boost-skill-cli 1.2.25__tar.gz → 1.2.27__tar.gz

{boost_skill_cli-1.2.25 → boost_skill_cli-1.2.27}/.vale/styles/config/vocabularies/boost/accept.txt

@@ -1,13 +1,18 @@
 ABM
 agentic
 Algolia
+allowlist
 allowlisted
 argparse
 Arize
+ASan
 Attio
 backtick
 backticks
 Bagisto
+basename
+basenames
+bestpractices
 bmad
 bookended
 Camunda
@@ -18,10 +23,12 @@ codespell
 ColdIQ
 config
 configs
+CPython
 CRM
 cyclomatic
 Dependabot
 deps
+deserialization
 Dev
 DigitalOcean
 docsite
@@ -35,6 +42,7 @@ eval
 evals
 freemium
 frontmatter
+fuzzer
 GEO
 GIF
 gitignored
@@ -55,26 +63,36 @@ Kotlin
 langchain
 Langfuse
 LeadMagic
+libFuzzer
+libsodium
 lookups
 lowercasing
 Magento
 mcp
 mergeable
+minisign
+misconfiguration
 MLflow
 mutmut
 mypy
+nonces
 npm
 onboards
 OpenShift
+OpenSSF
 overclaiming
 Pinecone
 pipx
+plaintext
+prehash
 PrestaShop
 Pulumi
 pytest
 Qdrant
 Quarkus
 rebased
+reimplement
+reimplemented
 reindex
 repo
 repo's
@@ -90,11 +108,14 @@ ruleset
 Rulesets
 rulesets
 Salesforce
+Saltzer
 sandboxed
 sandboxing
 scrollbar
 SEO
+setuptools
 Shopify
+Sigstore
 SonarCloud
 stderr
 Stdlib
@@ -104,25 +125,31 @@ stemmer
 stemming
 subagents
 subcommand
+subprocess
 tappable
 teardown
 tempdir
 toggleable
-tokenization
 Tokenization
+tokenization
 toolchain
 toolkits
 traceback
 tracebacks
+triaged
+triages
 typosquat
 typosquatted
 unkilled
 unlinking
+unpatched
 unregister
 unstaged
 untap
+untrusted
 uv
 Vaadin
+Valgrind
 vendored
 vendoring
 venv

{boost_skill_cli-1.2.25 → boost_skill_cli-1.2.27}/PKG-INFO

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Metadata-Version: 2.4
 Name: boost-skill-cli
-Version: 1.2.25
+Version: 1.2.27
 Summary: boost — Homebrew for AI coding skills
 Author: Jonathan Reyes
 License: GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
@@ -724,6 +724,7 @@ Dynamic: license-file
 [![Coverage](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fraw.githubusercontent.com%2Fjonnyeclectic%2Fboost%2Fbadges%2Fcoverage.json)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
 [![Mutation score](https://img.shields.io/badge/mutation_score-%E2%89%A580%25_killed-blueviolet)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/scripts/mutation_gate.py)
 [![Platform](https://img.shields.io/badge/platform-macOS%20%7C%20Linux-lightgrey)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
+[![OpenSSF Best Practices](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14275/badge)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14275)
 [![License](https://img.shields.io/github/license/jonnyeclectic/boost)](LICENSE)
 
 **Homebrew for AI coding skills.** boost finds, installs, and version-tracks

{boost_skill_cli-1.2.25 → boost_skill_cli-1.2.27}/README.md

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 [![Coverage](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fraw.githubusercontent.com%2Fjonnyeclectic%2Fboost%2Fbadges%2Fcoverage.json)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
 [![Mutation score](https://img.shields.io/badge/mutation_score-%E2%89%A580%25_killed-blueviolet)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/scripts/mutation_gate.py)
 [![Platform](https://img.shields.io/badge/platform-macOS%20%7C%20Linux-lightgrey)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
+[![OpenSSF Best Practices](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14275/badge)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14275)
 [![License](https://img.shields.io/github/license/jonnyeclectic/boost)](LICENSE)
 
 **Homebrew for AI coding skills.** boost finds, installs, and version-tracks

boost_skill_cli-1.2.27/SECURITY.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# Security policy
+
+## Supported versions
+
+Only the latest release receives security fixes.
+
+## Reporting a vulnerability
+
+Please **do not** open a public issue for security reports. Instead, use
+GitHub's private vulnerability reporting:
+
+**[Report a vulnerability](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/security/advisories/new)**
+
+You can expect an acknowledgement within a few days. Please include steps to
+reproduce and the affected command(s).
+
+## Vulnerability fixes in release notes
+
+Every merge to `main` cuts a release, so a fix reaches users within minutes of
+landing. When a release fixes a publicly known vulnerability in boost itself —
+one that already had a CVE or an equivalent identifier when the release was
+cut — the [release notes](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/releases) will
+name it and its identifier, so you can tell an upgrade that matters from one
+that does not. No such vulnerability has been reported to date.
+
+Vulnerabilities in boost's *dependencies* are handled separately: the runtime
+has none, and the development toolchain is watched by `osv-scanner`, `pip-audit`
+and Dependabot.
+
+## Scope notes
+
+boost executes `git` against registry URLs you tap and symlinks skills into
+agent directories. Reports about tap-supplied content escaping the store,
+path traversal via `SKILL.md` frontmatter, or command injection through
+skill/tap names are especially valuable.
+
+## How boost is designed to resist this
+
+[`docs/security-design.md`](docs/security-design.md) is the threat model: what
+boost trusts and what it does not, the design principles the code is held to,
+and the table of error classes — path traversal, command injection, zip-slip,
+untrusted deserialization, supply-chain compromise — each paired with the
+mitigation that counters it. It also states the known limits plainly, including
+the one that matters most: boost gives you a skill's provenance, integrity and
+diff, but judging what the skill *tells your agent to do* is yours.
+
+For how boost's badge-level security posture is assessed, see
+[`docs/openssf-badge.md`](docs/openssf-badge.md).

{boost_skill_cli-1.2.25 → boost_skill_cli-1.2.27}/boost_cli/_version.py

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ version_tuple: tuple[int | str, ...]
 commit_id: str | None
 __commit_id__: str | None
 
-__version__ = version = '1.2.25'
-__version_tuple__ = version_tuple = (1, 2, 25)
+__version__ = version = '1.2.27'
+__version_tuple__ = version_tuple = (1, 2, 27)
 
 __commit_id__ = commit_id = None

{boost_skill_cli-1.2.25 → boost_skill_cli-1.2.27}/boost_cli/commands/quality.py

@@ -1187,9 +1187,9 @@ def cmd_trust(argv) -> int:
         key_path = paths.expand(args.key)
         key_text = (key_path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
                     if key_path.is_file() else args.key)
-        rec = provenance.add_trusted_key(args.name, key_text)
+        provenance.add_trusted_key(args.name, key_text)
         journal.log("trust", args.name, op="add-key")
-        out.ok("trusted key %s (%s)" % (rec["name"], rec["fingerprint"]))
+        out.ok("trusted key added")
         return 0
 
     if args.action == "remove":

{boost_skill_cli-1.2.25 → boost_skill_cli-1.2.27}/boost_skill_cli.egg-info/PKG-INFO

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Metadata-Version: 2.4
 Name: boost-skill-cli
-Version: 1.2.25
+Version: 1.2.27
 Summary: boost — Homebrew for AI coding skills
 Author: Jonathan Reyes
 License: GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
@@ -724,6 +724,7 @@ Dynamic: license-file
 [![Coverage](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fraw.githubusercontent.com%2Fjonnyeclectic%2Fboost%2Fbadges%2Fcoverage.json)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
 [![Mutation score](https://img.shields.io/badge/mutation_score-%E2%89%A580%25_killed-blueviolet)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/scripts/mutation_gate.py)
 [![Platform](https://img.shields.io/badge/platform-macOS%20%7C%20Linux-lightgrey)](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
+[![OpenSSF Best Practices](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14275/badge)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/14275)
 [![License](https://img.shields.io/github/license/jonnyeclectic/boost)](LICENSE)
 
 **Homebrew for AI coding skills.** boost finds, installs, and version-tracks

{boost_skill_cli-1.2.25 → boost_skill_cli-1.2.27}/boost_skill_cli.egg-info/SOURCES.txt

@@ -132,8 +132,10 @@ docs/eval.html
 docs/index.html
 docs/langchain.html
 docs/mcp-hub.html
+docs/openssf-badge.md
 docs/rag-architecture.md
 docs/roadmap.html
+docs/security-design.md
 docs/.claude/settings.local.json
 docs/architecture/README.md
 docs/architecture/c4-components-core.md
@@ -339,6 +341,7 @@ docs/roadmap/items/one-command-every-env-nox.md
 docs/roadmap/items/one-commit-can-cut-two-releases.md
 docs/roadmap/items/one-dead-tap-broke-every-update.md
 docs/roadmap/items/one-shared-atomic-write-helper.md
+docs/roadmap/items/openssf-best-practices-badge.md
 docs/roadmap/items/package-metadata-validation-twine-check-friends.md
 docs/roadmap/items/patch-coverage-gate-diff-cover.md
 docs/roadmap/items/path-traversal-unsanitized-rule-workflow-name.md

boost_skill_cli-1.2.27/docs/openssf-badge.md

@@ -0,0 +1,254 @@
+# OpenSSF Best Practices badge — passing-level answers
+
+This is boost's worked answer to all 67 **passing**-level criteria of the
+[OpenSSF Best Practices badge](https://www.bestpractices.dev/). It exists so the
+badge submission is a transcription job rather than a research job, and so the
+claims stay reviewable: every "Met" below names the artifact that backs it, and
+every "N/A" says why the criterion does not apply.
+
+Criteria text is from the
+[badge project's own `criteria.yml`](https://github.com/coreinfrastructure/best-practices-badge/blob/main/criteria/criteria.yml).
+`MUST` must be Met (or N/A where the criterion permits it). `SHOULD` may be
+Unmet **with a justification**. `SUGGESTED` need only be answered.
+
+**Status: 66 Met or N/A, 1 SHOULD deliberately Unmet with justification
+(`crypto_call`).** That clears the passing bar. What remains is registration —
+see [Human actions](#human-actions) at the end.
+
+Repository: <https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost> · Licence: GPL-3.0 ·
+Package: [`boost-skill-cli`](https://pypi.org/project/boost-skill-cli/)
+
+---
+
+## Basics
+
+### Basic project website content
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `description_good` | MUST | **Met** | The README opens with what boost is and who it is for: "a package manager for AI coding skills… finds, installs, and version-tracks skills from GitHub-hosted registries". Mirrored in the repository description and the [Visual Guide](https://jonnyeclectic.github.io/boost/). |
+| `interact` | MUST | **Met** | README carries install, quick start and command examples; CONTRIBUTING carries dev setup, the gate list and PR process; both are linked from the site nav. |
+| `contribution` | MUST | **Met** | <https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md> — dev setup, ground rules, the full gate table, generated-file rules and PR expectations. |
+| `contribution_requirements` | SHOULD | **Met** | Same file: "Ground rules" states the stdlib-only runtime, the layering rule, and that behaviour changes need tests. [`.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md`](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md) pre-fills the checklist. |
+
+### FLOSS license
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `floss_license` | MUST | **Met** | GPL-3.0. |
+| `floss_license_osi` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | GPL-3.0 is [OSI-approved](https://opensource.org/license/gpl-3-0). |
+| `license_location` | MUST | **Met** | <https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/LICENSE>, at the repository root, and declared in `pyproject.toml`. |
+
+### Documentation
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `documentation_basics` | MUST | **Met** | README (install, quick start, concepts) plus the [Visual Guide](https://jonnyeclectic.github.io/boost/), [`docs/DEBUGGING.md`](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/docs/DEBUGGING.md) and [`docs/rag-architecture.md`](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/docs/rag-architecture.md). |
+| `documentation_interface` | MUST | **Met** | [`docs/commands.html`](https://jonnyeclectic.github.io/boost/docs/commands.html) documents every command and every flag. It is *generated from the CLI itself* — the `COMMANDS` registry and each command's argparse parser — and a CI `--check` fails the build if it drifts, so the reference cannot go stale. `boost --help` and `boost <cmd> --help` are the same data. |
+
+### Other
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `sites_https` | MUST | **Met** | Every project site is HTTPS-only: `github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost`, `jonnyeclectic.github.io/boost` (GitHub Pages enforces HTTPS), `pypi.org/project/boost-skill-cli`. A link-check workflow runs over the docs. |
+| `discussion` | MUST | **Met** | [GitHub Issues](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/issues), open to anyone, archived and searchable. |
+| `english` | SHOULD | **Met** | All documentation, code, commit messages, issues and reviews are in English. A `vale` prose-lint gate runs on the English documentation. |
+| `maintained` | MUST | **Met** | Active daily development — 560+ merged pull requests, and *every* merge to `main` cuts a release. The criterion asks only that the project be maintained; the project is not claiming to be unmaintained or seeking new maintainers. (Bus factor is a *silver*-level criterion and out of scope here — boost is a single-maintainer project today, which is worth saying out loud before anyone attempts silver.) |
+
+## Change Control
+
+### Public version-controlled source repository
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `repo_public` | MUST | **Met** | Public repository, full history, at the URL above. |
+| `repo_track` | MUST | **Met** | git — every change is a tracked commit with author and message. `main` is protected and takes changes only through a pull request that has passed the full required-check gate. Note what is *not* claimed: the ruleset deliberately does not require a human approval, because the working model is parallel `loop/*` branches that self-merge and there is no second reviewer. The criterion does not ask for review, and the [Scorecard triage card](https://jonnyeclectic.github.io/boost/docs/roadmap.html#scorecard-findings-triage) keeps that finding open rather than dismissing it, because the score is accurate. |
+| `repo_interim` | MUST | **Met** | Interim versions are on `main` continuously; the release cadence is *per merge*, so the published version is never more than one merge behind the repository. |
+| `repo_distributed` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | git. |
+
+### Unique version numbering
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `version_unique` | MUST | **Met** | Versions come from `setuptools-scm` reading git tags — there is no hand-maintained `__version__` to fall out of sync, and a tag is unique by construction. `boost --version` reports it. |
+| `version_semver` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | `vMAJOR.MINOR.PATCH` (current series `v1.2.x`). |
+| `version_tags` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | Every release is a git tag, created by the release workflow. |
+
+### Release notes
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `release_notes` | MUST | **Met** | <https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/releases> — one GitHub release per version, notes assembled by [release-drafter](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/.github/release-drafter.yml) from the merged pull-request titles, which is why CONTRIBUTING asks for the PR description to be written as the release note. |
+| `release_notes_vulns` | MUST | **N/A** | No publicly known run-time vulnerability in boost itself has ever been reported, assigned a CVE, or fixed, so no release has had one to name. The forward policy is written down in [SECURITY.md](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/SECURITY.md#vulnerability-fixes-in-release-notes): any release fixing a publicly known vulnerability will name it and its identifier in the release notes. Re-answer this as **Met** at the first such release. |
+
+## Reporting
+
+### Bug-reporting process
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `report_process` | MUST | **Met** | <https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/issues/new/choose> — issue templates for bug reports and feature requests; CONTRIBUTING points at the tracker. |
+| `report_tracker` | SHOULD | **Met** | GitHub Issues, used as the sole tracker. |
+| `report_responses` | MUST | **Met** | The maintainer triages issues as they arrive; the majority of the issue history is resolved rather than left open, and CI failures on `main` are opened automatically ([`ci-failure-issue.yml`](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/.github/workflows/ci-failure-issue.yml)) and closed on the fix. |
+| `enhancement_responses` | SHOULD | **Met** | Enhancement requests are answered and, where accepted, tracked as cards on the public [code roadmap](https://jonnyeclectic.github.io/boost/docs/roadmap.html). |
+| `report_archive` | MUST | **Met** | <https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/issues?q=is%3Aissue> — the full history, open and closed, publicly readable without an account. |
+
+### Vulnerability report process
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `vulnerability_report_process` | MUST | **Met** | <https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/SECURITY.md> — states the channel, the expected acknowledgement time, and what a useful report contains. |
+| `vulnerability_report_private` | MUST | **Met** | GitHub private vulnerability reporting is **enabled** on the repository (`GET /repos/jonnyeclectic/boost/private-vulnerability-reporting` → `{"enabled": true}`). Reports go to <https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/security/advisories/new>, never a public issue. |
+| `vulnerability_report_response` | MUST | **N/A** | No vulnerability report has been received in the last six months — none has been received at all. SECURITY.md commits to an acknowledgement within a few days, well inside the criterion's 14-day bound. |
+
+## Quality
+
+### Working build system
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `build` | MUST | **Met** | Standard PEP 517 build from `pyproject.toml` (`python -m build`), exercised end to end by the release workflow, which builds the wheel and smoke-tests it before publishing. `make venv` reproduces a development environment from the hash-pinned requirements. |
+| `build_common_tools` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | setuptools + `build`, driven by `make` and [`noxfile.py`](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/noxfile.py). |
+| `build_floss_tools` | SHOULD | **Met** | Every build and gate tool is FLOSS and runs on FLOSS platforms; CI runs on Ubuntu and macOS. |
+
+### Automated test suite
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `test` | MUST | **Met** | Four tiers: `tests/unit`, `tests/functional` (drive the real CLI in-process), `tests/smoke.sh` (170 end-to-end checks through the `./boost` shim) and a Gherkin BDD suite (11 features, 47 scenarios). |
+| `test_invocation` | SHOULD | **Met** | `make test` — or `nox`, which reproduces the exact CI gate in isolated venvs across every supported interpreter. |
+| `test_most` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | An **80% line-coverage** gate (`fail_under = 80`), an **80% changed-line** gate on pull requests, and an **80% mutation** gate over `boost_cli/core` — the last of which means coverage cannot be satisfied by tests that merely execute the code without asserting on it. |
+| `test_continuous_integration` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | GitHub Actions runs the full gate on every push and every pull request. |
+
+### New functionality testing
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `test_policy` | MUST | **Met** | CONTRIBUTING states it outright: "Behavior changes need tests" and "Anything under `boost_cli/core/` is mutation-tested; expect to add unit tests that actually kill your mutants." |
+| `tests_are_added` | MUST | **Met** | The policy is mechanically enforced, not merely stated: the changed-line coverage gate fails a pull request whose new lines are under 80% covered, and the mutation gate fails one whose new `core/` logic is untested — an unexercised branch counts as an unkilled mutant. Both are required checks. |
+| `tests_documented_added` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | Documented in CONTRIBUTING ("The gates") and re-stated in the pull-request template checklist. |
+
+### Warning flags
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `warnings` | MUST | **Met** | Python has no compiler warnings, so the criterion is met by linters: `ruff` (explicit rule set including the `S`/flake8-bandit, `B`/bugbear, `SIM`, `C4`, `PERF`, `RUF`, `UP` and `I` families), `mypy`, `pyright`, `vulture`, `xenon` and `refurb`. `pytest` additionally promotes `DeprecationWarning` raised inside `boost_cli` to an error. |
+| `warnings_fixed` | MUST | **Met** | Not "mostly fixed" — **zero** findings are permitted. Each of those tools is a required check that fails the build on a single finding, so a warning cannot accumulate. `ruff`'s rule set is spelled out with `select`, not `extend-select`, so a tool upgrade can never silently switch families on or off. |
+| `warnings_strict` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | The gates are already maximally strict — zero tolerance, plus a complexity ratchet (`xenon`) that fails on regression rather than on an absolute threshold. |
+
+## Security
+
+### Secure development knowledge
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `know_secure_design` | MUST | **Met** | [`docs/security-design.md`](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/docs/security-design.md) names boost's trust boundaries and works through Saltzer and Schroeder's eight principles — economy of mechanism, fail-safe defaults, complete mediation, open design, separation of privilege, least privilege, least common mechanism, psychological acceptability — as concrete claims about this codebase, each pointing at the code that implements it. |
+| `know_common_errors` | MUST | **Met** | The same document carries a table of the CWE/OWASP error classes that actually apply to a Python CLI that clones repositories and writes files — path traversal, OS command injection, zip-slip, link following, untrusted deserialization, supply-chain and CI-action compromise, leaked credentials, insecure download, improper input validation — each paired with the specific mitigation in this repository. Classes that do not apply are omitted rather than padded. |
+
+### Use basic good cryptographic practices
+
+boost implements no cryptographic protocol, stores no secret, and generates no
+key. It **verifies** minisign/Ed25519 signatures over tap content. See
+[the cryptography section](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/docs/security-design.md#cryptography-boost-uses)
+of the security-design document for the full account.
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `crypto_published` | MUST | **Met** | Ed25519 (RFC 8032), SHA-512 (FIPS 180-4), SHA-256 (FIPS 180-4) and BLAKE2b-512 (RFC 7693). All publicly published and expert-reviewed; no private or proprietary algorithm anywhere. |
+| `crypto_call` | SHOULD | **Unmet — justified** | `boost_cli/core/ed25519.py` is a pure-standard-library implementation of Ed25519 rather than a call into `cryptography` or libsodium. It is a deliberate trade the stdlib-only runtime rule forces: CPython ships no Ed25519 primitive, so signature verification without a runtime dependency means implementing RFC 8032's verify half. The exposure is bounded — **verification only**, over public keys and public signatures, with no secret that a timing side channel could leak — and correctness is pinned to the published RFC 8032 §7.1 test vectors in the unit suite. Hashing is *not* reimplemented; it goes through `hashlib`. |
+| `crypto_floss` | MUST | **Met** | Everything cryptographic is `hashlib` (Python standard library) plus boost's own GPL-3.0 code. No proprietary component, and every function is implementable with FLOSS. |
+| `crypto_keylength` | MUST | **Met** | Ed25519 is a 255-bit curve — above the criterion's 224-bit elliptic-curve minimum — and the digests are 256- and 512-bit, above the 224-bit hash minimum. No shorter length is configurable, so there is nothing to disable. |
+| `crypto_working` | MUST | **Met** | No MD4, MD5, SHA-1, single DES, RC4, Dual_EC_DRBG or ECB mode appears anywhere in the codebase; `ruff`'s `S` family fails the build on weak-hash use, so a regression is caught mechanically. |
+| `crypto_weaknesses` | SHOULD | **Met** | Same evidence. Ed25519, SHA-2 and BLAKE2 have no known serious weakness. |
+| `crypto_pfs` | SHOULD | **N/A** | boost implements no key-agreement protocol and no network cryptography. TLS is provided by `git` and by `pip`, not by boost. |
+| `crypto_password_storage` | MUST | **N/A** | boost performs no inbound authentication of external users and stores no password. It is a local CLI with no accounts. |
+| `crypto_random` | MUST | **N/A** | boost generates no cryptographic key and no nonce — signing is the publisher's job, boost only verifies. `random` is imported nowhere in `boost_cli/`, so there is no insecure generator to substitute. |
+
+### Secured delivery against MITM attacks
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `delivery_mitm` | MUST | **Met** | Distribution is PyPI over HTTPS (`pipx install boost-skill-cli`) and GitHub over HTTPS. Publishing uses [PyPI Trusted Publishing](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/.github/workflows/publish.yml) — a short-lived OIDC identity minted for that one workflow, with no long-lived token stored anywhere — and each release carries a **SLSA build-provenance attestation** tying the artifact to the commit and workflow that produced it. Taps clone over HTTPS or SSH. |
+| `delivery_unsigned` | MUST | **Met** | boost consumes no hash fetched over HTTP. The only hashes in the build are the sha256 values committed in `requirements/*.txt`, which `pip --require-hashes` enforces over an HTTPS connection; the tool downloads in CI are HTTPS with a pinned version. |
+
+### Publicly known vulnerabilities fixed
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `vulnerabilities_fixed_60_days` | MUST | **Met** | There are no unpatched vulnerabilities of medium or higher severity, publicly known or otherwise — none has been reported against boost. Dependency exposure is watched continuously by `osv-scanner`, `pip-audit` and Dependabot, all of which run in CI, and the runtime has no third-party dependency to inherit one from. |
+| `vulnerabilities_critical_fixed` | SHOULD | **Met** | Same position, and the release cadence — one release per merge — means a fix reaches users within minutes of landing rather than waiting for a release train. |
+
+### Other security issues
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `no_leaked_credentials` | MUST | **Met** | `gitleaks` runs in CI on every push over the repository, and fails the build on a hit (the allowlist in `.gitleaks.toml` covers only boost's own synthetic secret-scanner test fixtures). Structurally there is little to leak in the first place: publishing uses a short-lived OIDC identity rather than a stored PyPI token, and the two optional dashboard secrets are absent by default with their jobs skipping themselves. Confirm GitHub's own secret scanning and push protection are enabled in **Settings → Code security** while registering — that setting is not readable without repository-admin credentials, so it is not asserted here. |
+
+## Analysis
+
+### Static code analysis
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `static_analysis` | MUST | **Met** | Several tools, all required checks, all run before every release — which is *every* merge to `main`. [CodeQL](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/.github/workflows/codeql.yml) does semantic analysis on push, on pull request and weekly; `ruff`'s `S` family is Python SAST (`shell=True`, `tempfile.mktemp`, unsafe YAML loading, weak hashing); `mypy` and `pyright` are two independent type checkers, the second adding None-flow and narrowing analysis over `core/`; `zizmor` audits the GitHub Actions workflows for excessive permissions and unpinned refs; `import-linter` enforces the architectural layering. SonarCloud is wired up as an optional non-blocking dashboard. |
+| `static_analysis_common_vulnerabilities` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | CodeQL's Python security queries and `ruff`'s flake8-bandit family are both vulnerability-focused rather than generic-defect tools. `osv-scanner` and `pip-audit` cover known-vulnerable dependencies. |
+| `static_analysis_fixed` | MUST | **Met** | Findings are fixed, or dismissed with a written proof of why they are false positives — never dismissed for convenience. The [Scorecard triage roadmap card](https://jonnyeclectic.github.io/boost/docs/roadmap.html#scorecard-findings-triage) records that discipline explicitly, including the rule that posture metrics must *not* be filed as false positives. One CodeQL alert is currently open and triaged as a false positive; see [Human actions](#human-actions). |
+| `static_analysis_often` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | Every push and every pull request, plus a weekly scheduled CodeQL run to pick up new query releases against unchanged code. |
+
+### Dynamic code analysis
+
+| Criterion | Cat. | Answer | Evidence |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `dynamic_analysis` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | [`fuzz.yml`](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/blob/main/.github/workflows/fuzz.yml) runs `atheris` (libFuzzer for Python) against the parsers over a target matrix, uploading any crashing input as an artifact. Beyond fuzzing, `tests/smoke.sh` drives the real binary end to end through 170 checks, and the functional suite executes the CLI against a throwaway `$HOME`. |
+| `dynamic_analysis_unsafe` | SUGGESTED | **N/A** | Python is memory-safe; there is no buffer overflow or use-after-free class for a tool like ASan or Valgrind to find. The runtime has no C extension (the optional `[rag]` extra is not on the install path). |
+| `dynamic_analysis_enable_assertions` | SUGGESTED | **Met** | The test suites are assertion-driven and run with assertions enabled (no `-O`), and `pytest` promotes `DeprecationWarning` raised inside `boost_cli` to a hard error, so a latent deprecation fails a run rather than scrolling past. |
+| `dynamic_analysis_fixed` | MUST | **Met** | No medium-or-higher exploitable vulnerability has been found by dynamic analysis. A crashing input found by the fuzzer is uploaded as a workflow artifact and fixed; none is outstanding. |
+
+---
+
+## Human actions
+
+Everything above is repository-side and done. These four steps need an account
+or a repository setting, so they cannot be landed as a commit.
+
+1. **Register the project** at <https://www.bestpractices.dev/en/projects/new>
+   with the repository URL, signing in with the GitHub account that owns it.
+   Transcribe the answers above — the criterion identifiers on the form match
+   the identifiers in these tables one-for-one.
+2. **Add the badge to the README** once the project has an id. The Scorecard
+   `CIIBestPracticesID` check reads the same registration, so this also closes
+   that Scorecard finding:
+
+   ```markdown
+   [![OpenSSF Best Practices](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/<ID>/badge)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/<ID>)
+   ```
+
+   Do not add it before registering — an unknown id renders a broken badge.
+3. **Set the repository `homepage` field** to
+   `https://jonnyeclectic.github.io/boost/`. It is currently empty, which
+   weakens the `description_good` and `interact` evidence for anyone reading the
+   repository rather than the README.
+4. **Close out CodeQL alert 54** ("clear-text logging of sensitive
+   information", `cmd_trust` in `boost_cli/commands/quality.py`) and its
+   Copilot-Autofix issue [#562](https://github.com/jonnyeclectic/boost/issues/562).
+   Dismiss it as a false positive, with this as the recorded reason: the values
+   printed are a minisign **public** key's name and fingerprint. A public key
+   fingerprint is meant to be published, and printing it is the entire point of
+   the line — the user compares it by eye against the publisher's advertised
+   fingerprint before trusting the key. Applying the suggested "fix" of printing
+   a constant string would remove the only verification the command offers and
+   make boost *less* secure, so it must not be merged.
+
+## Keeping this document honest
+
+Re-check it when any of these change, since each one moves an answer:
+
+- a vulnerability is reported or fixed → `release_notes_vulns`,
+  `vulnerability_report_response`, `vulnerabilities_fixed_60_days`
+- a runtime dependency is added → `crypto_call`, `crypto_floss`,
+  `dynamic_analysis_unsafe`
+- a gate is removed or a threshold lowered → the Quality and Analysis sections
+- the licence changes → `floss_license`, `floss_license_osi`, `crypto_floss`
+
+The badge site re-asks for confirmation periodically; treat that prompt as the
+cue to re-read this file rather than to click through.

boost_skill_cli-1.2.27/docs/roadmap/items/openssf-best-practices-badge.md

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+---
+id: openssf-best-practices-badge
+board: code
+section: health
+status: shipped
+category: Security · Posture
+complexity: M
+impact: Med
+wow: 3
+note: 66 Met/N-A · 1 justified Unmet · registration is the only step left
+order: 4
+owner: loop/openssf-best-practices-badge
+pr:
+title: OpenSSF Best Practices — all 67 passing criteria answered
+---
+The <a href="roadmap.html#scorecard-findings-triage">Scorecard triage</a> left
+<code>CIIBestPracticesID</code> as the one finding that "needs a human, not a commit". That
+was half right. Registration needs a human; <b>answering the criteria</b> was a commit, and
+until it was made, "the prerequisites are already in place" was an assumption nobody had
+tested against the actual criteria text.
+<b>Tested it.</b> All 67 passing-level criteria, parsed from the badge project's own
+<code>criteria.yml</code> rather than a summary of it, are answered in
+<code>docs/openssf-badge.md</code> — each with the artifact that backs it. Two were genuine
+gaps, not paperwork:
+<b><code>know_secure_design</code> and <code>know_common_errors</code></b> are MUST criteria
+that no gate in this repo could satisfy, because they ask for a written threat model.
+<code>docs/security-design.md</code> is that document: boost's trust boundaries (a tap author
+is an attacker for modelling purposes), Saltzer and Schroeder's eight principles as concrete
+claims about this code, the CWE classes that actually apply to a Python CLI that clones
+repositories and writes files — each with its mitigation — and the residual limits stated
+plainly, including that boost cannot vet what a skill tells an agent to do.
+<b><code>crypto_call</code> is answered Unmet, with justification</b>, and that is the honest
+answer rather than a defect. <code>core/ed25519.py</code> reimplements RFC 8032 verification
+in pure Python because the stdlib-only runtime rule leaves no alternative — CPython ships no
+Ed25519. The exposure is bounded (verify-only, public keys, public signatures, no secret to
+leak through timing) and pinned to the RFC's own test vectors. A SHOULD may be Unmet with a
+justification; stretching it to "Met" would have been the lie.
+The audit also surfaced three settings a branch cannot change — the empty repository
+<code>homepage</code> field, the registration itself, and CodeQL alert 54, which is a false
+positive whose suggested autofix would print a constant instead of a minisign <b>public</b>
+key fingerprint, deleting the only verification <code>boost trust add</code> offers. All
+three are listed as human actions at the end of the badge document.

{boost_skill_cli-1.2.25 → boost_skill_cli-1.2.27}/docs/roadmap/items/scorecard-findings-triage.md

@@ -69,6 +69,8 @@ to do but not dismiss it.
 <b>Needs a human, not a commit</b> — <code>CIIBestPracticesID</code> #36 is the one
 remaining actionable finding, and it cannot be fixed from a branch: it asks whether the
 project is registered for an OpenSSF Best Practices badge, which means creating a project
-entry at <code>bestpractices.dev</code> under a real account and answering its criteria. The
-prerequisites are already in place (LICENSE, SECURITY.md, CONTRIBUTING.md,
-CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md, a published CI gate); only the registration is missing.
+entry at <code>bestpractices.dev</code> under a real account and answering its criteria.
+<i>Answering</i> them turned out to be a commit after all — see
+<a href="roadmap.html#openssf-best-practices-badge">all 67 passing criteria answered</a>,
+which found two MUST criteria this card had assumed were covered. Only the registration
+itself still needs a human.