You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Please consider adding the openssf badge to the readme and improving the scores. By improving the score, the repo and everyone that uses the tool will be that much safer.
You can also use stepsecurity to create an automated pr to help increase the score.
Hi, thanks for raising this. I am open to the idea, but a quick skim of the report shows multiple findings that are either false, or misleading. For example:
It gives a score of 0 for GITHUB_TOKEN permissions, despite the only the release workflow having any write permissions
It gives a score of 0 for fuzzing, but fuzzing doesn't make sense for a glue-code project like conftest
It lists conftest as vulnerable to many things it is not vulnerable to, such as GHSA-6fpp-rgj9-8rwc which is a Java vuln and conftest does not have or use any Java code
It gives a score of 0 just for not having the OpenSSF scorecard in the project
With all of these inaccuracies, I don't want to add this to conftest which may deter people from using the project because they think there are glaring security issues, when there are not. If you want to contribute to some of the areas where the project is indeed lacking (like release signing) that would be welcome.
Activity
jalseth commentedon May 5, 2025
Hi, thanks for raising this. I am open to the idea, but a quick skim of the report shows multiple findings that are either false, or misleading. For example:
With all of these inaccuracies, I don't want to add this to conftest which may deter people from using the project because they think there are glaring security issues, when there are not. If you want to contribute to some of the areas where the project is indeed lacking (like release signing) that would be welcome.