vet VS scorecard

I am working on a next-gen software composition analysis tool that can identify malicious open source packages through code analysis. Adopts a policy as code (CEL) approach to build security guardrails against risky OSS components using opinionated policies.

GitHub: https://github.com/safedep/vet

Our free and open source tool vet is integrated with the SafeDep Cloud Package Scanning Service and can be used to detect malicious packages before they are installed. vet-action is a GitHub Action that can be used to establish proactive guardrails against malicious open source packages in your GitHub Actions workflows.

Explore about SafeDep on GitHub - https://github.com/safedep/vet

Not sure if it’s relevant because you specifically mentioned about B2C.

For cyber security product, we took the open source route. We build our core technology in public as open source project.

https://github.com/safedep/vet

The commercial SaaS is for scaling and management. Our entire funnel is based on OSS. Folks who have already found value and is looking to scale their deployment.

This model works for us especially at our current stage where we are 100% engineering led.

May be try out vet as well: https://github.com/safedep/vet

vet is backed by a code analysis engine that performs malicious package (npm, pypi etc.) scanning. We recently extended it to support GitHub repository scanning as well.

It found the malicious behaviour in mcp-servers-example/bad-mcp-server.js

➡️ https://github.com/safedep/vet

Malicious code in open sources is real and people get hacked due to it as we have seen with changed-files incident, ultralytics hack and multiple such incidents. vet now supports identification of malicious OSS packages through active code analysis.

I think the conventional approach of checking for vulnerabilities in 3rd party dependencies by querying CVE or some other database has set the current behaviour i.e. if its not vulnerable it must be safe. This implicit trust on vulnerability databases has been exploited in the wild to push malicious code to downstream users.

I think we will see security tools shifting towards "code" as the source of truth when making safety and security decision about 3rd party packages instead of relying only on known vulnerability databases.

Take a look at vet, we are working on active code analysis of OSS packages (+ transitive dependencies) to look for malicious code: https://github.com/safedep/vet

securityscorecard is easy to integrate (it's a cli tool or you run it as a github action), one of the checks it performs is "Pinned-Dependencies": https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/blob/main/docs/checks.md#p.... Checks that fail generate an security alert under Security -> Code scanning.

OpenSSF scorecard flags dependencies (including GitHub actions) which aren’t pinned by hash

https://scorecard.dev/

https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/blob/main/docs/checks.md#p...

The OpenSSF Scorecard project is an effort to unify what best practices open source maintainers and consumers should use to judge if their code, practices, and dependencies are safe. Ultimately, the “scorecard” command line interface gives any the capability to inspect repositories, run “checks” against those repos, and derive an overall score for the risk profile of that project. It’s a very powerful software tool that gives you a general picture of where a piece of software is considered risky. It can also be a great starting point for any open source maintainer to develop better practices and find out where they may need to make improvements. By providing a standardized approach to assessing open source security and compliance, the Scorecard helps organizations more easily identify supply chain risks and regulatory requirements.

Scorecard checks are based on OpenSSF Scorecard Project

For general open source hygiene, I'd recommend running OpenSSF scorecards on your github repo and following-up on anything it suggests. https://github.com/ossf/scorecard.

The OSSF scorecard initiative is really good to assess your project against security best practices. I am not the first to write about this.