Crypto++

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 3806 is passing Here is how to embed it:

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

        

 Basics 15/17 ●

  • Identification

    Free C++ class library of cryptographic schemes

  • Prerequisites


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST achieve a passing level badge. [achieve_passing]

  • Basic project website content


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Contributions link, https://www.cryptopp.com/#contributions


  • Project oversight


    Barely enough for a 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 required) [dco]

    The library does not have a process in place to handle paperwork like Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO).

    The library does require contributors to place their contributions in Public Domain to avoid legal issues. It is a precondition to accepting a contribution. But it is not the same as "legal authority to make contributions [sic]". Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Category:Patch.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST clearly define and document its project governance model (the way it makes decisions, including key roles). (URL required) [governance]

    The project's governance is detailed in several places. In particular https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Process and https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Signing. We should probably create a PDF with the relevant information in one place.


    Not enough for a badge.

    The project MUST adopt a code of conduct and post it in a standard location. (URL required) [code_of_conduct]

    Do we really need to restate the Golden Rule?


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST clearly define and publicly document the key roles in the project and their responsibilities, including any tasks those roles must perform. It MUST be clear who has which role(s), though this might not be documented in the same way. (URL required) [roles_responsibilities]

    The project's key players and their roles are detailed in several places. In particular https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Process and https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Signing. We should probably create a PDF with the relevant information in one place.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST be able to continue with minimal interruption if any one person dies, is incapacitated, or is otherwise unable or unwilling to continue support of the project. 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 of the loss of support from any one individual. 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 required) [access_continuity]

    The project's key players and their roles are detailed in several places. In fact four different key members were selected from different regions of the world to ensure continuity. In particular https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Process and https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Signing. We should probably create a PDF with the relevant information in one place.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project SHOULD have a "bus factor" of 2 or more. (URL required) [bus_factor]

    The project's key players and their roles are detailed in several places. In fact four different key members were selected from different regions of the world to ensure continuity. In particular https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Process and https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Signing. We should probably create a PDF with the relevant information in one place.


  • Documentation


    Enough for a 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 required) [documentation_roadmap]

    The project includes a Roadmap and Release Process. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Roadmap and >https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Process>


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST include documentation of the architecture (aka high-level design) of the software produced by the project. If the project does not produce software, select "not applicable" (N/A). (URL required) [documentation_architecture]

    Documentation is provided in the Manual and the Wiki. The manual is Doxygen-based and brief and focuses on API. The wiki is verbose with lost of code examples and provides greater details. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/docs/ref/ and https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki.


    Enough for a 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 required) [documentation_security]

    Documentation is provided in the Manual and the Wiki. The manual is Doxygen-based and brief and focuses on API. The wiki is verbose with lost of code examples and provides greater details. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/docs/ref/ and https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST provide a "quick start" guide for new users to help them quickly do something with the software. (URL required) [documentation_quick_start]

    The quick Start guide is provided in Install.txt, which is similar to INSTALL. Also see https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/blob/master/Install.txt.

    Documentation is provided in the Manual and the Wiki. The manual is Doxygen-based and brief and focuses on API. The wiki is verbose with lost of code examples and provides greater details. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/docs/ref/ and https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki.


    Enough for a 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]

    Documentation is provided in the Manual and the Wiki. The manual is Doxygen-based and brief and focuses on API. The manual is frequently updated. The wiki is verbose and provides greater details. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/docs/ref/ and https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki.


    Not enough for a 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 required) [documentation_achievements]

    Ugh, we need to update the site's HTML and cutover to markdown (*.md) for this.


  • Accessibility and internationalization


    Barely enough for a 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]

    Ugh, we are missing text alternatives for those using screen readers.


    Enough for a 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]

    The library uses 7-bit ASCII clean for source code. The website uses UTF-8 encoding for web pages. The wiki uses UTF-8 encoding for web pages.


  • Other


    Enough for a badge!

    If the project sites (website, repository, and download URLs) store 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). If the project sites do not store passwords for this purpose, select "not applicable" (N/A). [sites_password_security]

    The website is hosted on a CentOS 7 VM. Access is granted through SSH using public key only.

    The source code is hosted on GitHub. Our governance requires code signing so nearly all commits are signed.

    The wiki accounts are by request only. Once granted Mediawiki hashes the password using SHA-512.


  • Previous versions


    Enough for a 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]

    The library provides past releases back to Crypto++ 2.0 dated January 1998. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/downloads.html.

    Being a library there is little need for upgrade paths. When needed for backwards compatibility, the library provides a class with the older behavior. For example, when a particular software-based PRNG was changed, a new class with the old behavior was added due to user requests. Also see the "OldRandomPool" class at https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/RandomNumberGenerator#Old_RandomPool.


  • Bug-reporting process


    Enough for a badge!

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

    https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues


  • Vulnerability report process


    Enough for a 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 required) [vulnerability_report_credit]

    The library gives credit where credit is due. Also see release notes like https://www.cryptopp.com/release600.html.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST have a documented process for responding to vulnerability reports. (URL required) [vulnerability_response_process]

    The process for responding to bugs in general and security bugs in particular can be found at https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Bug_Report#Security_Bugs.


  • Coding standards


    Not enough for a 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 required) [coding_standards]

    Ugh, we fail...

    On the good side, lack of coding standards removes a lot of barriers for patches. We don't reject contributions items like space vs tab, how to comment, end-of-line conversions, etc. We accpet the patch and fix it according to our [internal] standards.


    Not enough for a 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]

    Ugh, we fail...

    On the good side, lack of coding standards removes a lot of barriers for patches. We don't reject contributions items like space vs tab, how to comment, end-of-line conversions, etc. We accpet the patch and fix it according to our [internal] standards.


  • Working build system


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. The project follows GNU Coding Standards by default. The user always has the final say in compilers and flags.


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. The project follows GNU Coding Standards by default. The project adds debug information in default builds.


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. The project does not use recursive directories, so there is no recursive make.


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. The project attempts to obtain a reproducible builds.


  • Installation system


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. The project follows GNU Coding Standards by default. 'make install' and 'make uninstall' are supported in the makefile.


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. The project follows GNU Coding Standards by default. Users are allowed to override default choices.


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. The project follows GNU Coding Standards by default. We also work hard to minimize dependencies. The only thing needed to setup an environment is GNU make 3.80 or higher and a working C++ compiler that supports RTTI and exceptions.


  • Externally-maintained components


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST list external dependencies in a computer-processable way. (URL required) [external_dependencies]

    The prject maintains three external projects. The three external projects allow users to use a different build system (other then GNU Make). The wiki pages for the projects:

    And the corresponding GitHub repos:


    Enough for a 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]

    While we provide external projects, they are only project build files for Autotools, Cmake and Android.

    Whenever a new release of the library occurs, we package a new release of the build systems.


    Enough for a 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]

    While we provide external projects, they are only project build files for Autotools, Cmake and Android.


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. We remove deprecated APIs, or only provide them as needed for older/ancient platforms. On modern platforms the project uses modern system calls.


  • Automated test suite


    Enough for a 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]

    Absolutely. The project uses Travis, Cirrus and AppVeyor for CI. Results are sent to the [public] cryptopp-build mailing list at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/cryptopp-build.


    Enough for a 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]

    Our governance requires each bug and mailing list question has a postmortem examination. We try to determine why the instance problem (bug or question) happened. We then take action to fix future problems of the same class. We also add a specific test case in the case of a bug. We usually add documentation in response to a user question if it is missing. We consider lack of documentation bugs, too.


    Enough for a 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]

    The project uses Gcov, but it is not automated (yet).


  • New functionality testing


    Enough for a 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]

    Our governance requires new algorithms have both documentation on the wiki and test cases. We don't add new algorithms without test cases. It is too dangerous.


    Not enough for a 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]

    Our governance requires new algorithms have both documentation on the wiki and test cases. We don't add new algorithms without test cases. It is too dangerous.

    It looks like we need to add a wiki page on this topic. I thought we had one, but I cannot find it.


  • Warning flags


    Enough for a badge!

    Projects MUST be maximally strict with warnings in the software produced by the project, where practical. [warnings_strict]

    Testing includes -Werror when using GCC and Clang.


  • Secure development knowledge


    Enough for a 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]

    The project complies with FIPS 140-2 software requirements and attempts to use "secure by default" settings. For example, the library's assert is "off by default" because asserts are so dangerous. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Assertions.

    Note that the library only complies with FIPS 140-2. It is not longer validated (it used to be validated, but the validation was sunsetted by NIST).


  • 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 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]

    When available, the project uses 128-bits of security by default. 128-bits of security is the US government's recommendation nowadays.


    Enough for a 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]

    The Crypto++ library has an abundance of crypto agility :)


    Enough for a 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 replace them without code recompilation. If the project never processes authentication credentials and private cryptographic keys, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_credential_agility]

    The library itself does not handle sensitive information per se.

    The calling application will handle the sensitive information, and may use the library to encrypt it and store it where the user wants.


    Enough for a 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 communications, select "not applicable" (N/A). [crypto_used_network]

    The library does not provide protocols like SSH or TLS.


    Enough for a 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]

    The library does not provide protocols like SSH or TLS.


    Enough for a 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]

    The library does not provide protocols like SSH or TLS.

    The library does provide a X.509 certificate class that can be used to read and verify certificates and certificate chains. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/X509Certificate.


    Enough for a 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]

    The library does not provide protocols like SSH or TLS.


  • Secure release


    Enough for a 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 signs releases with GnuPG using RSA-4096 keys and SHA-256 digests. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Release_Signing.


    Barely enough for a 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]

    Hmmm.... I don't know how to sign a tag.


  • Other security issues


    Enough for a badge!

    The project results MUST check all inputs from potentially untrusted sources to ensure they are valid (an *allowlist*), and reject invalid inputs, if there are any restrictions on the data at all. [input_validation]

    The project does not handle untrusted user inputs. The applications that user the library may do so.


    Enough for a 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]

    The project uses hardened toolchain settings when available, like -fexceptions, -fplugin=annobin, -fstack-clash-protection, -fstack-protector-strong (or -fstack-protector), -grecord-gcc-switches, -mcet -fcf-protection, -Werror=format-security, -Werror=implicit-function-declaration, -fPIC and -pie for ASLR, -Wa,--noexecstack, -Wl,-z,relro, -Wl,-z,now and -Wl,-z,defs.


    Not enough for a 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 required) [assurance_case]

    Ugh, the project lacks threat models, attack trees and compensating controls.


  • Static code analysis


    Enough for a 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]

    The project uses Coverity Scan on Linux and OS X. The project uses Visual Studio Enterprise Analysis on Windows. Finally, the project uses the Looks Good To Me continuous security analysis. Also see https://www.cryptopp.com/wiki/Coverity_Scan and https://lgtm.com.


  • Dynamic code analysis


    Enough for a 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]

    The project uses Valgrind and Sanitizers to test for runtime violations. Valgrind detects memory and thread problems. Santiziers include Asan, Msan and UBsan.

    The projects self tests also "fuzz" certain interfaces attempting to crash the test suite. The fuzzing occurs under Valgrind, Asan and Msan.



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 Jeffrey Walton and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Jeffrey Walton.
Entry created on 2020-03-25 18:25:43 UTC, last updated on 2020-03-26 03:01:39 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2020-03-25 19:57:57 UTC.

Back