sigstore-python VS pip-audit

You could use `pip-compile` if you want full pinning. That's what we do on another project -- we use GitHub Actions with `pip-compile` to provide a fully frozen copy of the dependency tree for users who'd like that[1].

In the context of `pip-audit`, that makes a little less sense: most of our dependencies are semantically versioned, and we'd rather users receive patches and fixes to our subdependencies automatically, rather than having to wait for us to release a corresponding fix version. Similarly, we expect users to install `pip-audit` into pre-existing virtual environments, meaning that excessive pinning will produce overly conservative dependency conflict errors.

[1]: https://github.com/sigstore/sigstore-python/tree/main/instal...

The conflicting advice is a serious problem.

I hope you'll forgive me for adding one additional piece of advice: for many Python packages, the only packaging metadata you need is `pyproject.toml`. You don't even need `setup.py` anymore, so long as you're using a build backend that supports editable installs with `pyproject.toml`.

Here's an example of a Python package that does everything in `pyproject.toml`[1]. You should be able to copy that into any of your projects, edit it to match your metadata, and everything will work exactly as if you have a `setup.cfg` or `setup.py`.

[1]: https://github.com/sigstore/sigstore-python

You're right, both the infrastructure and metadata for cryptographic signatures on Python packages (both wheels and sdists) isn't quite there yet.

At the moment, we're working towards the "e2e" scheme you've described by adding support for Sigstore[1] certificates and signatures, which will allow any number of identities (including email addresses and individual GitHub release workflows) to sign for packages. The integrity/availability of those signing artifacts will in turn be enforced through TUF, like you mentioned.

You can follow some of the related Sigstore-in-Python work here[2], and the ongoing Warehouse (PyPI) TUF work here[3]. We're also working on adding OpenID Connect token consumption[4] to Warehouse itself, meaning that you'll be able to bootstrap from a trusted GitHub workflow to a PyPI release token without needing to share any secrets.

[1]: https://www.sigstore.dev/

[2]: https://github.com/sigstore/sigstore-python

[3]: https://github.com/pypa/warehouse/pull/10870

[4]: https://github.com/pypa/warehouse/pull/11272

Next up is making sure, none of the dependencies used throughout the project brings with it any already identified security issue. The makefile target audit, invokes the handy tool pip-audit.

Here is my "one true" Makefile for Python projects[1]. The skeleton gets tweaked slightly each time, but it's served me well for 4+ years.

[1]: https://github.com/pypa/pip-audit/blob/main/Makefile

Why use this over the established https://pypi.org/project/pip-audit/ ?

https://pypi.org/project/pip-audit/ details usage and the GitHub Action install.

If it's pure Python, the only packaging file you need is `pyproject.toml`. You can fill that file with packaging metadata per PEP 518 and PEP 621, including using modern build tooling like flit[1] for the build backend and build[2] for the frontend.

With that, you entire package build (for all distribution types) should be reducible to `python -m build`. Here's an example of a full project doing everything with just `pyproject.toml`[3] (FD: my project).

[1]: https://github.com/pypa/flit

[2]: https://github.com/pypa/build

[3]: https://github.com/pypa/pip-audit

- repo: https://github.com/trailofbits/pip-audit rev: v2.4.3 hooks: - id: pip-audit args: [ "-r", "requirements.txt" ] ci: # Leave pip-audit to only run locally and not in CI # pre-commit.ci does not allow network calls skip: [ pip-audit ]

This is really nicely written; kudos to the author for compiling a great deal of information in a readable format.

If I can be forgiven one nitpick: Poetry does not use a PEP 518-style[1] build configuration by default, which means that its use of `pyproject.toml` is slightly out of pace with the rest of the Python packaging ecosystem. That isn't to say that it isn't excellent, because it is! But you the standards have come a long way, and you can now use `pyproject.toml` with any build backend as long as you use the standard metadata.

By way of example, here's a project that's completely PEP 517 and PEP 518 compatible without needing a setup.py or setup.cfg[2]. Everything goes through pyproject.toml.

[1]: https://peps.python.org/pep-0518/

[2]: https://github.com/trailofbits/pip-audit/blob/main/pyproject...

Checking could be done if something like this eventually shows up in safety or pip-audit.

Something like python's pip-audit. For commercial solutions I know there's Snyk and Jfrog we can always purchase, but I'm interested to see if there's an open-source tool that can do this.