rustls

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 9034 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

    A modern TLS library in Rust

    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://github.com/rustls/rustls


    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://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


    Enough for a badge!

    Habari juu ya jinsi ya kuchangia LAZIMA ieleze mchakato wa uchangiaji (kwa mfano, je! Maombi ya kuvuta yanatumika?) (URL required) [contribution]

    https://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md


    Enough for a badge!

    Habari juu ya jinsi ya kuchangia INAPASWA kujumuisha mahitaji ya michango inayokubalika (k.m., rejeleo la kiwango chochote kinachohitajika cha usimbaji). (URL required) [contribution_requirements]

    https://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md explains our coding standard style guide.


  • 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 license is available in the LICENSE file in the repository: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/LICENSE The library is distributed under Apache License version 2.0, MIT license and ISC license, all of which are OSI approved FLOSS licenses. The Apache-2.0 license is approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI).


    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 Apache License version 2.0, MIT license and ISC license are all approved by the OSI. The Apache-2.0 license is approved by the Open Source Initiative (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]

    It's in the LICENSE file in the top level directory. See: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/LICENSE


  • Documentation


    Enough for a badge!

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

    The documentation is automatically generated from the source code and available at: https://docs.rs/rustls/latest/rustls/


    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]

    The interface of the library is described in the documentation: https://docs.rs/rustls/latest/rustls/


  • Other


    Enough for a badge!

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

    The project website and repo use GitHub, which supports HTTPS using TLS. There's no separate download URL (use git to download from the repo). The distribution packages can be downloaded from crates.io, which also supports HTTPS.


    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 issue tracker and pull requests support discussion. The issues are searchable, have URLs, and allow new people to participate in the discussion. No proprietary software is required to participate in the discussion.


    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 documentation is in English and the project accepts bug reports and comments in English.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST be maintained. [maintained]

    The project is actively maintained. Our core maintainers are listed here: https://github.com/rustls/rustls?tab=readme-ov-file#project-membership



(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]

    The project uses GitHub for version control and the repository is publicly readable at https://github.com/rustls/rustls.


    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]

    Interim versions are put on git, not just final versions.


    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]

    The project uses semantic versioning, which provides a unique version identifier for each release.


    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]

    Full releases are tagged using 'git tag'.


  • 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]

    The release notes are available with each GitHub release: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/releases


    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]

    The only two published CVEs for the rustls library are CVE-2019-15541, which was specific to example code and CVE-2024-32650, which was published on 2024-04-19. CVE-2024-32650 was fixed in 0.23.5 (and other supported releases), and called out in the release notes.


  • 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]

    The project uses GitHub issue tracker for bug reports (https://github.com/rustls/rustls/issues), as described in https://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Yes, we use the GitHub issue tracker


    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]

    Out of the 180 issues created in the last 12 months, 149 have been closed. Out of these, none are labeled as bugs.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Out of the 180 issues created in the last 12 months, 149 have been closed.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Yes, via the GitHub issue tracker: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/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]

    The process is described in the SECURITY.md file in the repository: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/SECURITY.md


    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]

    GitHub security advisories can be used for private reports, as described in https://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/SECURITY.md


    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]

    There has been one private security vulnerability report in the last 6 months (CVE-2024-32650) - it was filed via our recommended communication channel (GitHub security report) on April 17th 2024 at 7:06pm ET. Maintainers replied on April 18th at 3:13 ET, ~8 hours later.


  • Working build system


    Enough for a badge!

    Ikiwa programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi inahitaji ujenzi wa matumizi, mradi LAZIMA utoe mfumo wa kujenga ambao unaweza kujenga programu kiotomatiki kutoka kwa chanzo-msimbo. [build]

    The project uses Cargo for building the library, which automatically rebuilds the software from source code.


    Enough for a badge!

    INAPENDEKEZWA kuwa zana za kawaida zitumike kujenga programu. [build_common_tools]

    The project uses Cargo for building the library.


    Enough for a badge!

    Mradi UNAPASWA kujengwa kwa kutumia zana za FLOSS pekee yake. [build_floss_tools]

    The project uses Cargo for building the library, which is FLOSS.


  • 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]

    The project uses an extensive combination of unit and integration tests, and additionally includes 3rd party test coverage (e.g. BoringSSL's "bogo" test suite). All are released as FLOSS and run via GitHub Actions. Some tests are more time-consuming, or flaky due to external 3rd party services, and run daily in a separate task: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/actions/workflows/daily-tests.yml


    Enough for a badge!

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

    Yes, 'cargo test'.


    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]

    Yes, the code coverage is above 95%.


    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]

    Yes, the project uses GitHub Actions for continuous integration for all pull requests, as well as on a daily cadence. We additionally run a separate suite of tests (ones that are slower, or flaky due to external online dependencies) once per day. See https://github.com/rustls/rustls/actions/workflows/daily-tests.yml


  • 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]

    Yes, this is described in the CONTRIBUTING.md file (https://github.com/rustls/rustls/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md): "Features involving additions to the public API should have (at least) API-level tests", "Protocol additions should have some coverage -- consider enabling corresponding tests in the bogo suite, or writing some ad hoc tests."


    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]

    Yes, we measure every pull request's coverage. When coverage shows gaps, we will often add additional tests (example: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/pull/1963#issuecomment-2130328290). Where it is difficult to implement tests ourselves (e.g. because of missing features), we employ other project's tests where possible (example: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/pull/1718#issuecomment-1874583910). We often explicitly request additional tests for external contributions (example: https://github.com/rustls/rustls/pull/1922#pullrequestreview-2025335079).


    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]

    Yes, the CONTRIBUTING.md file describes the policy.


  • 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]

    The project uses 'forbid(unsafe_code)' attribute in the source code to ensure no unsafe code is used. We also use the nightly toolchain's cargo clippy tool for linting to ensure we're aware of new warnings/lints ASAP.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project MUST address warnings. [warnings_fixed]

    In general warnings are addressed. In some cases warnings are disabled for specific cases, always with justification.


    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]

    The settings for the cargo linter are kept strict.


  • 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]

    Ctz has industry experience in high-security & high-availability domains (HSMs), mobile and embedded security.

    Cpu has worked on large scale security-first systems (example, Let's Encrypt's CA software), independently audited software for vulnerabilities (e.g. CVEs in Apache HTTPD, OSSEC), worked as an application security engineer at a large fintech, as a security consultant at a security assessment firm, and holds a masters in computer science earned working in an academic security lab.


    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]

    See above. Both Ctz and Cpu are familiar with many classes of vulnerabilities, and remediations. See for example, the detailed summary/research work Ctz did for the Rustls manual on the topic of implementation vulns (https://docs.rs/rustls/latest/rustls/manual/_01_impl_vulnerabilities/index.html) and TLS protocol vulns (https://docs.rs/rustls/latest/rustls/manual/_02_tls_vulnerabilities/index.html).


  • 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!

    Programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi LAZIMA itumie, kwa chaguo-msingi, tu itifaki za kriptografia na mifumbo ambazo zimechapishwa hadharani na kukaguliwa na wataalam (ikiwa itifaki za kriptografia na mafumbo imetumika). [crypto_published]

    The project uses/implements only publicly published and reviewed cryptographic protocols and algorithms (TLS 1.2 and 1.3).


    Enough for a badge!

    Ikiwa programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi ni programu au maktaba, na kusudi lake la msingi sio kutekeleza usimbuaji, basi INAPASWA tu kuita programu iliyoundwa kihususa kutekeleza kazi za kielelezo; HAIPASWI kutekeleza-upya shughuli hiyo. [crypto_call]

    The project implements the TLS protocol, which is a cryptographic protocol. For cryptographic primitives, the project relies on dedicated cryptography providers like *ring* or AWS libcrypto (aws-lc-rs).


    Enough for a badge!

    Utendaji wote katika programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi ambayo inategemea usimbuaji LAZIMA iweze kutekelezwa kwa kutumia FLOSS. [crypto_floss]

    All required functionality is implemented using FLOSS, including cryptography.


    Enough for a badge!

    Mifumo ya usalama ndani ya programu inayozalishwa na mradi LAZIMA itumie kwa msingi keylengths ambazo angalau zinakidhi mahitaji ya chini ya NIST kufikia mwaka wa 2030 (kama ilivyoelezwa mnamo 2012). LAZIMA iwe rahisi kusanidi programu ili keylengths ndogo zimezimwa kabisa. [crypto_keylength]

    Rustls explicitly has many non-features (https://docs.rs/rustls/latest/rustls/manual/_04_features/index.html) related to weak configurations. It is not possible to use with weak key lengths enabled in any configuration.


    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]

    The project does not use broken cryptographic algorithms or inappropriate cipher suites. This is stated in the documentation.


    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]

    No known serious weaknesses are known in the cryptographic protocols or algorithms used/implemented by the project.


    Enough for a badge!

    Mifumo ya usalama ndani ya programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi INAPASWA kutekeleza kwa ukamilifu usiri wa umbele ya itifaki za makubaliano ya funguo ili funguo la kipindi kilicho tokana na kikao cha vifungo muda-mrefu haziwezi kuridhi mabaya ikiwa mojawapo ya vifunguo vya muda-mrefu imeridhi mabaya katika usoni. [crypto_pfs]

    The project implements TLS 1.2 and 1.3. TLS 1.3 provides perfect forward secrecy by design. For TLS 1.2 Rustls does not support RSA key exchange, ensuring supported ciphersuites also offer PFS by design.


    Enough for a badge!

    Ikiwa programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi imesababisha uhifadhi wa nywila kwa minajili ya uthibitishaji ya watumiaji wa kutoka nje, nywila LAZIMA zihifadhiwe kwa mficho uliorudiarudia na chumvi kwa kila-mtumiaji kwa kutumia kanuni ya upanuaji (rudiarudia) wa funguo (k.m., Argon2id, Bcrypt, Scrypt, or PBKDF2). Ona pia Kurasadogo ya Uhifadhi wa Nywila la OWASP). [crypto_password_storage]

    N/A: The project does not store passwords.


    Enough for a badge!

    Mifumo ya usalama ndani ya programu iliyotengenezwa na mradi LAZIMA itoe funguo zote za kriptologia na nonces kwa kutumia kitengeneza cha nambari za bahati kuptia kriptologia salama, na ISIWEZE kufanya hivo kutumia vitengenezi zisizo salama kikriptologia. [crypto_random]

    Random number generation is left to the cryptography provider, which uses 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]

    The project uses HTTPS for the project website and repository. The distribution packages can be downloaded from crates.io, which also supports 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]

    The project does not allow retrieving cryptographic hashes over HTTP without checking for a cryptographic signature.


  • 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]

    There are no unpatched vulnerabilities in Rustls or its dependencies that the maintainers are aware of.


    Enough for a badge!

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

    The only vulnerability in rustls in the past year was patched within 3 days of the initial report. CVE-2024-32650 (https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-6g7w-8wpp-frhj) was reported April 17th at ~7pm EST. The fix was published April 19th at ~11:30am EST.


  • 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]

    No valid private credentials are leaked.


  • Static code analysis


    Not 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 do not presently use any static code analysis tools beyond our linter, fuzzers, and code coverage. There are not many well established options applicable to our application beyond these tools.


    Barely 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 do not presently use any static code analysis tools beyond our linter, fuzzers, 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]

    All discovered vulnerabilities are fixed in a timely manner.


    Barely enough for a badge.

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

    We do not presently use any static code analysis tools beyond our linter, fuzzers, and code coverage.


  • 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]

    The project uses fuzzing and linting in our GitHub Actions to test the library. We also run our fuzzers as part of Google's f/oss fuzzing infrastructure.


    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]

    N/A: The project is written in Rust, which is a memory-safe language. The project uses fuzzing despite this.


    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 include assertions in our code that are only present in debug builds, and run tests against these debug builds.


    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]

    All discovered vulnerabilities are fixed in a timely manner.



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 Daniel McCarney and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Daniel McCarney.
Entry created on 2024-05-31 18:01:16 UTC, last updated on 2024-05-31 18:12:19 UTC.

Back