manydata

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 4562 is passing 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

    An R package for global governance data

    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]

    The manydata package offers a succinct README.md document presenting the uses and solutions offered by manydata. It also contains instructional vignettes for the usage of the package.


    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]

    The manydata project offers instructions in how to report bugs or issues directly in the GitHub address as well as templates for facilitating and standardizing these. Questions, contributions and feedback, as well as other forms of engagement, are encouraged by the developers.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Projects on GitHub by default use issues and pull requests, as encouraged by documentation such as https://guides.github.com/activities/contributing-to-open-source/. manydata encourages contribution and has extensive guidelines on how to contribute to the package development. There are also templates for pull requests to facilitate the engagement of contributors in expected ways (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/blob/main/.github/pull_request_template.md)


    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]

    manydata contains a detailed document on how to contribute and what is expected from contributors (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/blob/main/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md). It also details a code of conduct for future contributors (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/blob/main/.github/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)


  • 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]

    The CC-BY-4.0 is used.


    Barely 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]

    The CC-BY-4.0 license has not yet been added to the OSI list.


    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]

    Non-trivial license location file in repository: https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/blob/main/LICENSE.md.


  • Documentation


    Enough for a badge!

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

    How to use these specific functions, and others, has been well documented in the vignettes (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/blob/main/vignettes/user.Rmd)


    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]

    manydata has a pkgdown webpage that helps to describe and document in detail the package created by the project (https://globalgov.github.io/manydata/).


  • Other


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Please check the project website as well for further information about the project and partners (https://panarchic.ch/).


    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]

    GitHub supports discussions on issues and pull requests. Please check manydata on GitHub for more information about open issues and discussions (https://github.com/globalgov/qData/discussions)


    Enough for a badge!

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

    The package coding and documentation are all provided in English, please check our GitHub page (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata)


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST be maintained. [maintained]

    We have a maintainer and several contributors working on the project.



(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]

    Repository on GitHub, which provides public git repositories with URLs.


    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]

    Repository on GitHub, which uses git. git can track the changes, who made them, and when they were made.


    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]

    Github works so that we have develop and main branches to merge in-between releases.


    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]

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


  • 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]

    Please check the package news for important information about versioning (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/blob/main/NEWS.md).


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Enough for a badge!

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

    We use Semantic Versioning to identify releases (see https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/blob/main/NEWS.md).


  • 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]

    Non-trivial release notes file in repository: https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/blob/main/NEWS.md.


    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]

    Release notes for issues, fixes and additions are detailed for every release and can be found on the package NEWS file.


  • 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]

    Users and contributors can report issues, questions and make contributions to the package on GitHub (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/issues).


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Check our issues page on GitHub for a list of the issues and their dates (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/issues).


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We address bugs rather quickly, whenever possible, when they are found by us or reported to us. Bugs that take a bit longer to address are still acknowledged and made visible with bug tags on our GitHub issues page (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/issues).


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We meet enhancement requests rather quickly when reported to us via issues or discussions on GitHub. Some of the major enhancement issues we intend to make in the package in the future are put in a timeline with time estimates managed via Zenhub to be worked on in the long term.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    All of our GitHub issues and discussions are open to the public and trackable even for issue closed via a pull request (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/issues).


  • 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]

    Users and developers can report bugs and other vulnerability issues on our GitHub issues page in a secure and publicly open matter (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/issues).


    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]

    Reports and checks for package are publicly available.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We address issues and bugs rather quickly.


  • 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]

    We use R and devtools to build packages for use after any changes to code.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We use devtools.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We use R and GitHub which are free and open source.


  • Automated test suite


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We develop specific tests for the project code and functions as they are written, for more detail on our tests (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/tree/main/tests/testthat). We also test the package using various test and check mechanisms available on GitHub, for these please check our GitHub workflow page (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/tree/main/.github/workflows).


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We develop specific tests for the project code and functions as they are written, for more detail on our tests (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/tree/main/tests/testthat). We also test the package using various test and check mechanisms available on GitHub, for these please check our GitHub workflow page (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/tree/main/.github/workflows).


    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]

    As of now, our tests cover most of our code, and we are working towards the goal of getting all of it cover. We provide transparent code coverage reports for tests on our README documentation, please check (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata) for a detailed report on the current code coverage.


    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]

    This process is run constantly locally for development branches and before pull-requests can merged to the main branches of the package. For detailed workflows testing of our package please check https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/tree/main/.github/workflows.


  • 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]

    Our internal policy is that tests are added as package development occurs and any changes are made (test-driven development).


    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]

    As you may see on the tests section for qData on GitHub (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/tree/main/tests/testthat) tests are often being added as change occurs.


    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]

    Tests are being added in practice.


  • 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]

    We use linter and other software (pointblank, spellcheck and more) to make sure code is checked before it can be merged into our main branch on GitHub. These tests are visible as workflows checks on https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/tree/main/.github/workflows.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST address warnings. [warnings_fixed]

    Warnings must be addressed before branch merges are accepted.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We use many available software that generate informative warnings to developers to check codes before merging.


  • 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]

    Albeit the repository be open source and the code be publicly visible, we have a primary developer who reviews and accepts (or not) any changes made into that a developers branch that are to be merged into the main branch.


    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]

    Project maintainer is an experienced developer.


  • 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]

    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]

    Enough for a badge!

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

    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]

    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]

    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]

    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]

    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]

  • 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]

    Only changes approved by main developer and that pass all automated tests are merged into the main branch.


    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]

  • 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]

    We fix issues and vulnerabilities quickly.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We fix issues and vulnerabilities quickly.


  • 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]

    We use lintr as an extra check for our codes on the workflows (https://github.com/globalgov/manydata/tree/main/.github/workflows).


    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]

    We provide detailed reports and checks for the package before deployment. As well as badges for detailing package language and code coverage.


    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]

    Merges are only allowed once the issues pointed in the checks are addressed.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    For commits in develop or local branches these checks are not necessary since these changes are not yet ready to be implemented in the main package branch. Once any changes are requested to be made to that branch, checks are run on every commit and change is approved only after they pass.


  • Dynamic code analysis


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We apply code coverage report tools to account for changes in the percent of the code covered by the tests on every pull request.


    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]

    We provide coded languages percentage reports on our GitHub for each package.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    We provide detailed test reports and checks for the package before deployment.


    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]

    We always fix issues and vulnerabilities as soon as they arise.



This data is available under the Creative Commons Attribution version 3.0 or later license (CC-BY-3.0+). All are free to share and adapt the data, but must give appropriate credit. Please credit James Hollway and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: James Hollway.
Entry created on 2021-01-04 15:36:25 UTC, last updated on 2021-12-18 01:57:08 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2021-05-14 07:22:51 UTC.

Back