans and machines have created. It supports the most obscure ancient formats up to the cutting edge. No matter if they were designed by some standards committee, the community or a corporation. It is also highly portable: FFmpeg compiles, runs, and passes our testing infrastructure [FATE](fate.ffmpeg.org) across Linux, Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, the BSDs, Solaris, etc. under a wide variety of build environments, machine architectures, and configurations.

    It contains libavcodec, libavutil, libavformat, libavfilter, libavdevice, libswscale and libswresample which can be used by applications. As well as ffmpeg, ffserver, ffplay and ffprobe which can be used by end users for transcoding, streaming and playing.

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

  • Basic project website content


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://ffmpeg.org/about.html


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://ffmpeg.org/bugreports.html https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html https://ffmpeg.org/contact.html#MailingLists


    Enough for a badge!

    The information on how to contribute MUST explain the contribution process (e.g., are pull requests used?) (URL required) [contribution]

    https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html

    The above URL gives complete information regarding the contribution process. As a short summary: although mirrored on GitHub at https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFmpeg, the project does not accept pull requests as explained in https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/pull/153. We instead use a mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org instead; exact details are provided in the developer documentation link at the top.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html includes references to coding guidelines https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Coding-Rules-1.


  • FLOSS license

    What license(s) is the project released under?


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://ffmpeg.org/legal.html provides complete information regarding the licensing of FFmpeg.

    A short summary quoted from the above is:

    FFmpeg is licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) version 2.1 or later. However, FFmpeg incorporates several optional parts and optimizations that are covered by the GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 or later. If those parts get used the GPL applies to all of FFmpeg.

    Read the license texts to learn how this affects programs built on top of FFmpeg or reusing FFmpeg. You may also wish to have a look at the GPL FAQ.

    Note that FFmpeg is not available under any other licensing terms, especially not proprietary/commercial ones, not even in exchange for payment.


    Enough for a badge!

    It is SUGGESTED that any required license(s) for the software produced by the project be approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI). [floss_license_osi]

    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/COPYING.GPLv2 https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/COPYING.GPLv3 https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/COPYING.LGPLv2.1 https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/COPYING.LGPLv3


  • Documentation


    Enough for a badge!

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

    The documentation for FFmpeg is built from: https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/tree/HEAD:/doc. The documentation for the FFmpeg website is built from: https://git.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg-web.

    As such, the recommended starting point for exploring the docs is: https://ffmpeg.org/documentation.html.

    FFmpeg provides security information such as CVE numbers and commits addressing them at: https://ffmpeg.org/security.html.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://ffmpeg.org/documentation.html - the starting reference for documentation.

    For some community documentation, please see: https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki. For a short tutorial, please see: http://dranger.com/ffmpeg/. For a short book, please see: http://ffmpeg.tv/.


  • Other


    Enough for a badge!

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

    website: https://ffmpeg.org/. repository: https://git.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.git. snapshot/release download: https://ffmpeg.org/download.html#releases.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST have one or more mechanisms for discussion (including proposed changes and issues) that are searchable, allow messages and topics to be addressed by URL, enable new people to participate in some of the discussions, and do not require client-side installation of proprietary software. [discussion]

    mailing list: https://ffmpeg.org/contact.html#MailingLists IRC: https://ffmpeg.org/contact.html#IRCChannels forum: https://ffmpeg.org/contact.html#Forums bug tracker: https://trac.ffmpeg.org/.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    As can be seen at https://ffmpeg.org/documentation.html, all FFmpeg documentation is in English.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST be maintained. [maintained]


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



  • Public version-controlled source repository


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://git.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.git


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://git.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.git - it uses Git, and as such keeps track of the revisions. Note that revisions may also be viewed at the FFmpeg cvslog archives: https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-cvslog/. Remark: The name cvslog dates to when the project used CVS. Now, the project uses Git.


    Enough for a badge!

    To enable collaborative review, the project's source repository MUST include interim versions for review between releases; it MUST NOT include only final releases. [repo_interim]

    FFmpeg's repository is public, so in addition to the release branches (e.g https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/shortlog/refs/heads/release/3.0), we have a branch for master (https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/shortlog/refs/heads/master). Developers also sometimes maintain their own private forks for work in progress, e.g https://github.com/gajjanag/FFmpeg).


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Git is currently used, as reflected by https://git.ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg.git .


  • Unique version numbering


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#Release-process-1 - this describes the release process. In particular, major and minor version numbers are maintained for releases.


    Barely enough for a badge.

    It is SUGGESTED that the Semantic Versioning (SemVer) or Calendar Versioning (CalVer) version numbering format be used for releases. It is SUGGESTED that those who use CalVer include a micro level value. [version_semver]

    Enough for a badge!

    It is SUGGESTED that projects identify each release within their version control system. For example, it is SUGGESTED that those using git identify each release using git tags. [version_tags]

    https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/tags - each release is tagged. As an example, please see https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/tag/ee4ec90241c2e8c2ab69a1155fc3df86ff6f09ad.


  • Release notes


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST provide, in each release, release notes that are a human-readable summary of major changes in that release to help users determine if they should upgrade and what the upgrade impact will be. The release notes MUST NOT be the raw output of a version control log (e.g., the "git log" command results are not release notes). Projects whose results are not intended for reuse in multiple locations (such as the software for a single website or service) AND employ continuous delivery MAY select "N/A". (URL required) [release_notes]

    https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/blob/HEAD:/Changelog - this file keeps track of the release notes.


    Enough for a badge!

    The release notes MUST identify every publicly known run-time vulnerability fixed in this release that already had a CVE assignment or similar when the release was created. This criterion may be marked as not applicable (N/A) if users typically cannot practically update the software themselves (e.g., as is often true for kernel updates). This criterion applies only to the project results, not to its dependencies. If there are no release notes or there have been no publicly known vulnerabilities, choose N/A. [release_notes_vulns]

    https://ffmpeg.org/security.html - FFmpeg associates public vulnerabilities with the release that fixes them here.


  • Bug-reporting process


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST provide a process for users to submit bug reports (e.g., using an issue tracker or a mailing list). (URL required) [report_process]

    https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ - the bug tracker for FFmpeg.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/5689 - an illustration of an individual ticket.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST acknowledge a majority of bug reports submitted in the last 2-12 months (inclusive); the response need not include a fix. [report_responses]

    As can be seen at https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?status=new&status=open&status=reopened&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=component&col=version&col=time&col=changetime&report=1&desc=1&order=time, the project does respond to most bug reports within a few days.

    A significant fraction of them are fixed: https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?status=closed&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=owner&col=type&col=priority&col=component&order=priority.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?status=closed&status=new&status=open&desc=1&order=priority - as can be seen here, all incoming reports are classified into categories, and can be associated with the "enhancement" type or the "wish" priority.

    Also clear from the above links is that a significant fraction are implemented.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://trac.ffmpeg.org/report - this allows searching through the report database via a variety of queries.


  • Vulnerability report process


    Enough for a badge!

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

    As seen at: https://ffmpeg.org/security.html, vulnerabilities are reported to ffmpeg-security@ffmpeg.org.


    Enough for a badge!

    If private vulnerability reports are supported, the project MUST include how to send the information in a way that is kept private. (URL required) [vulnerability_report_private]

    As seen at: https://ffmpeg.org/security.html, vulnerabilities reported to ffmpeg-security@ffmpeg.org are private.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project's initial response time for any vulnerability report received in the last 6 months MUST be less than or equal to 14 days. [vulnerability_report_response]

    As can be seen at: https://ffmpeg.org/security.html, regular point releases are made to address security vulnerabilities. For further evidence of a regular response time, please see: https://security.googleblog.com/2014/01/ffmpeg-and-thousand-fixes.html.

    For more detailed statistics, please check the commit log - any commit addressing a CVE has the CVE number associated with it via the commit message.


  • Working build system


    Enough for a badge!

    If the software produced by the project requires building for use, the project MUST provide a working build system that can automatically rebuild the software from source code. [build]

    FFmpeg can be built on a variety of platforms, including but not limited to Windows, GNU/Linux, OS X, BSD's, Solaris. Generally, it may be accomplished via ./configure, make, make install with a few flags, see https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/CompilationGuide/Generic for details.


    Barely enough for a badge.

    It is SUGGESTED that common tools be used for building the software. [build_common_tools]

    FFmpeg uses make and the configure script is written in sh. The configure script relies on some standard utilities, like tr, grep, etc for testing the availability of components for building. A standard C compiler and linker are required, but FFmpeg does not restrict itself to a particular toolchain. For good performance, yasm is required for building assembly files, though this is not strictly needed as --disable-yasm is supported by configure.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project SHOULD be buildable using only FLOSS tools. [build_floss_tools]

    FFmpeg builds fine with FLOSS tools, please see e.g fate.ffmpeg.org.


  • Automated test suite


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST use at least one automated test suite that is publicly released as FLOSS (this test suite may be maintained as a separate FLOSS project). The project MUST clearly show or document how to run the test suite(s) (e.g., via a continuous integration (CI) script or via documentation in files such as BUILD.md, README.md, or CONTRIBUTING.md). [test]

    FFmpeg uses the FATE automated test suite: http://fate.ffmpeg.org/. The client side infrastructure is maintained within the FFmpeg repo. Server side is maintained at https://git.ffmpeg.org/fateserver. For details on how this works, please see https://ffmpeg.org/fate.html.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    As seen from https://ffmpeg.org/fate.html, invoking the FATE test suite is usually as simple as make fate. To obtain the test samples, make fate-rsync pulls samples from the https://samples.ffmpeg.org/ directory.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    The code coverage is generally at a 66%-75% level. It is still being actively worked upon, with http://coverage.ffmpeg.org/ showing the current status.


    Enough for a badge!

    It is SUGGESTED that the project implement continuous integration (where new or changed code is frequently integrated into a central code repository and automated tests are run on the result). [test_continuous_integration]

    A number of FATE clients are run, as can be seen from fate.ffmpeg.org. Clients get added and removed, but at any given moment there are a reasonable variety of CPU architectures, operating systems, and toolchains represented at fate.ffmpeg.org.


  • New functionality testing


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST have a general policy (formal or not) that as major new functionality is added to the software produced by the project, tests of that functionality should be added to an automated test suite. [test_policy]

    This is currently only an informal requirement, and generally is enforced only in libavcodec, where new encoders and decoders must be accompanied by tests.

    However, this is not uniformly enforced. Roughly, libavfilter tends to lack a lot of tests, and many new filters do not have tests associated with them immediately. It is the general expectation (informal) that tests will be added by the developer over time.


    Not enough for a badge.

    The project MUST have evidence that the test_policy for adding tests has been adhered to in the most recent major changes to the software produced by the project. [tests_are_added]

    Tests are lacking for all libraries except libavcodec.


    Barely enough for a badge.

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

    As seen above, the adding of tests is currently quite informal. Documentation is present at https://ffmpeg.org/developer.html, but it is sometimes vague.


  • Warning flags


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST enable one or more compiler warning flags, a "safe" language mode, or use a separate "linter" tool to look for code quality errors or common simple mistakes, if there is at least one FLOSS tool that can implement this criterion in the selected language. [warnings]

    There are FATE clients running the ubsan toolchain, valgrind, etc. Generally speaking, -Wall and some other warnings are enabled by default for all compilations.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST address warnings. [warnings_fixed]

    There are numerous commits in the repository addressing warnings, and patches are regularly submitted and reviewed for the same.

    However, it must be noted that as FFmpeg supports a variety of toolchains, some of which omit bogus warnings, and that too sometimes only for specific versions of the toolchain, it is infeasible to reach a 0 warnings policy across all FATE clients. Generally, on "standard" toolchains, such as GNU/Linux OR OS X + gcc OR clang, the warning count does not exceed 100, and most warning cleanup work addresses such toolchains.


    Barely enough for a badge.

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

    As noted above, as FFmpeg supports a variety of toolchains, some of which omit bogus warnings, and that too sometimes only for specific versions of the toolchain, it is infeasible to reach a 0 warnings policy across all FATE clients. Generally, on "standard" toolchains, such as GNU/Linux OR OS X + gcc OR clang, the warning count does not exceed 100, and most warning cleanup work addresses such toolchains.

    It is thus counterproductive to enforce a maximal strictness policy wrt warnings in FFmpeg. However, it should be noted that some developers experiment with additional warning combinations, and when the warnings stop being too noisy, the project is open to introducing these flags into the default set of warning flags.


  • Secure development knowledge


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST have at least one primary developer who knows how to design secure software. (See ‘details’ for the exact requirements.) [know_secure_design]

    Nicholas George and Michael Niedermayer (among possibly others) are developers who understand the above principles and actively use them. Michael Niedermayer is perhaps the only currently active developer who meets all of the above criteria.


    Enough for a badge!

    At least one of the project's primary developers MUST know of common kinds of errors that lead to vulnerabilities in this kind of software, as well as at least one method to counter or mitigate each of them. [know_common_errors]

    FFmpeg uses Coverity (https://scan.coverity.com/), a number of FATE clients use aids like ubsan, Valgrind, Helgrind, etc.

    FFmpeg does address the issue of creating more secure defaults, defensive programming practices, etc from time to time.


  • Use basic good cryptographic practices

    Note that some software does not need to use cryptographic mechanisms. If your project produces software that (1) includes, activates, or enables encryption functionality, and (2) might be released from the United States (US) to outside the US or to a non-US-citizen, you may be legally required to take a few extra steps. Typically this just involves sending an email. For more information, see the encryption section of Understanding Open Source Technology & US Export Controls.

    Enough for a badge!

    The software produced by the project MUST use, by default, only cryptographic protocols and algorithms that are publicly published and reviewed by experts (if cryptographic protocols and algorithms are used). [crypto_published]

    As seen from files like aes.c, blowfish.c, etc in libavutil/, FFmpeg only uses publicly known cryptographic algorithms by default.


    Barely enough for a badge.

    If the software produced by the project is an application or library, and its primary purpose is not to implement cryptography, then it SHOULD only call on software specifically designed to implement cryptographic functions; it SHOULD NOT re-implement its own. [crypto_call]

    FFmpeg reimplements common cryptographic primitives like AES, Blowfish, SHA, etc in files within FFmpeg. Many of them are simply used to meet a multimedia specification, and in many cases it is not security relevant. As FFmpeg is a very widely used library deployed in a variety of configurations, it is desired to have as few external dependencies as possible.


    Enough for a badge!

    All functionality in the software produced by the project that depends on cryptography MUST be implementable using FLOSS. [crypto_floss]

    This may be seen by examining the source code.


    Enough for a badge!

    The security mechanisms within the software produced by the project MUST use default keylengths that at least meet the NIST minimum requirements through the year 2030 (as stated in 2012). It MUST be possible to configure the software so that smaller keylengths are completely disabled. [crypto_keylength]

    Although FFmpeg does provide a low level DES API, it is used strictly for format interoperability and is thus not part of any security mechanism.


    Enough for a badge!

    The default security mechanisms within the software produced by the project MUST NOT depend on broken cryptographic algorithms (e.g., MD4, MD5, single DES, RC4, Dual_EC_DRBG), or use cipher modes that are inappropriate to the context, unless they are necessary to implement an interoperable protocol (where the protocol implemented is the most recent version of that standard broadly supported by the network ecosystem, that ecosystem requires the use of such an algorithm or mode, and that ecosystem does not offer any more secure alternative). The documentation MUST describe any relevant security risks and any known mitigations if these broken algorithms or modes are necessary for an interoperable protocol. [crypto_working]

    FFmpeg does implement and export a number of low level cryptographic primitives, some of which are broken such as MD5 and single DES. However, it should be noted that the usage of these primitives within FFmpeg are confined to instances where it is necessary in order to meet some specification.


    Enough for a badge!

    The default security mechanisms within the software produced by the project SHOULD NOT depend on cryptographic algorithms or modes with known serious weaknesses (e.g., the SHA-1 cryptographic hash algorithm or the CBC mode in SSH). [crypto_weaknesses]

    Same remarks as above. In particular, SHA-1 is used for creating identifiers, and is not used for a security purpose.


    Enough for a badge!

    The security mechanisms within the software produced by the project SHOULD implement perfect forward secrecy for key agreement protocols so a session key derived from a set of long-term keys cannot be compromised if one of the long-term keys is compromised in the future. [crypto_pfs]

    Enough for a badge!

    If the software produced by the project causes the storing of passwords for authentication of external users, the passwords MUST be stored as iterated hashes with a per-user salt by using a key stretching (iterated) algorithm (e.g., Argon2id, Bcrypt, Scrypt, or PBKDF2). See also OWASP Password Storage Cheat Sheet. [crypto_password_storage]

    FFmpeg does not store passwords for authentication of external users.


    Enough for a badge!

    The security mechanisms within the software produced by the project MUST generate all cryptographic keys and nonces using a cryptographically secure random number generator, and MUST NOT do so using generators that are cryptographically insecure. [crypto_random]

    As can be seen from https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/blob/HEAD:/libavutil/random_seed.c, FFmpeg makes a best effort at providing a cryptographically secure random number generator.


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


    Enough for a badge!

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

    PGP signatures are provided: https://ffmpeg.org/download.html#releases. The download is over https.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    PGP signatures are provided: https://ffmpeg.org/download.html#releases. The download is over https.


  • Publicly known vulnerabilities fixed


    Enough for a badge!

    There MUST be no unpatched vulnerabilities of medium or higher severity that have been publicly known for more than 60 days. [vulnerabilities_fixed_60_days]

    FFmpeg fixes public vulnerabilities much more quickly than this. Please see the commit logs for evidence of this.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    FFmpeg has a track record of fixing CVE's promptly. Some evidence for this: 1. https://ffmpeg.org/security.html 2. Commit logs - all CVE related commits have the CVE number included in the message 3. https://security.googleblog.com/2014/01/ffmpeg-and-thousand-fixes.html.


  • Other security issues


    Enough for a badge!

    The public repositories MUST NOT leak a valid private credential (e.g., a working password or private key) that is intended to limit public access. [no_leaked_credentials]

  • Static code analysis


    Enough for a badge!

    At least one static code analysis tool (beyond compiler warnings and "safe" language modes) MUST be applied to any proposed major production release of the software before its release, if there is at least one FLOSS tool that implements this criterion in the selected language. [static_analysis]

    FFmpeg uses Coverity (scan.coverity.com) before production releases, which checks for a variety of common C programming mistakes. It should be noted that Coverity is not perfect, and there are false positives which is why FFmpeg does not necessarily "clear" the list before release. Nevertheless, an effort is made to fix Coverity reports before release.


    Enough for a badge!

    It is SUGGESTED that at least one of the static analysis tools used for the static_analysis criterion include rules or approaches to look for common vulnerabilities in the analyzed language or environment. [static_analysis_common_vulnerabilities]

    FFmpeg uses Coverity (scan.coverity.com), which checks for a variety of common C programming mistakes.


    Enough for a badge!

    All medium and higher severity exploitable vulnerabilities discovered with static code analysis MUST be fixed in a timely way after they are confirmed. [static_analysis_fixed]

    FFmpeg fixes exploitable vulnerabilities promptly, regardless of whether they are found via static analysis (e.g privately via Coverity) or made public.


    Barely enough for a badge.

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

  • Dynamic code analysis


    Barely enough for a badge.

    It is SUGGESTED that at least one dynamic analysis tool be applied to any proposed major production release of the software before its release. [dynamic_analysis]

    Enough for a badge!

    It is SUGGESTED that if the software produced by the project includes software written using a memory-unsafe language (e.g., C or C++), then at least one dynamic tool (e.g., a fuzzer or web application scanner) be routinely used in combination with a mechanism to detect memory safety problems such as buffer overwrites. If the project does not produce software written in a memory-unsafe language, choose "not applicable" (N/A). [dynamic_analysis_unsafe]

    Fuzzing is certainly performed quite regularly on FFmpeg: https://security.googleblog.com/2014/01/ffmpeg-and-thousand-fixes.html, http://obe.tv/about-us/obe-blog/item/26-fuzzing-ffmpeg-for-fun-and-profit. Note that this is being done by third parties.


    Enough for a badge!

    It is SUGGESTED that the project use a configuration for at least some dynamic analysis (such as testing or fuzzing) which enables many assertions. In many cases these assertions should not be enabled in production builds. [dynamic_analysis_enable_assertions]

    FFmpeg uses assertions at various locations in the code (https://git.ffmpeg.org/gitweb/ffmpeg.git/blob/HEAD:/libavutil/random_seed.c).


    Enough for a badge!

    All medium and higher severity exploitable vulnerabilities discovered with dynamic code analysis MUST be fixed in a timely way after they are confirmed. [dynamic_analysis_fixed]

    FFmpeg does tend to fix vulnerabilities discovered via dynamic code analysis in a timely fashion: https://security.googleblog.com/2014/01/ffmpeg-and-thousand-fixes.html, http://obe.tv/about-us/obe-blog/item/26-fuzzing-ffmpeg-for-fun-and-profit. Note that is being done by third parties.



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

Project badge entry owned by: Ganesh Ajjanagadde.
Entry created on 2016-07-04 19:43:22 UTC, last updated on 2016-07-17 01:18:29 UTC.

Back