Versions Compared

Old Version 1

changes.mady.by.user Amy Zwarico

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Amy Zwarico

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

KPI 1: CII Badging (Tony)

CII security requirements

  • Assurance requirementscase requirement: 50% of the projects have "Met" one additional requirementthat requirement
    • project needs to produce documentation to satisfy this requirement and link to it from the CII badge page (wiki, readthedocs)
  • Application quality security requirements at the silver level: fewer than 10% of the projects not answering

...

  • Note: All projects need to upgrade response to Passing (Vulnerability Report Private) to "Met"

KPI 2: Closed OJSI

...

Tickets (Krzysztof)

  • 80% of OJSI tickets closed
  • fewer than 5 HTTP interfaces

...

  • No HTTP ports exposed.
    • All port expose HTTPS, or
    • HTTP port waiver granted by the SECCOM and documented in readthedocs
  • All OJSI tickets with CVEs assigned are closed (Security level set to None).

KPI 3: Remediating Known Vulnerabilities in Third Party Packages (Amy)

  • 75% of direct dependencies upgraded to latest version

...

  • All Jiras for upgrading direct dependencies are closed (tickets with label= ComponentUpgrade).
  • If the project is unable to upgrade a direct dependency, they must have a TSC exception with documentation of the reason the direct dependency was not upgraded.

KPI 4: Code coverage tests (Pawel, Amy)

Frankfurt

  • all All projects achieve at least 55% code coverage for the Frankfurt release and 60% for the Guilin releasecoverage.
  • If a project is unable to achieve 55% they must:
    • Request a TSC exception including:
      • Reason 55% coverage cannot be achieved,
      • % coverage they can achieve.
  • KPI measurement
    • Projects without exceptions: passing = at least 55%
    • Projects with exceptions: passing = at least committed %
  • All projects document the % coverage in the readthedocs and the location of the test suites.

Guilin and beyond

The desire is for projects to concentrate on code coverage tests for new code and core components. Until we have tooling available that reliably measures this, we will use the following measures to assess code coverage.

  • All projects commit to the % coverage they can meet.
  • KPI: passing = at least committed %
  • Code coverage below 55% requires a TSC exception as documented in the Frankfurt code coverage tests above.