The Self-assessment is the initial document for projects to begin thinking about the security of the project, determining gaps in their security, and preparing any security documentation for their users. This document is ideal for projects currently in the CNCF sandbox as well as projects that are looking to receive a joint assessment and currently in CNCF incubation.
For a detailed guide with step-by-step discussion and examples, check out the free Express Learning course provided by Linux Foundation Training & Certification: Security Assessments for Open Source Projects.
- Metadata
- Overview
- Self-assessment use
- Security functions and features
- Project compliance
- Secure development practices
- Security issue resolution
- Appendix
A table at the top for quick reference information, later used for indexing.
| Assessment Stage | Incomplete, Complete, or Obsolete. Status of this file may change over time. |
| Software | A link to the software’s repository. |
| Security Provider | Yes or No. Is the primary function of the project to support the security of an integrating system? |
| Languages | Language(s) the project is written in. |
| SBOM | Software bill of materials. Link to the libraries, packages, versions used by the project, may also include direct dependencies. |
Provide the list of links to existing security documentation for the project. You may use the table below as an example:
| Doc | url |
|---|---|
| Security file | https://my.security.file |
| Default and optional configs | https://example.org/config |
One or two sentences describing the project -- something memorable and accurate that distinguishes your project to quickly orient readers who may be assessing multiple projects.
Provide information for reviewers who may not be familiar with your project's domain or problem area.
These are the individual parts of your system that interact to provide the desired functionality. Actors only need to be separate, if they are isolated in some way. For example, if a service has a database and a front-end API, but if a vulnerability in either one would compromise the other, then the distinction between the database and front-end is not relevant.
The means by which actors are isolated should also be described, as this is often what prevents an attacker from moving laterally after a compromise.
These are the steps that a project performs in order to provide some service
or functionality. These steps are performed by different actors in the system.
Note, that an action need not be overly descriptive at the function call level.
It is sufficient to focus on the security checks performed, use of sensitive
data, and interactions between actors to perform an action.
For example, the access server receives the client request, checks the format, validates that the request corresponds to a file the client is authorized to access, and then returns a token to the client. The client then transmits that token to the file server, which, after confirming its validity, returns the file.
The intended goals of the projects including the security guarantees the project is meant to provide (e.g., Flibble only allows parties with an authorization key to change data it stores).
Non-goals that a reasonable reader of the project’s literature could believe may be in scope (e.g., Flibble does not intend to stop a party with a key from storing an arbitrarily large amount of data, possibly incurring financial cost or overwhelming the servers)
This self-assessment is created by the [project] team to perform an internal analysis of the project's security. It is not intended to provide a security audit of [project], or function as an independent assessment or attestation of [project]'s security health.
This document serves to provide [project] users with an initial understanding of [project]'s security, where to find existing security documentation, [project] plans for security, and general overview of [project] security practices, both for development of [project] as well as security of [project].
This document provides the CNCF TAG-Security with an initial understanding of [project] to assist in a joint-assessment, necessary for projects under incubation. Taken together, this document and the joint-assessment serve as a cornerstone for if and when [project] seeks graduation and is preparing for a security audit.
- Critical. A listing critical security components of the project with a brief description of their importance. It is recommended these be used for threat modeling. These are considered critical design elements that make the product itself secure and are not configurable. Projects are encouraged to track these as primary impact items for changes to the project.
- Security Relevant. A listing of security relevant components of the project with brief description. These are considered important to enhance the overall security of the project, such as deployment configurations, settings, etc. These should also be included in threat modeling.
- Compliance. List any security standards or sub-sections the project is already documented as meeting (PCI-DSS, COBIT, ISO, GDPR, etc.).
- Development Pipeline. A description of the testing and assessment processes that the software undergoes as it is developed and built. Be sure to include specific information such as if contributors are required to sign commits, if any container images immutable and signed, how many reviewers before merging, any automated checks for vulnerabilities, etc.
- Communication Channels. Reference where you document how to reach your team or
describe in corresponding section.
- Internal. How do team members communicate with each other?
- Inbound. How do users or prospective users communicate with the team?
- Outbound. How do you communicate with your users? (e.g. flibble-announce@ mailing list)
- Ecosystem. How does your software fit into the cloud native ecosystem? (e.g. Flibber is integrated with both Flocker and Noodles which covers virtualization for 80% of cloud users. So, our small number of "users" actually represents very wide usage across the ecosystem since every virtual instance uses Flibber encryption by default.)
- Responsible Disclosures Process. A outline of the project's responsible
disclosures process should suspected security issues, incidents, or
vulnerabilities be discovered both external and internal to the project. The
outline should discuss communication methods/strategies.
- Vulnerability Response Process. Who is responsible for responding to a report. What is the reporting process? How would you respond?
- Incident Response. A description of the defined procedures for triage, confirmation, notification of vulnerability or security incident, and patching/update availability.
- Known Issues Over Time. List or summarize statistics of past vulnerabilities with links. If none have been reported, provide data, if any, about your track record in catching issues in code review or automated testing.
- Open SSF Best Practices. Best Practices. A brief discussion of where the project is at with respect to CII best practices and what it would need to achieve the badge.
- Case Studies. Provide context for reviewers by detailing 2-3 scenarios of real-world use cases.
- Related Projects / Vendors. Reflect on times prospective users have asked about the differences between your project and projectX. Reviewers will have the same question.