open-source-policy
Open Source Policy Skill
Purpose
This skill provides comprehensive open source governance aligned with Hack23 AB's transparency principle, demonstrating that radical openness creates competitive advantage through evidence-based security excellence. It enables repository maintainers to implement required security badges, manage license compliance, generate SBOMs, and maintain security documentation that serves as both operational necessity and client demonstration.
When to Use This Skill
Apply this skill when:
- ✅ Creating new public repositories
- ✅ Preparing for OpenSSF Scorecard assessment (target: ≥7.0)
- ✅ Configuring CII Best Practices badge (minimum: Passing)
- ✅ Setting up SLSA Level 3 build attestations
- ✅ Implementing license compliance scanning (FOSSA)
- ✅ Generating SBOMs (CycloneDX/SPDX)
- ✅ Creating security architecture documentation
- ✅ Planning coordinated vulnerability disclosure
- ✅ Responding to client due diligence requests
Do NOT use for:
- ❌ Private/internal repositories (different policy applies)
- ❌ Security incident response (use incident-response skill)
- ❌ Tactical vulnerability remediation (use vulnerability-management skill)
Required Security Badge Architecture
graph TB
REPO[📦 Repository] --> BADGES[🎖️ Security Badges]
BADGES --> OSS[OpenSSF Scorecard<br/>Target: ≥7.0]
BADGES --> CII[CII Best Practices<br/>Minimum: Passing]
BADGES --> SLSA[SLSA Level 3<br/>Build Attestation]
BADGES --> QUALITY[Quality Gate<br/>SonarCloud: Passed]
BADGES --> LICENSE[License Compliance<br/>FOSSA: Passing]
OSS --> OSS_CHECKS{15 Automated Checks}
OSS_CHECKS --> BRANCH[Branch Protection]
OSS_CHECKS --> SIGNED[Signed Commits]
OSS_CHECKS --> PINNED[Pinned Dependencies]
OSS_CHECKS --> VULN[Vulnerability Scanning]
OSS_CHECKS --> CODE_REVIEW[Code Review]
CII --> CII_CRITERIA{70+ Criteria}
CII_CRITERIA --> BASICS[Project Basics]
CII_CRITERIA --> CHANGE[Change Control]
CII_CRITERIA --> QUALITY_CII[Quality Assurance]
CII_CRITERIA --> SECURITY[Security]
CII_CRITERIA --> ANALYSIS[Analysis]
SLSA --> BUILD_INTEGRITY[Build Provenance<br/>Signed Artifacts<br/>Reproducible Builds]
QUALITY --> SONAR_METRICS[Code Coverage ≥80%<br/>Complexity Control<br/>Security Hotspots = 0]
LICENSE --> FOSSA_SCAN[Automated License Scan<br/>Attribution Management<br/>Compliance Reports]
BRANCH --> EVIDENCE[📊 Public Evidence]
SIGNED --> EVIDENCE
QUALITY_CII --> EVIDENCE
BUILD_INTEGRITY --> EVIDENCE
SONAR_METRICS --> EVIDENCE
FOSSA_SCAN --> EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE --> CLIENTS[🤝 Client Trust<br/>Competitive Advantage]
style REPO fill:#1565C0,stroke:#0D47A1,stroke-width:3px,color:#fff
style BADGES fill:#4CAF50,stroke:#2E7D32,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff
style EVIDENCE fill:#FF9800,stroke:#F57C00,stroke-width:2px
style CLIENTS fill:#9C27B0,stroke:#6A1B9A,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff
Repository Setup Checklist
Phase 1: Initial Security Configuration
- Enable branch protection on
main/master:- Require pull request reviews (1+ approvers)
- Require status checks to pass
- Require signed commits
- Restrict push access
- Enable Dependabot security updates
- Enable GitHub secret scanning
- Configure CodeQL analysis
- Set up automated security scanning (SonarCloud)
Phase 2: Documentation Requirements
- Create
SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.mdwith Mermaid diagrams - Create
FUTURE_SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.mdfor roadmap - Create
SECURITY.mdwith vulnerability disclosure process - Create
WORKFLOWS.mddocumenting CI/CD security gates - Create
LICENSE(Apache 2.0 or compatible) - Create
NOTICEfor third-party attributions - Create
CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md - Create
CONTRIBUTING.md - Create
CRA-ASSESSMENT.md(EU Cyber Resilience Act)
Phase 3: License Compliance
- Integrate FOSSA scanning
- Generate
LICENSES/directory with all dependency licenses - Add
.reuse/dep5for machine-readable licensing - Configure automated NOTICE file generation
- Review all dependencies for license compatibility
Phase 4: Security Badges
- Register with OpenSSF Scorecard: https://scorecard.dev/
- Apply for CII Best Practices: https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/
- Configure SLSA attestations in GitHub Actions
- Add SonarCloud quality gate badge
- Add FOSSA license status badge
- Add custom security badges (Threat Model, STRIDE, etc.)
Phase 5: Supply Chain Security
- Implement SBOM generation (CycloneDX or SPDX)
- Configure artifact signing (Sigstore/cosign)
- Pin all GitHub Actions dependencies
- Enable Dependabot version updates
- Set up automated vulnerability scanning
OpenSSF Scorecard Optimization Guide
Target score: ≥7.0 across 15 automated checks
Critical Checks (Must Pass)
1. Branch-Protection (Weight: High)
# .github/branch-protection.yml
required_status_checks:
strict: true
contexts:
- "CodeQL"
- "SonarCloud Code Analysis"
- "Security Scan"
required_pull_request_reviews:
required_approving_review_count: 1
dismiss_stale_reviews: true
enforce_admins: true
restrictions: null
2. Signed-Releases (Weight: High)
# .github/workflows/release.yml
- name: Sign artifacts
uses: sigstore/gh-action-sigstore-python@cd84bbf8fc2bdfd61e0b9bb63e1a18050dd9ff99 # v2.1.1
with:
inputs: ./dist/*
- name: Generate SBOM
uses: anchore/sbom-action@d94f46e13c6c62f59525ac9a1e147a99dc0b9bf5 # v0.15.1
with:
format: cyclonedx-json
3. Pinned-Dependencies (Weight: High)
# Pin ALL dependencies to specific SHA
# Bad:
uses: actions/checkout@v4
# Good:
uses: actions/checkout@b4ffde65f46336ab88eb53be808477a3936bae11 # v4.1.1
4. Token-Permissions (Weight: High)
# .github/workflows/*.yml
permissions:
contents: read # Least privilege
security-events: write # Only if needed
5. Vulnerabilities (Weight: High)
- Enable Dependabot alerts
- Configure CodeQL scanning
- Integrate SonarCloud security analysis
- Set SLAs for vulnerability remediation (see below)
6. Code-Review (Weight: High)
- Require at least 1 approving review
- No commits directly to default branch
- Use CODEOWNERS file
Important Checks (Should Pass)
7. Dangerous-Workflow
- Don't use
pull_request_targetwithout security review - Avoid
scriptinjection from user-controlled data
8. License
- Include LICENSE file (Apache 2.0)
- Add SPDX identifier to source files
9. SAST
- Enable CodeQL with security queries
- Add SonarCloud with Security Hotspot detection
10. Dependency-Update-Tool
- Enable Dependabot for both security and version updates
# .github/dependabot.yml
version: 2
updates:
- package-ecosystem: "npm"
directory: "/"
schedule:
interval: "weekly"
open-pull-requests-limit: 10
Additional Checks
11. Fuzzing (Java/Spring projects)
- Configure JQF for fuzz testing where applicable
12. Maintained
- Commit at least every 90 days
- Respond to issues within 14 days
13. Packaging
- Publish to npm/Maven Central with provenance
14. Security-Policy
- Maintain SECURITY.md with disclosure process
15. Binary-Artifacts
- Avoid committing binary files (use package managers)
CII Best Practices Badge Requirements
Apply for badge at: https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/
Passing Level (Minimum Required)
Basics (13 criteria):
- Project website URL
- Basic project documentation
- FLOSS license (Apache 2.0)
- Public version-controlled source repository
- Public discussion forum (GitHub Issues)
- English language communication
- Bug reporting process (SECURITY.md)
- Security vulnerability disclosure (SECURITY.md)
- Working build system
- Automated test suite
- New functionality testing
- Warning flags enabled
- Release notes for each version
Change Control (6 criteria):
- Public version control (GitHub)
- Unique version numbering (SemVer)
- Changelog maintained
- Previous versions available
- Identification of committers
- Commit review before integration
Quality (13 criteria):
- Automated test suite runs on CI
- Build warnings free
- Static analysis (SonarCloud)
- Dynamic analysis (OWASP ZAP for web apps)
- Memory safety (Java/managed languages)
- Automated test suite covers ≥80% statements
- Test suite covers ≥70% branches
- New tests added with new features
- Continuous integration tests
- Test policy documented
Security (11 criteria):
- Secure coding standards documented
- HTTPS for website/downloads
- TLS 1.2+ for encrypted connections
- Secure delivery mechanism (signed releases)
- Automated security vulnerability detection
- No known unpatched critical vulnerabilities
- Public vulnerability disclosure process
- Private vulnerability reporting channel
- Hardening mechanism documented
- Crypto published/peer-reviewed
- Input validation
Analysis (10 criteria):
- Static code analysis
- Address all medium+ severity issues
- Memory-safe language or analysis
- Dynamic analysis on releases
- Code coverage measurement
- Continuous automated testing
Reference Implementation:
SLSA Level 3 Implementation
Achieve Supply Chain Levels for Software Artifacts Level 3:
Requirements
- Source integrity: GitHub-hosted with signed commits
- Build integrity: Reproducible builds with provenance
- Provenance: Signed attestations for all artifacts
- Isolation: Builds run in ephemeral environments
Implementation
# .github/workflows/release.yml
name: Release with SLSA3
on:
push:
tags:
- 'v*'
permissions:
contents: read
id-token: write # For SLSA attestation
jobs:
build:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@b4ffde65f46336ab88eb53be808477a3936bae11 # v4.1.1
- name: Build
run: |
npm ci
npm run build
- name: Generate provenance
uses: slsa-framework/slsa-github-generator/.github/workflows/generator_generic_slsa3.yml@v1.9.0
with:
subjects: "dist/*"
Verification:
# Verify SLSA attestation
gh attestation verify artifact.tar.gz --owner Hack23
License Compliance Framework
Approved Licenses (Pre-approved)
✅ Permissive:
- MIT
- Apache 2.0
- BSD (2-clause, 3-clause)
- ISC
✅ Weak Copyleft:
- LGPL 2.1/3.0
- MPL 2.0
- EPL 2.0
✅ Documentation:
- CC-BY-4.0
- CC-BY-SA-4.0
Review Required (CEO Approval)
⚠️ Strong Copyleft:
- GPL 2.0/3.0
- AGPL 3.0
⚠️ Non-standard:
- Custom licenses
- Modified licenses
Prohibited
❌ Never Use:
- Licenses with advertising clauses
- Licenses incompatible with Apache 2.0
- Unclear terms or missing attribution
FOSSA Integration
Setup:
# .github/workflows/fossa.yml
name: FOSSA Scan
on: [push, pull_request]
jobs:
fossa:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@b4ffde65f46336ab88eb53be808477a3936bae11 # v4.1.1
- uses: fossas/fossa-action@f61a2c7c4e3c0f1b20a199f4eafe9e8e02d5bd7d # v1.3.3
with:
api-key: ${{ secrets.FOSSA_API_KEY }}
Badge:
[](https://app.fossa.com/projects/git%2Bgithub.com%2FHack23%2FREPO?ref=badge_shield)
SBOM Generation Requirements
Per Secure Development Policy, generate SBOMs for all releases:
CycloneDX Format (Preferred for Java/Maven)
# pom.xml
<plugin>
<groupId>org.cyclonedx</groupId>
<artifactId>cyclonedx-maven-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.7.11</version>
<executions>
<execution>
<goals>
<goal>makeAggregateBom</goal>
</goals>
</execution>
</executions>
</plugin>
SPDX Format (Preferred for npm/Node.js)
# .github/workflows/sbom.yml
- name: Generate SPDX SBOM
run: |
npm install -g @cyclonedx/cyclonedx-npm
cyclonedx-npm --output-format spdx --output-file sbom.spdx.json
Artifact Locations:
- Maven:
target/bom.json - npm:
sbom.spdx.json - GitHub Release: Attach SBOM to release assets
Vulnerability Management SLAs
Aligned with Vulnerability Management Policy:
| Severity | Detection | Remediation Deadline | Escalation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical | Automated (Dependabot/CodeQL) | 24 hours | Immediate CEO notification |
| High | Automated | 7 days | Weekly status update |
| Medium | Automated | 30 days | Monthly review |
| Low | Automated | 90 days | Quarterly review |
Remediation Options:
- Update dependency (preferred)
- Apply patch (if update breaks compatibility)
- Mitigate (compensating controls)
- Accept risk (document in Risk Register, CEO approval required)
Security Architecture Documentation Matrix
Per Secure Development Policy:
| Document | Purpose | Mermaid Diagrams | Update Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|
| SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md | Current security implementation | Authentication flow, Data flow, Infrastructure | Every release |
| FUTURE_SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md | Planned improvements | Target architecture, Migration plan | Quarterly |
| THREAT_MODEL.md | STRIDE analysis, Attack trees | Attack trees, Data flow diagrams | Annually or with major changes |
| WORKFLOWS.md | CI/CD security gates | Pipeline diagram | When workflows change |
| SECURITY.md | Vulnerability disclosure | N/A | Annually |
Mermaid Diagram Types:
flowchart- Authentication/authorization flowssequenceDiagram- Request/response securitygraph- Architecture layerserDiagram- Data model security
Practical Examples
Example 1: CIA Platform (High Maturity)
Security Badge Status:
- ✅ OpenSSF Scorecard: 8.1/10
- ✅ CII Best Practices: Passing (100%)
- ✅ SLSA Level 3: Implemented
- ✅ SonarCloud: A (0 Security Hotspots)
- ✅ FOSSA: Passing (0 Critical Issues)
Documentation:
Example 2: Setting Up New Repository
Step-by-step:
# 1. Clone template
gh repo create Hack23/new-project --template Hack23/cia --public
# 2. Enable security features
gh api repos/Hack23/new-project/vulnerability-alerts -X PUT
gh api repos/Hack23/new-project/automated-security-fixes -X PUT
# 3. Configure branch protection
gh api repos/Hack23/new-project/branches/main/protection -X PUT \
--input branch-protection.json
# 4. Add FOSSA
# Visit https://app.fossa.com/ and add repository
# 5. Register with OpenSSF Scorecard
# Visit https://scorecard.dev/ and add repository
# 6. Apply for CII Best Practices
# Visit https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/
# 7. Configure SonarCloud
# Visit https://sonarcloud.io/ and import project
# 8. Create required documentation
touch SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md
touch FUTURE_SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md
touch THREAT_MODEL.md
touch WORKFLOWS.md
touch SECURITY.md
touch CRA-ASSESSMENT.md
# 9. Add badges to README.md
# See badge examples below
Badge Examples for README.md
## Security Posture
[](https://scorecard.dev/viewer/?uri=github.com/Hack23/REPO)
[](https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/projects/XXXX)
[](https://github.com/Hack23/REPO/attestations)
[](https://sonarcloud.io/summary/new_code?id=Hack23_REPO)
[](https://app.fossa.com/projects/git%2Bgithub.com%2FHack23%2FREPO?ref=badge_shield)
## Security Documentation
[](./THREAT_MODEL.md)
[](./THREAT_MODEL.md#stride-threat-analysis)
[](./SECURITY_ARCHITECTURE.md)
Standards & Policy References
Core Hack23 ISMS Policies:
- Open Source Policy - Governance framework
- Secure Development Policy - Documentation standards
- Vulnerability Management - Remediation SLAs
- Classification Framework - Business impact assessment
All Hack23 ISMS Policies: https://github.com/Hack23/ISMS-PUBLIC